Transcript Highlights:

• Unfortunately, the First Circuit upheld the requirement to fully fund SNAP.
• CalFresh is California's SNAP program.
• to make sure that there's funding remaining for CalFresh Outreach.
• CalFresh Outreach, I think sometimes that term would imply something that it's not.
• Yes, plus one on the CalFresh outreach.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on CalFresh enrollment, food insecurity in California, the recent federal shutdown’s disruption of SNAP benefits, and the long-term effects of H.R. 1 on eligibility, benefits, and state and county costs. Opening remarks emphasized that millions of Californians rely on CalFresh, that the shutdown briefly delayed benefits for the first time in the program’s history, and that state and local governments, including Alameda County, stepped in with emergency food aid and funding. Members also framed the issue as both a hunger and affordability problem, with several noting that California’s agricultural abundance contrasts sharply with persistent food insecurity. The first panel presented research and advocacy perspectives on food hardship. PPIC’s Tess Thorman described food insecurity rates, disparities affecting households with children and Black and Latino households, and the role of nutrition programs in reducing poverty. Nourish California’s Betzabel Estudio argued that hunger is a policy choice and highlighted campaigns to expand state-funded food assistance for immigrants, support reentry populations, and continue the CalFresh fruit-and-vegetable incentive program. The California Association of Food Banks’ Josh Wright said food banks are seeing sustained high demand, lower federal food supplies, and cannot replace CalFresh, while urging more state support for food purchasing, school meals, and SunBucks. The second panel reviewed CalFresh operations and participation. The California Department of Social Services reported that CalFresh participation has risen over the past decade, with the state closing much of the participation gap through outreach, simplified applications, and demonstration projects such as the Elderly Simplified Application Project and a minimum nutrition benefit pilot. Alameda County Social Services described local caseloads, application trends, and emergency food distributions during the shutdown, while also warning that H.R. 1’s work requirements, immigrant eligibility restrictions, and possible cost-sharing could reduce enrollment. A student CalFresh ambassador testified about the burdensome application and recertification process and urged more funding for campus basic-needs centers and outreach to reduce stigma and administrative friction. In the final panel, county, food bank, and policy witnesses described the shutdown response and the expected impact of H.R. 1. Alameda County Community Food Bank and the County Welfare Directors Association said counties, food banks, and community partners mobilized emergency funds, pop-up pantries, and food purchasing to bridge the shutdown gap, but warned that hundreds of thousands of Californians could lose benefits under the new federal rules. The California Budget and Policy Center began outlining the scale of federal cuts, noting that H.R. 1 will significantly reduce SNAP funding and shift costs to states. No votes or formal committee actions were taken; the hearing was informational and concluded with discussion of possible state responses, including backfilling benefits, preserving outreach funding, and improving administrative systems to protect enrollment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the concerns are not having funds from SNAP benefits on November 1st, but also the new federal SNAP
• SNAP housing programs, cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, with these cuts in SNAP and Medicare and Medicaid
• This funding will allow outreach to continue to share new information on Medicaid and SNAP requirements
• information on Medicaid and SNAP new information on Medicaid and SNAP requirements.<01:27:48.400><c>
• We are serving 4,000 plus SNAP benefits.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: This joint informational briefing on Act 310 grants and aid focused on organizations describing how federal funding cuts, Medicaid/SNAP changes, and related policy shifts are affecting their services and budgets. Committee members explained there would be no Q&A, testimony would be limited to one minute, and in-person participants would be heard before Zoom callers. Members repeatedly asked testifiers to identify the amount of federal funding lost or at risk. Testimony came from a wide range of nonprofits and community providers, including Aloha Care, Hawaii Bicycling League, Hawaii Literacy, Hawaii Youth Symphony, Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies Coalition of Hawaii, the Tsunami Museum, The Kohala Center, West Hawaii Community Health Center, West Hawaii Region Hospital Foundation, Sounding Joy Music Therapy, Big Brothers Big Sisters Hawaii, Dynamic Community Solutions, Feeding Hawaii Together, Girl Scouts of Hawaii, Hawaii Disability Rights Center, Hawaii Youth Services Network, Hawaiian Lending and Investments, Homana, Honolulu Theatre for the Youth, Kids Hurt Too Hawaii, and Kokua Kalihi Valley. Most described reduced or threatened federal support and requested state funding to maintain services such as health care access, food security, disaster preparedness, literacy and digital inclusion, youth mentoring, arts education, housing, and climate or agricultural resilience. Several speakers emphasized direct impacts on vulnerable populations, including kūpuna, low-income families, immigrants, homeless youth, and people with disabilities. Requests ranged from relatively small planning or program grants to multi-million-dollar stabilization asks, with some organizations citing specific losses such as reduced Medicaid or USDA funding, canceled EPA or FEMA support, or expiring federal grants. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the briefing.

