BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
BILL NO: SB 1359
S
AUTHOR: Price
B
VERSION: April 8, 2010
HEARING DATE: April 13, 2010
1
FISCAL: Appropriations
3
5
CONSULTANT:
9
Park
SUBJECT
Public social services
SUMMARY
Requires the California Research Bureau and the Legislative
Analyst's Office to research and report on the federal
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, other federal
human services programs, and the activities of the
Department of Social Services related to such programs, as
specified.
ABSTRACT
Existing law:
1.Establishes the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP), formerly the food stamp program,
administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA), which imposes specified rules on specified
program participants and limits benefits based on those
rules. Under SNAP, administering entities are allowed to
exercise various administrative and other options.
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
2
2.Establishes a statewide program, administered by state
and local agencies, that enables recipients of aid and
other low-income households to receive federal food
assistance benefits.
This bill:
1.Requires the California Research Bureau (CRB) to compile
all existing information and recommendations from
interested stakeholders relating to:
the economic and social impact removing
administrative barriers that will increase
participation in SNAP;
best practices and administrative housekeeping
policies of the Department of Social Services, with
respect to encouraging participation in SNAP and
maximizing participation in all federal human services
programs, as policy changes occur; and
the regional economic impacts within the state of
increased participation in federal human services
programs.
1.Requires CRB to submit a report to the Legislative
Analyst's Office by July 1, 2011.
2.Requires the Legislative Analyst's Office to submit a
report to the Legislature by November 1, 2011, and
annually thereafter, that analyzes and evaluates the
information gathered by CRB.
FISCAL IMPACT
Unknown
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Author's statement
The author states that California's participation in SNAP
is low, and the state's statutory eligibility criteria are
highly restrictive and discourage participation. The
author notes that the food stamp benefit is 100 percent
federally funded, and that the economic activity generated
for every dollar of food stamp benefit is roughly $1.70.
The author believes that increased participation in the
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
3
program will provide an internal economic stimulus for
California as growers, grocers and food transporters see
increased demand for their services and products, while
other businesses find new customers because household
income allotted for food can be re-directed to taxable
goods.
SNAP/Food Stamp Program
In California, more than 3 million people receive federal
food assistance benefits. To qualify for SNAP benefits,
households must meet certain income tests, and some
households must meet certain resource tests and work
requirements. According to the USDA, in 2009, California
received $4.3 billion in federal food assistance benefits;
however, only about half of eligible persons actually
receive food stamps in California.
Some advocates argue that the state foregoes billions in
food assistance benefits and should take actions to improve
food stamp participation. California Food Policy Advocates
believes that if 2.9 million income-eligible
non-participants became participants, this would result in
an estimated $3.7 billion in additional benefits, which
would generate an additional $6.9 billion in economic
activity.
A report published by the California Budget Project in
December 2009 notes that, according to the USDA,
California's food stamp participation rate ranked
second-to-last among the 50 states and the District of
Columbia and was the lowest among the ten most populous
states in federal fiscal year 2007. The report notes that
there is some debate about whether the USDA's methodology
understates California's participation rate; nonetheless,
the fact remains that nearly 2.2 million eligible
Californians failed to receive food stamp benefits as
recently as FFY 2007. The report also notes that although
many eligible Californians have not received food stamp
benefits in recent years, participation in the program has
increased considerably since mid-2007, by more than 42
percent.
Several advocacy groups have proposed strategies for
increasing participation in the food stamp program, such as
removing finger-imaging requirements or changing income
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
4
reporting requirements from three to six months. Some of
these proposals have been introduced through legislation in
recent years. (See related and prior legislation
sections.) The state currently has a stakeholder group
reviewing the potential for centralized eligibility for the
California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids
program (CalWORKs), Medi-Cal, and the food stamp program,
although it is unknown whether the project would seek to
reduce, or result in any reduction of, barriers to the food
stamp program.
Related legislation
AB 2018 (Skinner) of 2010 would require DSS to establish a
process of intercounty transfer of eligibility for benefits
under SNAP when a recipient permanently changes residence
from one county to another within the state. To be heard
in Assembly Human Services Committee on April 13th.
AB 1642 (Beall) of 2010 would repeal the requirements
relating to quarterly reporting under CalWORKs and SNAP and
imposes similar requirements for a semiannual reporting
period. Makes other related changes. To be heard in the
Assembly Human Services Committee on April 13th.
