Senate Floor

Senate will convene in 30 seconds.

Good morning, Senators. Mr. Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call].

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Ladies and gentlemen, the Senate or quorum is present. Would our members and our guests beyond the rail and in the Gallery please rise? We're going to be led in prayer by our amazing chaplain, Sister Michelle, who is beloved, after which we're going to ask each of you to please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance of the flag. Sister Michelle, the floor is yours.

Thank you. So we gather again in God's presence. Gracious God, we pray for courage and comfort in the words of Amanda Gorman's 'The Hill We Climb.' 'When day comes, we ask ourselves, where can we find light in this never ending shade?

'Let the globe, if nothing else, say this is true, that even as we grieved, we grew, that even as we hurt, we hoped, that even as we tired, we tried, that we'll forever be tied together, victorious where we will never again sow division. This is the hill we climb.

'We will not march back to what was, but move to what shall be. We will not be turned around or interrupted by intimidation because we know our inaction and inertia would be the inheritance of the next generation. One thing is certain.

'If we merge mercy with might and might with right, then love becomes our legacy and change our children's birthright.' Merciful God, may our merging of mercy, might, and right lead to an experience of love for all and for our future generations. Amen.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. [Pledge of Allegiance]. Thank you to our guests and to the Senators. Members, I'm going to say a few words and then I'd like to better turn it over to my partner, Brian Jones, leader of the Republican Caucus, and this is going to be some very brief remarks on behalf of each caucus.

I would be remiss if not to mention the federal siege on our great state. The people of California have endured indiscriminate and ruthless terror over the past few weeks.

The federalization and deployment of the National Guard and the military here on U.S. soil is not just undemocratic; it goes against who we are as a republic. As California Senators, I think it's important that we stand in solidarity with our neighbors who are candidly under the assault in the cities who are under siege.

That is why, after we hear from our Republican Leader, Senator Jones, I'm going to call the Senate into a brief recess and I'm going to invite individuals to be able to join us in solidarity for our democracy on the west steps in front of the Capitol Building, and this Capitol Building is the defining symbol of our state's democracy. But first, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to turn it over to Senator Brian Jones.

Thank you, Senator Pro Tem, for the opportunity to address the body as well. I want to start off by saying that California Republicans are purposefully walking a very tight rope over the last couple of weeks, recognizing that there are emotions high on both sides of the political spectrum and across this political spectrum, but also within our communities in Los Angeles and other areas of California, as we've now been noticed that there's going to be continued protests and uprisings announced for tomorrow across the state and across the country.

I understand the perspective of a siege, but some people would argue that that started in the prior presidential administration with an open border policy. I believe that the California State Senate, all of us, Republicans, Democrats, progressives, conservatives, and everywhere in between, have the opportunity today to provide local leadership here in this Capitol Building.

We have the opportunity to provide leadership across our state, we have opportunity to provide leadership across our country, and we have an opportunity, as of last night, to provide leadership across the globe.

The demeanor, the professionalism, and the words that we choose to use over the next 24 hours will determine whether the country looks at the California State Senate as statesmen and stateswomen and problem-solvers and people who love this country and love this state and are determined to work together to get us through this chaos that now has been elevated, I believe, by egos on both sides of the debate.

People's lives are being impacted on the streets of California. I would implore and ask all of us to keep that in mind as we progress over our debate on the budget, as we deal with the press and the statements that we make. If we all agree and cooperate to tone things down, I think we can set the example for national leaders to follow suit, and that is my prayer, and that's what I'll continue to pray about. Thank you, Mr. Pro Tem.

I want to take a moment to say thank you to Leader Jones. There are disagreements that we have in these chambers, Democrats and Republicans. One thing I can say, Leader Jones, is that we strive to work closely together to be able to deliver for the people of California.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, this body is going to take action on our budget. We're going to take care of the business, delivering for the people of the State of California, delivering a budget that is balanced and on time, but at this time, I'm going to call the Senate into a brief recess so we can gather in solidarity on the west steps in front of the Capitol Building. Thank you.

Convene from recess. In just a few minutes, we're going to let folks come back. We have a busy day in front of us. We're going to turn the dais over to Senator Grayson in just a moment. We're going to be taking up a resolution celebrating our nation, and of course, our flag for Flag Day in just a few moments.

Then we're going to get into the Legislature's budget balance on time and we're ready to go. We're asking all Senators to return to the floor, and we'll get started in just a few moments.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, we're going to get started in two minutes, two-minute warning. We're going to get the Senate started in two minutes.

The Senate is reconvened. Senator Jones, for what purpose?