Bills: SB243, SB1586, SB1891, SB1959, SB2159, SB2568

Keywords: migrant labor housing, migrant housing, farmworker housing, migrant agricultural worker, agricultural labor, farm labor contractor, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, TDHCA, civil penalty, housing code enforcement, sanitation, occupancy standards, retaliation, worker complaint, language access, Spanish-language outreach, H-2A visa, temporary agricultural workers, unlicensed housing, rural housing

Transcript Highlights:

• This is Chair Busey's bill creating an expedited pathway for children enrolled in SNAP to be considered
• The bill would have HHSC contact the family to SNAP-enrolled children, and if the family consents, enroll
• Near immediate outreach to patients. I do have ACS facts. I'll just briefly reiterate what Dr.
• Bill 514 addresses these critical shortages by establishing a maternal health care workforce public outreach
• And so with a public outreach campaign across the state, we believe that more people will understand

Bills: HB514, HB1652, HB2117, HB2298, HB3269, HB46, HB46

Keywords: maternal health, maternal care, pregnancy, labor and delivery, postpartum, doula, birth worker, midwife, obstetric care, women's health, rural health, health workforce, workforce development, trauma-informed care, public outreach campaign, health equity, minority health, underserved communities, Texas Department of State Health Services, HHSC

Transcript Highlights:

• As you all know, the SNAP federal share to administer the SNAP program is being reduced from 50% to 25%
• The SNAP payment error rate is going to impact the state's cost for SNAP benefits that will start in
• That's for people who expedited SNAP benefits in seven days.
• going on, so we'll make that proactive outreach today.
• on the SNAP error rate and how we need to quickly fix that.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> SNAP cuts.
• Uh, we're experiencing a SNAP SNAP cuts.
• </c> shutdown threatens to delay SNAP shutdown threatens to delay SNAP benefits<01:15:58.960><c> for<
• This funding will allow outreach to continue to share new information on Medicaid and SNAP requirements
• </c> cuts to SNAP and the federal shutdown. cuts to SNAP and the federal shutdown.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: This joint informational briefing focused on Act 310 grants and aid, with committee members hearing one-minute testimony from organizations first in person and then by Zoom. At the outset, the chairs explained there would be no Q&A during the briefing and asked testifiers to focus on how federal cuts were affecting their work. The meeting was organized by registration number and included both neighbor island and Oʻahu applicants. Testimony centered on organizations seeking state support to offset federal funding losses or anticipated reductions. Health and social service providers described impacts from Medicaid, SNAP, ACA subsidy, Title X, and other federal changes, including Aloha Care, Community Clinic of Maui, Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies, West Hawaiʻi Community Health Center, Hawaiʻi Disability Rights Center, Hawaiʻi Youth Services Network, Alcoholic Rehabilitation Services of Hawaiʻi, and Kokua Kalihi Valley. Other groups highlighted losses affecting food security, housing, disaster preparedness, and climate resilience, including the Kohala Center, Feeding Hawaiʻi Together, Hawaiian Lending and Investments, Dynamic Community Solutions, and the Pacific Tsunami Museum. Several arts, youth, and education organizations also testified, including Hawaiʻi Literacy, Hawaiʻi Youth Symphony, Honolulu Theatre for the Youth, Sounding Joy Music Therapy, Big Brothers Big Sisters Hawaiʻi, Girl Scouts of Hawaiʻi, Kids Hurt Too Hawaiʻi, and US Vets, each requesting funding to preserve programs and staffing. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the briefing. The only action was procedural: the chairs moved through the applicant list, limited testimony time, and then transitioned from neighbor island in-person testimony to Oʻahu and later Zoom participants.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Bureau had also incorporated some data from the SNAP program.
• Now, years before... ...some data from the SNAP program.
• There's also no federal set of SNAP data.
• So I hear you saying SNAP, WIC... ...slide, thank you.
• As we move left, I'm going to talk about the WIC, TANF, and SNAP toward the end.

