California Antihunger Response Act of 2022.
The legislation is poised to fill a critical gap left by existing federal provisions, particularly for individuals classified as able-bodied adults without dependents, who face time constraints on receiving benefits. By mandating that CARE benefits match the amount individuals would receive under CalFresh were it not for the time limits, AB 1965 aims to reduce hunger and promote better economic outcomes for individuals striving to secure employment. The provision of CARE benefits will only occur in regions not granted a time limit waiver by the federal government, ensuring that help is directed to those areas experiencing economic distress.
Assembly Bill 1965, known as the California Antihunger Response Act of 2022, establishes a new food assistance program to improve access to nutrition for individuals ineligible for CalFresh benefits due to the federal ABAWD time limit. This bill aims to address the significant issue of food insecurity, impacting one in five Californians, especially among low-income, out-of-work, and job-seeking applicants. The California Department of Social Services (CDSS) is required to implement this program, referred to as the California Antihunger Response (CARE), using state-appropriated funds to provide necessary support to those affected.
The sentiment around AB 1965 is largely supportive among advocates for food security, reflecting a shared understanding of the necessity of addressing hunger as a barrier to employment and economic mobility. Proponents assert that rather than incentivizing work, the ABAWD time limit disproportionately affects individuals needing support. Conversely, there may be concerns about the implications of expanding such programs on state budgets and the complexities of eligibility guidelines, which could provoke debate among fiscal conservatives and those emphasizing personal responsibility.
The bill's contention arises primarily from the nuances of its implementation, including challenges associated with establishing state-level benefits in alignment with federal policies. Some legislators have raised concerns about the potential strain on state resources and the practical challenges that could arise from administering the CARE program effectively. Additionally, discussions around the redistribution of discretionary exemptions between counties further complicate the landscape of support, as it raises questions about equitable access and resource allocation across different communities.