Thank you, Mr. President. Just wanted to make a brief clarification on procedure, prior procedure. Just wanted to--there were some questions about what happened to the Republicans. I just wanted to--for the public and the press and everybody here, we caucused, had a brief caucus meeting while the Democrats were out on the west steps.

Thank you for that clarification. Noted.

Moving on with the business of the day. Privileges of the floor, there are none. Messages from the Governor will be deemed read. Messages from Assembly will be deemed read. Reports of committees will be deemed read and amendments adopted. Motions and resolutions and notices. Senator Richardson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to request that file item number 78-AB 831 by Assemblymember Ramos be removed from the consent calendar and put on the inactive file at the request of the member.

The desk will note. Senator Valladares, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the request of the author, please remove file item number 80 AB 1149 Davies from the consent calendar and place it on the inactive file.

The desk will note. Seeing no other mics raised. Members, we will move to consideration of the daily file. Second reading file. Secretary, please read.

Assembly Bill 463 with amendments. 870, 348, 962 with amendments. 260 with amendments.

Second reading file will be deemed read. Senate, third reading, item 23. Secretary, please read.

Senate Concurrent Resolution 74 by Senator Ochoa Bogh relative to Flag Day.

Senator Ochoa Bog, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, I rise to present SCR 74, which recognizes June 14, 2025 as Flag Day. This day is personal to me, not only because it recognizes one of the greatest symbols of our country, but because it took a greater significance when I became an elected official.

On June 14, 1777, 248 years ago, on Saturday, the Second Continental Congress approved the nation's first flag, which had 13 stripes and a constellation of 13 white stars on a field of blue. Since then, Americans have displayed several variations of the flag in government buildings, schools, stadiums and homes.

In fact, between 1777 and 1960, there were over 20 versions of the American flag, as a star was added every time a state joined the Union. While the number of stars on Flag Day may have changed, the ideals it represents have remained the same. Justice, vigilance and perseverance.

These are just a few of the values our flag symbolizes. Permission to read?

Without objection? Yes.

In his 1917 Flag Day proclamation, President Woodrow Wilson stated that the flag represents our unity, our power, our thought and purpose as a nation.

And in his 1988 Flag Day proclamation, President Ronald Reagan wrote that the flag reminds us of the courage and steadfastness of those who pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to found this great experiment in Republican government.

SCR 74 continues the 75 year tradition of recognizing Flag Day as our nation's commitment to form and a more perfect union. We are not perfect, but we are always trying to strive to be better, be wiser and go further.

That is what the United States of our ancestors and the United States I want for my children and I'm proud to have been part of making that happen. On your desk today is a flag to take with you. May it remind you that the promise that is and always will be in this great nation.

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Umberg, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President and colleagues. How ironic that today is Flag Day-- tomorrow is Flag Day. When I think of the flag, I think of the flag-draped coffins of those who come back from Iraq, from Afghanistan, the funerals of those who fought in Vietnam.

The funerals of those who volunteered or voluntold to go to Vietnam. I think of what the flag stands for. Wrapping the flag around someone in a false show of patriotism is a very shallow, shallow demonstration of patriotism. But self sacrifice, putting the country above oneself is what the flag stands for. It stands for the rule of law.

It stands for democracy. It stands for those who stood up for democracy, for those who stood up for the rule of law. It stands for all of us that care about our republic and care about our traditions and care about what we leave for our children.

So I urge support for this Flag Day resolution and for its reverence, its symbol of democracy and the rule of law.

Senator Choi, you are recognized.

Thank you, President. The American flag symbolizes the unity of a nation, representing a collective strength of all Americans. A symbol of freedom and justice that we strive to uphold. Our flag embodies the love of our country and national purpose.

As an immigrant, the flag symbolizes hope and possibility, the opportunity for better future where people from all backgrounds can come together to create a stronger nation.

To quote the President Calvin Coolidge from 1931 addresses, "But when we look at our flag and behold it emblazoned with all our rights, we must remember that it is equally a symbol of our duties."

It is disheartening to witness American flags being burnt on streets in recent demonstrations. I urge them to respect the American flag first if they love America. I respectfully urge your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Choi. Senator Alvarado-Gil, you are recognized.

Mr. President, I respectfully rise with a point of order. We are a body of decorum and to deface or mutilate our flag here on the floor. I need to ask that the Senator from LA please remove the flag from her desk.

One moment.

Senator Alvarado-Gil. The Senator has her flag on her desk. It is a sign of distress. And so we will allow for her to keep her flag on her desk. It's not defacing the flag. It's a actual sign of distress-- a symbol.

Mr. President, question of personal privilege.

It's a First Amendment right.

Permission to read Section 222?

Without objection? We have an objection.