Summary: The hearing focused on census data privacy, administrative data sharing, and the role of state and local governments in improving census accuracy, especially for the 2030 census. Dr. Philip Rocco testified first, arguing that the census is increasingly intergovernmental and that state and local investments in address list work, outreach, and complete count commissions can materially improve self-response and reduce undercounts. He emphasized that hard-to-count communities are most affected when states delay planning, politicize census work, or lack capacity, and he pointed to examples such as LUCA participation, outreach funding, and group quarters review as important tools. He also warned that recent federal actions and a broader climate of distrust could threaten 2030 operations, and urged Massachusetts to begin readiness planning now. Members then questioned Dr. Rocco about the use of administrative data such as DMV, TANF, SNAP, and WIC records, and about group quarters enumeration. He explained that those data-sharing efforts were voluntary agreements with the Census Bureau, unlike group quarters data, which are often provided by facility administrators and sometimes state agencies. He said the Trump-era effort to use DMV and other records was tied to Executive Order 13880 and was widely resisted because states had confidentiality and legal concerns, and because the stated purpose appeared to shift toward citizenship-related uses. On group quarters, he described e-response, paper response, in-person enumeration, and administrator-provided directory information, noting that privacy issues arise mainly from FERPA limits on university data and from missing demographic details in administrative records. A second panel, Beth Giroz and Amy O'Hara, then explained how administrative data are used by the Census Bureau and why data quality and privacy concerns matter. They described administrative data as records collected for operational purposes, useful for frame-building, nonresponse follow-up, enumeration, and post-enumeration evaluation, but often incomplete or mismatched on key census variables such as race, ethnicity, household relationships, and residence timing. They highlighted that some sources, like IRS, Medicare, USPS, SSA, and Bureau of Prisons records, are especially valuable, while others such as SNAP, TANF, WIC, Medicaid, CHIP, foster care, and driver’s license data vary in completeness and sharing. They stressed that privacy means collecting only what is needed, and that the Bureau typically uses limited header or roster data rather than full records. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing, and the committee recessed briefly before continuing testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• We meet with our VSOs for outreach, as well as our other state benefits and outreach events that we push
• A lot of the work that we do, particularly in outreach, involves helping people apply for SNAP benefits
• , and protect access to SNAP.
• Getting access to SNAP that do not qualify.
• Working two jobs that qualify for SNAP.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:37:36.719><c> Outreach</c> today and other snap Outreach today and other snap Outreach organizations
• I manage a SNAP outreach team, and we are one of about 29 other SNAP outreach grantees in the state.
• She said she manages a SNAP outreach team, and they are one of about 29 other SNAP outreach grantees
• She manages a SNAP outreach team, and they are one of about 29 other SNAP outreach grantees in the state
• HF 45 would address this by avoiding a SNAP outreach funding cliff this summer, and they respectfully

Bills: HF22, HF45

Keywords: parent's bill of rights, parental rights, minor consent, minors, parents, guardians, education rights, school records, home schooling, charter school, private school, health care consent, medical privacy, patient records, exam room access, biometric data, DNA samples, blood samples, mental health, physical health

Transcript Highlights:

