Senate budget subcommittee rejects major Medi‑Cal cuts, preserves behavioral‑health and home‑care investments

Chair Powell opened the final hearing of Budget Subcommittee No. 3 by praising the Senate-side budget for maintaining services and rejecting cuts proposed earlier in the year. After public testimony from disability, health‑care and county advocates, the subcommittee moved forward with the Senate package.

Evan Fern of Disability Rights California told the subcommittee that proposed asset limits and premium changes would put care out of reach for many Californians: "On item 56, for 62,000 people with disabilities and seniors, medical would no longer be within reach if these new lower asset limits were reinstated," he said, and added, "Disability doesn't recognize immigration status." Fern urged retaining full‑scope Medi‑Cal for qualified humanitarian immigrants (item 55) and opposing a $50 monthly Medi‑Cal premium (item 57).

A broad coalition of county, hospital and community organizations thanked the subcommittee for rejecting an IHSS cost shift and for delaying or rejecting proposed rate cuts. Bridal McCarthy of the California State Association of Counties pressed the Legislature to consider funding remaining county costs tied to HR 1—particularly indigent care and public hospitals—and provided an alternative that she said would cost $50,000,000 in the budget year to preserve inpatient access and leverage federal dollars.

Multiple speakers—including advocates for home‑ and community‑based services, the Commission for Behavioral Health, and provider groups—praised the subcommittee's support for mobile crisis infrastructure and the Be Home Soon proposal to move people from institutional care to home‑based supports. Kate Morrison of Maxim Healthcare Services said the proposal would help medically fragile children: "We know 1,000 kids are waiting for care across the state," she said, arguing care at home is far less costly than continued hospitalization.

Speakers representing legal services, immigrant advocates, food‑assistance groups and county eligibility staff repeatedly urged the Legislature to fund implementation, immigration legal defense, and CalFresh outreach to avoid wrongful coverage losses as HR 1 takes effect. Several witnesses urged adopting the PATH proposal to provide short‑term, state‑only coverage for people who would otherwise fall out of Medi‑Cal.

The subcommittee did not make policy changes on the record beyond the votes to approve staff recommendations; rather, it received public testimony and then proceeded to roll‑call votes on the package. The hearing concluded after three voting blocks were approved and the subcommittee adjourned.