Questions of personal privilege, item number one: questions affecting the rights, reputation and conduct of members of the body in the representative capacity are questions of personal privilege. I believe that has--

Senator, we had an actual objection.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yes. Members, we will vote on the permission to read. There is a point of order on the floor right now, so-- Let us vote the permission to read.

Okay. Senator Laird objected to the request to read, so he is requesting no. And Senator Alvarado-Gil is asking for permission to read.

We will vote first, and then I will come to you. All right. Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll call]

Ayes 8, nos 28. Senator, the permission to read is denied. Is this a point of order?

Point of order is recognized. Senator Strickland.

I would like to appeal the ruling of the Chair allowing a Member to put a flag to go upside down in this chamber. I'm appealing the ruling of the Chair. Thank you very much.

Senator Strickland, we're going to do a roll call. Senator Strickland is asking for the ruling of the chair to be appealed. The chair. Upheld. I'm sorry, upheld. The question before the members is whether the ruling of the chair should be upheld. That is a yes. And mister. Oh, Senator Strickland is no. Secretary, please call the roll.

[roll call]

I's, 28. No's, 8. The ruling of the chair is upheld. We have a point of order. Senator Alvarado-Gil. You are recognized for your point of order.

Under questions of personal privilege, Section 222. I'm questioning the act of the Senator from Los Angeles holding the American flag upside down. We, as duly elected officials, took an oath to defend our flag and our Constitution. A sign of distress for Senators is to flip our pin upside down. That is the designated.

Senator, we've already discussed this through both your point of order and an appeal. It's already been voted on and we've already addressed this.

And there's still an offensive sign on this floor of.

The matter has been handled.

A defaced flag.

Thank you. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. And I am deeply troubled by the Senator who raised this issue. As I think about the voters in her district.

Is this a point of order or?

Whose rights were violated. I find it very offensive that this.

Senator, please clarify for which you rise.

I rise to respond to this issue.

Are you raising to speak on a resolution? Is this a point of order?

I'm raising to speak on the resolution, Mr. President. Yes.

Please proceed.

I want to start by saying that I turn my flag in distress as an American because what is happening in this country, what is happening in my city makes me feel distressed as an American. And on Flag Day, as we talk about this flag and what it represents.

I gaze on the flag in the way that my ancestors have gazed on this flag, seeing it as a symbol of protection, as a symbol of liberty, as a symbol of freedom, not as a symbol of oppression. A symbol of an occupying force in a California City.

A symbol that is taking away the rights of neighbors, of residents, of businesses's ability to be able to earn profits in our city. I'm deeply distressed as we think about Flag Day and what it represents and all of the families who are hurting.

I can only as an American who is gazing on this flag in the way that Sojourner Truth gazed on this flag, in the way that Frederick Douglass gazed on this flag, Martin Luther King, Cesar Chavez, imploring America to do what it should and must do, which is to live up to its values and standards of liberty and justice for all.

But unfortunately, there are 400 people that are locked up that we can't even find. We don't even know their names. We just know they've been disappeared from our streets. There are babies who are crying this morning because their parents never came home yesterday.

And I can only think about the enslaved mothers as they stood, as their children were ripped from them.

Please stay with the resolution and the flag.

Well, this is about the flag. This is about the history. This is about from whence we have come. This is about the lie that cannot live forever. We are one people under God, indivisible. That's what this flag is about.

But we have an administration and we have a party and we have colleagues and we have individual senators that are straight up hypocrites. Straight up hypocrites.

Stick with the resolution on flag day. Thank you.

To see the flag pinned on my senator who was thrown to the ground, his face ground into the carpet, his arm bent behind his back, on television, to see my governor attacked personally.

Senator, I really need you to stick to the issue and the resolution.

It is incredible and unconscionable. It is unconscionable. It is unconscionable to stand up and talk about Flag Day and to not say that we and this flag are not in distress. So I rise in the spirit. I rise in the spirit of John Brown. I rise in the spirit of the patriots who fought against tyranny.

I rise for my brothers and sisters in Los Angeles to say this flag has to mean something for all of us, and that is the freedom and justice for everyone who resides in this state. So, yes, my flag is in distress.

And as a proud American who knows what it means to fight for justice in this country generation after generation after generation. And we will win this fight. We will win. I stand proudly for Flag Day, but I know that my flag is in distress.

And with that, I thank this body, I thank my colleagues, I thank my good senator from Los Angeles and my other senators from Los Angeles as we stand and fight for our constituents and their rights and their ability to be free in California.

Senator Jones, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, I rise in support of SCR 74, the Flag Day resolution. To respond just real quick to a couple of things.

If we're going to call out the behavior of elected officials, let's make sure that we're holding our own Governor accountable to the comments that his communications team is making on his social media platform by calling one of our assembly colleagues a small bald man.

