BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
1198 (Swanson)
Hearing Date: 07/13/2009 Amended: As introduced
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Human
Services 3-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 1198 eliminates California's lifetime
disqualification from federal food stamps benefits for
individuals who have been convicted of drug-related felonies.
This bill allows individuals who have been convicted of
drug-related felonies to receive federal food stamps benefits if
they provide proof of one of the following criteria as a
condition of eligibility:
1) Completion of a government-recognized drug treatment
program.
2) Participation in a government-recognized drug treatment
program.
3) Enrollment in a government-recognized drug treatment
program.
4) Placement on a waiting list for a government-recognized
drug treatment program.
5) Other evidence that the illegal use of controlled
substances has ceased. Requires the Department of Social
Services (DSS) to establish those regulations.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
Expands food stamp eligibility Unknown, potentially
significant costs General
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill may meet the criteria for referral to
the Suspense File.
Federal law prohibits individuals who have been convicted of
drug felonies from receiving federal food stamps, but allows
state to opt out of some or all of the provisions of the
automatic aid disqualification. Existing California state law
opts out of the federal prohibition against food stamp
eligibility, in part, for persons convicted of a drug felony
that is not related to distribution or sales (primarily
possession and use) 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.
Existing state law retains the federal prohibition against
eligibility for food stamps for persons convicted of a felony
involving transporting, importing, selling, furnishing,
administering, giving away, possessing for sale, manufacturing a
controlled substance, possessing precursors with intent to sell,
cultivating or processing marijuana, or convicted of a felony
involving soliciting, inducing, encouraging, or intimidating a
minor to participate in any such crimes. This bill would provide
the same eligibility standard for these crimes, as for
possession and use crimes, as specified.
The extent to which food stamp eligibility and participation
would be increased is unknown, because eligibility is based on
several criteria. The universe of individuals this bill would
apply to is limited. It expands eligibility to people who meet
the income,
Page 2
AB 1198 (Swanson)
citizenship, and documentation requirements, and are only
excluded because of a disqualifying drug conviction. The number
is further limited to those who provide proof of meeting one of
the specified drug treatment requirements.
DSS estimates that this bill would cause only a very minor
increase to the food stamp caseload, based on the number of
adults who apply for food stamps and are disqualified by one of
the specified drug convictions. It is unclear, however, the
number of individuals who have a disqualifying drug conviction
and simply do not apply for food stamps because they know they
are disqualified. There are likely thousands of people living in
the state with a disqualifying drug conviction on their records
who have not ever applied for food stamps since the conviction.
There is insufficient data to determine how many people who have
ever been convicted of a disqualifying offense have sufficiently
low incomes as to qualify for food stamps.
The degree to which disqualified drug felons currently collect
food stamps is also unknown. Felony drug convictions are
self-disclosed by food stamps applicants, under penalty of
perjury, on their applications. Typically, these declarations
(or their absence) are not verified by eligibility or social
workers, and are not verified by DSS. It is also unclear how
many newly eligible individuals would apply for food stamps. The
Public Policy Institute of California estimates that only 50% of
Californians eligible for food stamps receive them.
The food stamp benefit is federally funded, and state costs are
for administration of the program. The cost of a food stamp
caseload increase depends on the number of cases, and the
counties in which the individuals are served. Costs are also
impacted by whether or not the cases are new, or are simply
adding an excluded individual to a family case already receiving
food stamps. The state pays 35% of the cost to administer the
food stamps program. Approximately 830,000 families receive food
stamps, and an increase of 1% would cost the state approximately
$2 million. This cost would be offset to some degree by a likely
increase in sales tax. Studies show that low-income families
spend 40% of their money on food, and food stamps allow them to
spend that money on taxable items.
A virtually identical bill, AB 1996 (Skinner 2008), was vetoed
with the following message:
I am returning Assembly Bill 1996 without my signature. In
vetoing similar legislation last year, I made it clear that I
support the use of drug treatment programs as a viable
intervention tool for drug users. It is important to provide
individuals with the correct incentive to transition from a life
of crime and substance abuse to one of work and personal
responsibility. However, extending food stamp eligibility to
drug dealers or traffickers, upon the condition that they engage
in drug treatment, will not ensure these individuals will stop
selling or trafficking illegal drugs. Therefore, this bill does
not provide a targeted approach to the right population and does
not ensure adequate public safety protections.