 116 New Montgomery St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
415.777.4422
|
|
| Nutrition Legislation Update | May 29, 2008 |
|
Much Progress (and One Defeat) for CFPA-Sponsored Bills
CFPA is the sponsor of six bills this session. Recognizing the budget crisis facing the state, CFPA pushed bills that were low-cost, no-cost, or, in some cases, produced cost-savings. So far, CFPA is batting 5 for 6 in its bills this session and is gathering bipartisan support for many of them.
Below is a quick update on where things stand with CFPA-sponsored bills, going in numerical order. For right now, you can just sit back and relax for this update. There isn't much in terms of action steps for the time being. Congratulate yourselves for your efforts to get these bills as far as they have!
AB 433 (Beall): This bill would remove the asset test for some families for food stamp eligibility. AB 433 is actually a holdover from last year and has already passed through the Assembly and is waiting to be voted upon by the Senate. This bill continues to be a hot topic of discussion with the administration. We will be asking for your help in moving this bill later in the session.
AB 1966 (Garcia): The one legislative defeat thus far for our bills was AB 1966 - the bill to require school breakfast in "severe need" schools. Like some past versions of this bill, AB 1966 died in the Assembly Appropriations committee. An overly pessimistic cost estimate doomed this bill, particularly given the state's budget crisis. CFPA and others believe that this cost estimate is significantly exaggerated. Although all similar pieces of legislation have failed in the past, this issue continues to be a popular one - not to mention an important one.
AB 2300 (Laird): AB 2300 would seek to help low-income households receiving Medi-Cal more easily enroll in free or reduced-price school meals. With a near unanimous vote of 73 to 4 (three members did not vote or were absent), this bill passed off the Assembly floor with flying colors. Those voting outliers who were against the bill were Joel Anderson (R-La Mesa), Rick Keene (R-Chico), Doug La Malfa (R-Biggs), and Mimi Walters (R-Laguna Niguel).
AB 2704 (Leno): Our bill to remove barriers to free, tap water in school cafeterias and eating areas also passed off the floor of the Assembly with a vote of 47 to 25. The bill is now referred to the Senate Education committee.
AB 2726 (Leno): Although the Legislature and the Governor both agreed to and passed the Healthy Purchase Pilot Program to improve access to and affordability of fresh produce for food stamp recipients, this innovative program was never funded. AB 2726 sought to authorize the use of alternative funding sources, such as private or federal funds, for the pilot. This bill also passed through the Assembly with a vote of 47 to 31. Thanks to Senator Harkin money was included in the recently passed Farm Bill for pilot programs such as the Healthy Purchase Pilot. Having these federal funds available increases the prospects for the bill and for the pilot.
AB 2844 (Laird): This bill to remove red tape from the food stamp program would allow food stamp recipients to only have to report income every six months instead of three months, and thus reduce the "churning" of food stamp caseloads on and off the rolls. This bill also passed off the Assembly floor by a wide margin (a vote of 50 to 28) and picked up some Republican support as well.
A number of other nutrition related bills we were tracking also have recently been acted upon:
AB 1996 (Swanson): Assemblymember Swanson's bill to restore food stamp benefits to individuals convicted of certain drug-related crimes who have served their time and are seeking to re-enter society passed out of the Assembly with a vote of 42 to 35. As might be expected on this potentially controversial subject, floor debate was heated, but the bill still survived.
AB 2474 (Galgiani): Our friends at the California WIC Association were the sponsor of this bill to require the coordination of obesity prevention efforts across the State of California. Although the bill passed out of the Assembly Appropriations committee, it was amended to weaken the language from "require" to "authorize" such coordination.
AB 2572 (Parra): This bill would do little more than codify existing practice with respect to menu labeling in restaurants. SB 1420 (Padilla), discussed below, is a much stronger menu labeling bill and one that we support. AB 2572 passed out of the Assembly Appropriations committee and will be voted on soon. Click here to urge your Assemblymember to vote "no" on this bill.
AB 2708 (Solorio): This bill would seek to limit advertising of certain unhealthy foods and beverages on school campuses. The bill failed to pass out of the Assembly Appropriations committee.
AB 2965 (Krekorian): This bill sought to test the toxicity of water in schools. The bill did not make it out of the Assembly Appropriations committee.
SB 1101 (Cedillo): This bill, sponsored by California Association of Food Banks, extends the sunset of the state's income tax check-off for the Emergency Food Assistance Program. The bill passed off the Senate floor by a wide margin of 30 to 3 and will next be heard in the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation.
SB 1420 (Padilla): Our friends at the California Center for Public Health Advocacy are sponsors of this bill to require menu labeling in chain restaurants. The bill squeaked through the Senate with a vote of 21 to 17. A weaker bill menu labeling bill, AB 2572, is discussed above.