• They reduce SNAP participation.
• They reduce SNAP participation.
• Do you have estimates on that for Medi-Cal and SNAP? And SNAP. Hi, Jason Constantoros, LEO.
• SNAP. Just SNAP, right? Yeah.
• that applies generally to SNAP.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the discussion around major federal changes to work requirements, eligibility redeterminations, immigrant eligibility, and financing rules, while noting the state’s own structural budget deficit and the need for a second hearing later in March on county and safety-net impacts. The first panel included the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, the UC Berkeley Labor Center, and the Food Research and Action Center. LAO and Finance described H.R. 1 as driving major enrollment losses and cost shifts. LAO estimated that Medi-Cal work requirements and six-month redeterminations could affect 3.5 million people, with 1 to 2 million potentially disenrolled, while CalFresh changes could subject more than 800,000 people to work requirements and cause over 600,000 to lose food assistance. They also highlighted new ineligibility for certain non-citizens, reduced federal matching for emergency Medi-Cal services, tighter provider tax rules, and higher state and county administrative costs for CalFresh. Finance said the governor’s budget reflects about $1.4 billion in new General Fund costs in 2026-27 and a $2.4 billion reduction in federal funds, with larger out-year impacts and up to 2 million Medi-Cal disenrollments by 2029-30. The UC Berkeley Labor Center projected up to 3 million Californians could lose full-scope Medi-Cal by 2028 when H.R. 1 is combined with state budget changes, though it said the state could limit losses by choosing not to apply some new requirements to state-funded populations and by keeping some immigrants in full-scope state-funded coverage. The Food Research and Action Center argued that CalFresh cuts and time limits would increase hunger, homelessness risk, and health costs, while also hurting local economies and increasing administrative burden. Committee members from both parties questioned the fiscal sustainability of Medi-Cal growth, the 11% CalFresh error rate and possible $2 billion penalty, county indigent care costs, and the effect of work requirements; several Democratic members argued the federal changes and state cuts would disproportionately harm low-income Californians, immigrants, and communities of color, while Republican members emphasized program growth, work incentives, and the need for budget restraint. No votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the same with SNAP: what percentage of the SNAP changes?
• You know, we talk about SNAP benefits.
• And so what's interesting about the SNAP dynamic is that, unlike Medicaid, SNAP has not been administered
• SNAP is now.
• Does the SNAP benefit completely go away? Does New Mexico not have any SNAP benefits?

Transcript Highlights:

• As I noted before, state investments in census outreach ranged widely across states.
• The Bureau had also incorporated some data from the SNAP program.
• And so there was an effort underway for many years to acquire SNAP, TANF, and WIC data.
• There's also no federal set of SNAP data.
• As we move left, I'm going to talk about the WIC, TANF, and SNAP toward the end.

Keywords: 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They reduce SNAP participation.
• Do you have estimates on that for Medi-Cal and SNAP? And SNAP. Hi, Jason Constantoros, LEO.
• People enter SNAP because they have lost their jobs.
• SNAP. Just SNAP, right? Yeah.
• funding that applies generally to SNAP.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the issue as a major federal disruption that would reduce benefits and shift costs to the state, counties, hospitals, and other local systems. The first panel included the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, the UC Berkeley Labor Center, and the Food Research and Action Center, each describing projected enrollment losses, higher state and county costs, and implementation challenges. The LAO outlined H.R. 1’s main changes: new and expanded work requirements, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, restrictions on certain non-citizen eligibility, and financing changes affecting provider taxes and federal matching rates. The LAO estimated that 1 to 2 million people could be disenrolled from Medi-Cal and more than 600,000 could lose CalFresh, with additional costs from reduced federal support and possible state and county administrative burdens. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s budget includes about $1.4 billion General Fund in 2026-27 to respond to H.R. 1, with larger out-year reductions in federal funds and projected Medi-Cal caseload losses of up to 2 million by 2029-30. The UC Berkeley Labor Center projected up to 3 million Californians could lose full-scope Medi-Cal by 2028 when H.R. 1 is combined with state budget changes, while noting the state could choose policies that would reduce some of those losses. The Food Research and Action Center warned that CalFresh cuts and time limits would increase hunger, worsen health outcomes, and strain local economies and emergency systems. Members questioned the witnesses about procedural disenrollments, regional variation, the overall growth in Medi-Cal spending, the future of the MCO tax, the CalFresh error rate, and the downstream effects on hospitals and county indigent care. Several senators argued that the federal law was driven by tax cuts for high-income earners and would disproportionately harm low-income Californians, immigrants, and communities of color. Administration witnesses said some impacts are still being analyzed, that counties and departments are working on implementation, and that the Legislature may need to use statute, reporting, and oversight tools as federal guidance develops. No votes or formal actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We currently have federal funding to support a SNAP education program, SNAP outreach, SNAP employment
• The next component I want to mention is SNAP outreach.
• Now, SNAP outreach is typically administered through nonprofits.
• Now, want to mention is SNAP outreach.
• 27.200><c> administered</c> SNAP outreach is typically administered SNAP outreach is typically administered

