By Megan Myscofski
California started a $35 million guaranteed income program in 2023, giving people monthly checks for 12 to 18 months with no requirements on how to spend them. Now, some lawmakers are looking to find permanent funding for it.
The pilot program is for former foster youth and pregnant people with lower incomes, and has reached almost 2,000 participants with help from seven nonprofits.
Robin Baker manages the guaranteed income program for pregnant people at one of those organizations — the McKinleyville Family Resource Center in Humboldt County.
“It’s been interesting to see now a year out when people would have been returning to work that folks are able to have the space to find a job that’s a better fit for them or to spend more time with their babies or to go back to school,” she said.
Baker added there’s also less bureaucracy than other social service programs, which means less stress for participants and fewer costs for administrators.
Last year, the state allocated another $5 million to expand the pilot to adults over 60 — a population that experiences higher poverty rates than other age groups. The Department of Social Services said it expects to open applications for that program this spring.
“I’m tired of calling this a pilot. We know it works,” Riverside Democratic Assembly member Corey Jackson said at an informational hearing on Wednesday. He asked the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance to look into potential ways the state could permanently fund the program.
“I do believe that guaranteed income is a part of a 21st century social safety net to fill in the gaps that other, more stringent programs aren’t able to meet,” he said.
Guaranteed income pilots have sprung up around the country — including in some California cities and counties such as Sacramento County. Research on them shows generally positive outcomes. For example, the University of Pennsylvania looked into a program funded by Los Angeles and found participants had better access to food and experienced less domestic violence than a control group.
“People have higher rates of employment. They are more likely to be housed. They are more likely to be thriving because of direct cash,” said Rachel Resnick. She oversees the direct cash program at the National Council of Jewish Women Los Angeles, which also administers funds to pregnant people.
At the same time, conservative lawmakers and some taxpayer groups have opposed guaranteed income programs, calling it “redistribution.” That includes Susan Shelley, who represents the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
“A guaranteed income program that’s funded by philanthropy from voluntary donations is fine,” she said. “But a guaranteed income program funded by taking money out of other people’s checks and redistributing it through the government is not fine.”
Two Assembly Democrats — Alex Lee from Fremont and Nick Schultz of Burbank — authored Assembly Bill 661, which calls for the State Department of Social Services to study and make recommendations on how to expand the program.