AB 1756 (Swanson) of 2010 would provide that a person
convicted of any drug felony shall be eligible for aid
under the food stamp program. To be heard in the Assembly
Human Services Committee on April 13th.
AB 1914 (Davis) of 2010 would require expedited food stamp
benefits to be provided to persons awaiting receipt of
unemployment compensation benefits, as specified, and would
require DSS to seek any federal waivers necessary to
implement the bill. To be heard in the Assembly Human
Services Committee on April 13th.
Prior legislation
SB 718 (Leno) of 2009 repeals the current requirement that
all adult members of a household applying for or receiving
food stamps be fingerprinted as a condition of eligibility.
This bill also maintains the fingerprinting requirement
for adults applying for any type of cash aid, such as
CalWORKs or general relief, and requires DSS and the Office
of Systems Integration to maintain the finger imaging
system. Held under submission in the Senate Appropriations
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
5
Committee.
AB 643 (Skinner) of 2009 specifies that "aid" for purposes
of the provisions relating to a recipient's change of
residence, includes benefits under the food stamp program,
thereby requiring county welfare offices to transfer a food
stamp recipient's benefits from one county to another
without requiring the recipient to reapply in the new
county. Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
AB 1057 (Beall) of 2009 eliminates the Statewide
Fingerprint Imaging System requirement for food stamp-only
applicants, and instead, uses Department of Motor Vehicles
or other state agency information to verify an applicant's
identification and prevent duplicate aid fraud. In
addition, the bill moves the food stamp and CalWORKs
programs recipient income reporting periods from quarterly
to semi-annually. Held under submission in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 1198 (Swanson) of 2009 allows individuals convicted of
specific drug felonies to receive federal food stamps
benefits if they meet certain treatment conditions. Held
under submission in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
AB 433 (Beall), Chapter 625, Statutes of 2008 requires DSS
to propose a new name for the California food stamp program
and to establish a federal option known as categorical
eligibility for food stamp benefits for specified
households who are eligible for services funded by the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant.
AB 1382 (Leno) of 2007 eliminates the requirement that
applicants for and recipients of food stamp benefits not
receiving cash assistance be fingerprint-imaged as a
condition of receiving benefits. Vetoed by Governor.
AB 2844 (Laird) of 2008 repeals the quarterly
re-determination requirement for the CalWORKs program and
food stamp program, and, instead, imposes a semi-annual
re-determination requirement for these programs, beginning
July 1, 2010. Vetoed by Governor.
AB 3029 (Laird) of 2006 requires semiannual
redeterminations of eligibility and benefit amounts for
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
6
CalWORKs and food stamps based upon semi-annual reports of
recipient households. Withdrawn at enrollment and held at
desk.
AB 696 (Chu) of 2005 repeals the current requirement that
adult members of a household applying for or receiving food
stamps be fingerprinted as a condition of eligibility.
Vetoed by Governor.
AB 2013 (Steinberg) of 2004 eliminates authority to operate
a statewide fingerprint imaging system for the CalWORKs
program and the food stamp program. Held in Senate Health
and Human Services Committee at author's request.
AB 231 (Steinberg), Chapter 743 of 2003, makes reforms
designed to increase participation in the food stamp
program and improve nutritional outcomes for low-income
families.
Arguments in support
In reference to the prior version of the bill, the
Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations writes
that the current reporting system is arcane and wasteful,
and that simplified reporting would be beneficial to the
low-income community of California and increase food stamp
participation. The California State Association of
Counties also writes in relation to the prior version of
the bill, and states that by loosening eligibility
requirements for the food stamp program, the bill will
increase participation and maximize federal funding in
needy households and throughout the rest of the economy.
COMMENTS
1.Work with LAO and CRB. While the tasks outlined by the
bill appear to be within the purview of these
organizations, the author may wish to request the
information sought by the bill through a letter or a more
informal request, rather than through legislation.
2.Benefits of an annual review. It is unclear what benefit
an annual report would have, as opposed to a report that
would be issued on a less frequent basis. The workload
for an annual report that evaluates all federal human
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1359 (Price) Page
7
services programs in terms of the regional economic
impact of increased participation may consume
disproportionate resources at LAO, relative to other
issues that may need analysis.
3.Request is unclear. It is unclear what is meant by
"administrative housekeeping policies of DSS" and whether
the phrase "as policy changes occur" is meant to refer to
state or federal policy change, or both. The author may
want to clarify its request.
POSITIONS
Support: California State Association of Counties (prior
version)
Coalition of California Welfare Rights
Organizations (prior version)
Oppose:None received
-- END --