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with roll call and housekeeping, including moving standing attendees to an overflow room and asking the audience to avoid interruptions. The task force then heard testimony from Allison Adams of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, who presented statewide health trend data showing Kentucky ranked 41st overall and 44th in health outcomes, with especially poor performance on premature death, chronic disease, diabetes, and vaccination rates. She emphasized that Kentucky has the highest rates of residents with multiple chronic conditions, that diabetes remains above the national average, and that childhood immunization rates have worsened. She also highlighted major provider shortages in rural areas, noting that 43 of 120 counties meet shortage criteria and that more than half of primary care providers are concentrated in Fayette and Jefferson counties. Adams urged the task force to focus on prevention, early intervention, access to care, physical activity, and healthier school and community environments, and said the foundation is prepared to share results from its demonstration projects. Task force members asked follow-up questions about the age range for chronic-condition data and whether the diabetes figure reflected type 1 or type 2 diabetes; Adams said the chronic-condition measure spans all ages and that the diabetes figure likely reflects type 2, though she offered to provide the full report. The task force then approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The committee next turned to SNAP benefits and heard from Lisa Dennis, commissioner of the Department for Community Based Services, and Roger McCann, director of the Division of Family Support. They explained that SNAP is not only a food assistance program but also a public health and family stability tool, arguing that poor diet contributes to chronic disease and that food insecurity is linked to family stress, child welfare involvement, and neglect-related CPS referrals. They cited research showing that more generous SNAP policies are associated with fewer CPS reports, fewer substantiated reports, and fewer foster care placements, and said SNAP helps reduce risk and promote stability across vulnerable populations including children, older adults, people with disabilities, and pregnant women. They also described SNAP-Ed as the nutrition education component that teaches healthy eating, cooking on a budget, and how to use fresh produce, but warned that recent federal legislation eliminates federal funding for SNAP-Ed beginning in federal fiscal year 2026. McCann outlined the remaining SNAP outreach and employment-and-training components, noting that outreach is typically run by nonprofits with a 50% match and that employment and training funds job-skills programs to help recipients move toward better jobs and self-sufficiency. The discussion emphasized that access to nutritious food, education, and job supports are all part of improving health outcomes and reducing food insecurity.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is the purpose of SNAP.
• There's no indication that SNAP recipients have higher levels of diabetes than non-SNAP recipients.
• than non-SNAP recipients.
• But it is important to note that folks on SNAP are twice the rate of folks that are not on SNAP, but
• SNAP purchased is soda.

Bills: HB2190, HB2202, HB2233, HB2251, HB2252, HB2396, HB2437, HB2689, HB2796

Keywords: physician assistants, licensure compact, medical services, multistate practice, patient care access, healthcare workforce, military families, adverse actions, dementia care, telementoring, healthcare education, rural communities, grant funding, HB 2233, rural health transformation, rural health transformation program, AHCCCS, Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Joint Legislative Budget Committee, JLBC

Transcript Highlights:

• SNAP and TANFF for such as SNAP and TANFF.
• While I recognize the bill's goal is to fight SNAP fraud, which is commendable, SNAP fraud is actually
• Rate committed by SNAP implementation agencies.
• So skimming is snap theft.
• a checkout line that's just for SNAP.

Bills: SB 596, SB 961, SB 1398, SB 1183, SB 1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Bills: SB596, SB961, SB1398, SB1183, SB1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• While I recognize the bill's goal is to fight SNAP fraud, which is commendable, SNAP fraud is actually
• The 11% of fraud was attributed to SNAP implementation agencies. at a federal level.
• So skimming is SNAP theft.
• About natural disasters, there's a program called D-SNAP, Disaster SNAP, which is a special program for
• a checkout line that's just for SNAP recipients.

