BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
1756 (Swanson)
Hearing Date: 08/02/2010 Amended: 04/05/2010
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Human
Services 3-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 1756 would provide that a conviction for a drug
felony does not make an individual ineligible to receive food
stamp benefits, if otherwise eligible.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Expands food stamp eligibility Unknown; potentially
significant costs Gen/Fed/Loc
Removes verification Potentially significant
workload reduction Gen/Fed/Loc
_________________________________________________________________
____
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 convictions retain eligibility) 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, 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 change state law to opt out of the entire
federal prohibition; no individual who has been convicted of a
drug felony (including distribution and sales crimes) would be
automatically deemed ineligible for food stamps, without
condition. The current requirement for drug felons (whose crimes
are related to possession and use) to prove cessation or
rehabilitation would be deleted by this bill.
The extent to which food stamp eligibility and participation
would be increased is unknown, because eligibility is based on
several criteria. This bill expands eligibility to individuals
who meet the income, citizenship, and documentation
requirements, and are: A) only excluded because of a
disqualifying drug conviction; or B) individuals who are unable
or unwilling to provide required rehabilitation/cessation
documentation required of those previously convicted of a
possession/use crime.
The Department of Social Services (DSS) estimates that the
number of adults who
apply for food stamps and are disqualified by one of the
specified drug convictions is
Page 2
AB 1756 (Swanson)
small. 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 under
existing law. There are likely thousands of people living in the
state with a disqualifying drug conviction on their records who
have never applied for food stamps, but who might otherwise
qualify. There are 18,914 people incarcerated presently in state
prisons for drug offenses that would make them disqualified for
life, without exception, under current law. It is unknown how
many people have ever been convicted of a disqualifying offense
in state or federal court. The number of convicted drug use
felons who would be eligible for food stamps if they presented
specified documentation, and who do not, is also unknown.
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.
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. More than 2 million people (nearly
1,000,000 families) receive food stamps, and caseloads have
sharply increased in the past two years. Counties are already
experiencing increased workload to administer the program, and
it is unclear how many cases would be added by this bill.
Any additional costs to administer the program would be offset,
to some degree, by the deletion of the requirement to verify
rehabilitation/cessation, as provided in current law. Processing
new food stamps cases without reference to drug convictions, and
related verification, would take less time and ease the burden
on county eligibility workers. Additional costs to the state
would also be offset to some degree by a likely increase in
sales tax. Studies show that low-income families spend about 40%
of their money on food, and increasing food stamp access would
allow them to spend that money on taxable items.
A substantially similar bill is currently on the Suspense File
in this Committee. Another substantially similar bill, AB 1996
(Swanson 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.