BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1198
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1198 (Swanson)
As Introduced February 27, 2009
Majority vote
HUMAN SERVICES 5-2 APPROPRIATIONS 11-4
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Beall, Ammiano, Hall, |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles |
| |Portantino, Torres | |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes, |
| | | |Hall, John A. Perez, |
| | | |Price, Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Torlakson |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
|Nays:|Tom Berryhill, Logue |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey, |
| | | |Audra Strickland |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Expands eligibility for Food Stamp Program (FSP)
benefits to convicted drug felons who distributed illegal
controlled substances, if they provide proof of one of the
following subsequent to their most recent drug-related
conviction:
1)Completion of, participation or enrollment in, or placement on
a waiting list for a government-recognized drug treatment
program.
2)Other evidence that the illegal use of controlled substances
has ceased, as established by State Department of Social
Services regulations.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits, under federal law, applicants for food stamps or
benefits funded by Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) funds from qualifying if they have been convicted of a
felony crime involving controlled substances, but allows
states to opt out of the disqualification in whole or part.
2)Opts into the federal prohibition on federal food stamp
eligibility for persons convicted of drug trafficking, as
defined, or who have been convicted of soliciting, inducing,
AB 1198
Page 2
encouraging or intimidating a minor to participate in any such
crimes.
3)Opts out of the federal prohibition on food stamp eligibility
for "drug users" convicted of a drug felony, as defined, who
can prove completion, participation in, enrollment in, or
placement on a waiting list for a government-recognized drug
treatment program, or provide other evidence that illegal use
of controlled substances has ceased.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee analysis:
1)Up to $1 million in food stamps benefits to the extent
additional individuals receive food stamps. For every 900
beneficiaries, about $1 million in food stamps are received
annually. These benefits are 100% federal funds.
2)Minor absorbable workload to local welfare departments to
process additional food stamps applications or adjust existing
family food stamps benefits.
3)Unknown General Fund and local tax revenues to the extent that
new food stamp recipients spend funds on taxable goods.
4)Unknown savings, to the extent federal food assistance reduces
the need for other kinds of public benefits.
COMMENTS : The FSP is California's most significant means of
reducing hunger and improving nutrition among the state's poor.
It serves a total of nearly two million people. The benefits,
paid monthly through an electronic benefit transfer system or
"EBT" card, are entirely funded by the federal government. The
federal, state and county governments share the cost of
administration. The program is administered locally by county
welfare departments.
Background : The lifetime ban on food stamps and TANF-funded
benefits for persons with felony drug convictions was included
in the 1996 federal welfare reform bill (Section 115 of the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act). However, this new law also gave states the ability to opt
out of the ban for either of these programs or based on
particular drug felonies. California declined to include any
AB 1198
Page 3
opt-out provision when it implemented welfare reform in 1997,
but several years later, with AB 1796 (Leno), Chapter 932,
Statutes of 2004, opted out of the ban for drug users applying
to the FSP. These individuals were deemed eligible for these
benefits based on the condition that they offer the following
proof: completion of, participation or enrollment in, placement
on a waiting list to a government-recognized drug treatment
program, or other proof of having ceased using illegal drugs.
The author of this bill seeks to expand the conditions above to
drug distributors. This is an identical bill to the one that
the author introduced last year and that was ultimately vetoed.
The Governor's veto message clarified that he supports drug
treatment programs for drug users, but pointed out that the
bill's expansion of food stamp eligibility to drug distributors
based on the incentive of drug treatment was not an appropriate
solution because treatment does not stop the distribution.
While this bill is identical to last year's, the author's office
has indicated that it will be working with the Governor's office
to find the appropriate solution for this population of
convicted drug felons.
Other states actions : According to a 2005 report by the General
Accounting Office (GAO), 15 states fully implemented the federal
ban on food stamp benefits to convicted drug felons, and 35
states had laws modifying the federal ban on food stamps. Of
the 35 states with exemptions, 14 states exempted all convicted
drug felons from the food stamp ban, and 21 have laws that
exempt some convicted drug felons from the food stamp ban
provided they meet certain conditions.
Who is affected by this bill ? The GAO report also notes that
proportionally more female drug felons than males are affected
by the ban. The GAO calculates that about 27% of female and 15%
of all drug offenders released from prison in 2001 in states
that had not modified the ban would have met the eligibility
requirements and therefore, be affected by the ban.
Nutrition and drug felons : The drug felon rule has been the
subject of much criticism by drug treatment providers, advocates
for the poor and law enforcement organizations because it
permanently disqualifies otherwise needy persons from receiving
food assistance and may interfere with their current or
continued recovery. A person may be banned even if they are in
a treatment program and need a healthy diet to succeed, or if
AB 1198
Page 4
the conviction occurred long before the time they needed
assistance, or if they have no current substance problem.
The premise of the original rule was that substance abusers
should be prevented from misusing public benefits to fuel their
addiction. However, the lifetime ban denies aid to persons who
have served their sentence without a showing that they are drug
dependent and would use the benefits to further their habit.
Additionally, the food stamp program has converted to an EBT
system in which benefits are received through a debit card
subject to electronic tracking, and there is very little ability
for recipients to convert food assistance into drugs.
Supporters also contend that passage of Proposition 36 in 2000
demonstrated the voters' intention to take a remedial,
non-punitive approach to substance abuse. They also contend
that the lifetime ban imposes a special penalty only upon
persons poor enough to need public assistance; those convicted
of such crimes who do not need food stamps or cash aid face no
added financial penalty beyond the criminal consequences.
Related legislation : AB 1996 (Swanson), of 2008, would have
expanded eligibility for FSP benefits to convicted drug felons
who distributed the illegal controlled substances, as specified;
bill was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
AB 508 (Swanson), of 2007, would have repealed the lifetime
disqualification from food stamps for persons convicted of
specified felonies involving controlled substances; bill was
vetoed by the Governor.
Analysis Prepared by : Frances Chacon / HUM. S. / (916)
319-2089
FN: 0000912