Bills: SB596, SB961, SB1398, SB1183, SB1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• They reduce SNAP participation.
• SNAP. Just SNAP, right? Yeah. CalFresh. SNAP.
• My next question has to do with SNAP and Ms. Plattonino.
• For example, we're developing an ABOD outreach toolkit.
• funding that applies generally to SNAP.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the bill as a major federal shift that would reduce benefits and increase state and county costs, while the Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office outlined projected impacts: new work requirements, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, tighter immigrant eligibility rules, reduced federal support for provider taxes and emergency services, and new CalFresh cost-sharing provisions. The LAO estimated millions could be affected, including 1 to 2 million Medi-Cal disenrollments and over 600,000 CalFresh losses, while Finance said the Governor’s budget reflects about $1.4 billion in new General Fund costs in 2026-27 and larger federal funding reductions over time. The committee also heard that the state is pursuing implementation resources and that counties will bear significant administrative burdens, with regional variation expected. Testimony from UC Berkeley’s Labor Center emphasized that many projected coverage losses would stem from administrative red tape rather than true ineligibility, and that the state could choose to limit the impact by applying new requirements only to federally funded populations and by keeping some immigrants in state-funded full-scope Medi-Cal. The Food Research and Action Center argued that CalFresh cuts would increase hunger, housing instability, health costs, and local economic losses, and said work/time-limit policies do not increase employment but do increase churn and administrative complexity. Members repeatedly raised concerns about county indigent care, hospital and clinic impacts, racial and immigrant disparities, and the downstream costs of reduced coverage, while some Republicans argued the programs’ growth is unsustainable and that work requirements and tighter eligibility could encourage employment and reduce spending. No formal votes were taken. The hearing was informational, with members asking for follow-up information on procedural disenrollments, regional impacts, county cost exposure, the Medi-Cal managed care organization tax, and CalFresh error-rate reduction efforts. The chair noted a second hearing would be held later to continue discussion of county and safety-net impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• So notably, these changes also apply to CalFresh outreach.
• We are in the final stages of selecting an outreach contractor to support outreach efforts ahead of the
• A total of $12.5 million is budgeted for this outreach.
• I don't know if you want to speak to the outreach component.
• So they are one of our largest outreach providers.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services opened its first hearing of the year with a discussion centered on CalFresh, the Department of Social Services, and related anti-poverty and immigrant services programs. Chair Jackson framed the hearing as a response to the “historic and enormous challenges” created by H.R. 1, emphasizing that the committee’s goal was to minimize harm to vulnerable Californians. No votes were taken in the hearing. The first major topic was the impact of H.R. 1 on CalFresh eligibility and administration. CDSS estimated major federal funding reductions, with hundreds of thousands of Californians potentially losing benefits under new time limits and work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents, and additional losses among certain non-citizen groups. County welfare directors, eligibility workers, SEIU, and other advocates argued that counties are underfunded and understaffed to implement the new rules, and urged release of the previously authorized $20 million General Fund, a county match waiver, and an additional ongoing workforce investment. LAO and the Department of Finance said they were reviewing the administration’s proposals and emphasized the need to use existing data, automation, and statutory direction to reduce administrative burden and improve implementation. A second panel addressed county administrative backfill and the broader fiscal effects of H.R. 1. CDSS explained that the law shifts more administrative costs to the state and counties beginning in federal fiscal year 2027 and could also create future state benefit costs tied to payment error rates. County and food bank representatives warned that many counties will struggle to absorb the higher match and that penalties tied to payment error rates could worsen budget pressure. Members pressed Finance and CDSS for clearer timelines, written responses, and more detailed workload assumptions, while Finance said it was still analyzing the federal guidance and county resource needs. The final major topic was the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) and possible state responses for people losing federal CalFresh eligibility. CDSS said CFAP remains limited by statute and by the federal structure it currently uses, but that the planned expansion to Californians age 55 and older regardless of immigration status remains on track for October 1, 2027, subject to funding. Immigrant advocates urged the state to fold newly excluded humanitarian immigrants into CFAP and to invest in outreach and administration, while Western Center on Law and Poverty proposed a broader state-funded anti-hunger response for people cut off by H.R. 1. LAO noted that the CFAP expansion is difficult to estimate and that further policy and technical work would be needed to assess costs and implementation options.