As we reported in our last alert, the Governor's revised budget proposal contained a number of harmful cuts to low-income families, immigrants, seniors, and disabled people, including cuts to CalWORKs, SSI/SSP, in-home supportive services, and Medi-Cal. In a bit of positive recent news, the Legislature's Budget Committees have decided not to hold hearings on many of these new budget proposals. This suggests that the Legislature will likely reject many, if not all, of these harmful cuts in this round of budget action.
As we mentioned in our nutritional analysis of the Governor's May Revise, one positive note was his proposal to waive the face-to-face interview requirement for food stamps by some working households that meet certain work requirements. CFPA's Director of Legislation, George Manalo-LeClair, recently testified on this issue. The one improvement that we are asking for is that the state use the full amount of flexibility offered by USDA to waive the face-to-face interview requirements.
What about the status of the budget process? Uncertainty abounds. A recent news article predicted that the budget would not meet the constitutionally required deadline of June 15th and quoted Senate Leader Don Perata (D-Oakland) as predicting a "long, hot, dry summer". However, another recent article reported that the state may run out of cash by August making a long, drawn out budget negotiation much more costly and putting more pressure on lawmakers to get a deal settled on-time.
SJ Mercury News Editorial Praises Food Stamp Legislation
A recent editorial in the San Jose Mercury News expressed support for improving the Food Stamp Program and highlighted AB 433 and AB 2844 (see the section above for more info on these bills).
Because it just wouldn't be an alert without some mention of the Farm Bill, we thought we'd remind you of this analysis of nutrition improvements in the Farm Bill from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. |
In this issue:
Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Listening Sessions at USDA HQ in SF
The USDA will be hosting a listening session for Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization on Wednesday, August 6 at their regional headquarters in San Francisco. The session provides a great opportunity for you to have your voice heard by USDA officials about what you would like to see change in these important nutrition programs. It also provides an opportunity for you to hear what other (perhaps competing) priorities are going to be debated in the coming couple of years.
Regional and national USDA officials will be in attendance and listening to comments. All are invited, including program participants and/or their families, representatives from state agencies, local program offices, professional organizations, industry, advocacy groups, and other interested parties.
Because the time and space of the listening session is limited, speakers are assigned on a first-come, first-served basis upon registration and speaking time will be limited to three to four minutes. Participants may also submit written testimony. More information is available in this invitation letter.
To register for the session, click here for the registration form.
For the listening session agenda, click here.
The address for the USDA office in San Francisco is included in the information above.
Unable to attend the listening session? Fear not! You can still have your voice heard! Below is a link to CFPA's survey on Child Nutrition Reauthorization (to close on Monday June 2). In addition, you can also submit public comments to the USDA until October 15, 2008. The USDA recently released this notice for public comment. Instructions on how to submit your comments are included in the link. (You need to scroll down about half the page to get to the relevant section...)
Last Chance! Child Nutrition Reauthorization Survey Closes on Monday June 2
This is your last chance to weigh in with your priorities for Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization.
Have your voice heard on school lunch, school breakfast, summer nutrition programs, WIC, child care nutrition, and afterschool snacks.
Click here for more information and the link to our brief survey.
Polls close on June 2nd!
New Resource: California Family Economic Self-Sufficiency Standard by County This valuable resource provides county specific information on how much it takes to make ends meet for different types of families (both one or two parents with different numbers of children.) At a time of rising costs and a worsening economy, the minimum wage is clearly insufficient to keep families out of poverty. This information from the Insight Center for Community Economic Development is a useful tool to highlight the inadequacy of many low-wage jobs. More information from the Insight Center: "The Family Economic Self-Sufficiency Standard (Self-Sufficiency Standard) measures how much income is needed for a family of a certain composition living in a particular county to adequately meet its minimal basic needs. It is based on the costs families face on a daily basis – housing, food, child care, out-of-pocket medical expenses, transportation, and other necessary spending – and provides a complete picture of what it takes for families to make ends meet. In contrast, the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) , which was developed in the early 1960’s and is used to determine income eligibility for many public programs, is based on the outdated assumption that food represents one-third of a family’s budget. The FPL also fails to take into account housing and transportation costs, geography, and, most importantly, child care costs, which are increasingly more expensive. For a family of four — whether in a high cost market like San Francisco, CA or a more affordable market like Baton Rouge, LA — the poverty level is $21,200 in annual household earnings." Selected Findings:
|
| Copyright © CFPA |
|
| If you wish to cancel your subscription to this action alert click here. If you were forwarded this alert and you wish to subscribe, please click here. | |