Senator, please stick.

That is inappropriate. Thank you, Mr. President.

Regarding the Flag Day and the flag on our U.S. Senator, U.S. senators know the protocol when they are interacting with a federal agency and the secretaries of those agencies and.

Senator, please stick to the scope of the resolution at hand.

Know how to play the theatrical media. And so let's not excuse their behavior also. Regarding Flag Day and the great flag of our country, the best symbol of freedom across the globe. Founded in the 1700s, this country has been through toils, troubles, and terrors before. We've been through peacetime, we've been through prosperous times.

This country has outlasted many episodes of history that tried to destroy this country and take it down.

From the War of Independence to the War of 1812 to the Civil War to the wars that Theodore Roosevelt fought in, to the First World War, the campaigns across the globe that this flag was planted for freedom. To the Second World War, the Vietnam War, the Korean War.

The Middle East wars, and the current wars that are happening across our globe, this flag has been planted as a symbol of freedom. And in every country that we've planted that flag of freedom as a symbol of hope to the people that we were liberating, we took our flag back and gave them their country back.

We will withstand the current troubles that this country is facing today. And that flag, the symbol of us withstanding those troubles. This will get worked out, this will get solved, and this will be one more example of that flag surviving and doing its job. Thank you, Mr. President.

Seeing no other mics raised. Senator Ochoa Bogh, you may close.

I was just going to respectfully ask for an I vote. As I started my comments and I said this was a resolution on Flag Day and what it stands for me personally as a daughter of immigrant parents, the symbolism of that flag, of the opportunities that this country has given my parents and our siblings, those opportunities that have allowed us to achieve the American dream and the different versions of it.

As I mentioned also, we are not perfect. We're not perfect, but we work together to become more perfect. And just like human beings, we are always growing, learning and growing, becoming, hopefully, something better. A better human being. I've often been heard say that I'm proud to serve in the senate amongst 39 other colleagues.

And though we vary in mindset, approaches, or even directives, there is so much more that unites us as human beings and as members of this body. Yes, many things happen, and unfortunately, yes, the weaknesses of the human spirit play at hand. But regardless. Regardless, this flag, as mentioned, unites us.

And more than ever, at times of distress, we should find that common ground. We should find that humanity, as my colleague from Haworth always talks about. And we should continuously strive to find the good in human beings, understand what their plight is.

But now is not the time for us in this body to create animosity or disdain. We should always uphold our level of decorum, respect our differences, because that is what that beautiful flag stands for.

And I'll echo my leaders. The Republican leader from San Diego stated earlier, a lot may happen this weekend, but I hope that our bonds as colleagues, as fellow Senators, as human beings, and hopefully I call many of you friends that will unite in prayer.

And rather than getting people incited, I hope that we all act as adults with emotional maturity to speak wisely, respectfully and help everybody come together and heal. And with that, sir or Mr. President, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll call]

Ayes 36, noes 0. The resolution is adopted. Members, we will move to supplemental file number one, file item 81. Secretary, please read.

Senate Bill 101 by Senator Wiener, an act relating to the state budget to take effect immediately. Budget Bill.

Senator Wiener, you are recognized.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. Colleagues, I rise today to present SB 101, which is the Budget Act of 2025. SB 101 represents a budget package including $327.7 billion in total spending, 231.9 billion of which is General Fund. It maintains 13.2 billion in combined total reserves.

It includes 12.3 billion in solutions to balance the budget in 2025-26 and ongoing solutions that grow to over $12 billion to reduce out your structural deficits. The bill includes many vital investments that were absent from the Governor's May Revision budget plan, including, for example, this budget eliminates.

It rejects proposed cuts to the UC and CSU systems at a time when higher education and scientific research are under severe assault from the federal government from this President. We need to have UC and CSU's backs. The bill continues to invest in housing, which is a huge issue facing our state.

By funding the Low Income Housing Tax Credit for Affordable Housing, the Multifamily Housing Program and supporting first time homebuyers through California Dream for All. It continues to fund efforts to address homelessness, including reversing the Governor's proposed cut on HHAP, the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Grants for our cities.

The bill also supports our local governments by providing loans, General Fund loan to support recovery in Los Angeles County. Local governments in Los Angeles are struggling mightily right now. This provides a loan of $1 billion for local government in LA County.

It also supports public transportation in the Bay Area by providing a loan of $750 million so that our major transit systems in the Bay Area do not have to enact massive, massive service cuts. I do want to acknowledge that we were also forced to make some very tough choices to balance this year's budget.

Choices that none of us wants to have to make, particularly around Medi-Cal coverage for immigrant neighbors. We do not take these choices lightly and we know that these choices will have impacts. We were able to significantly scale back the Governor's proposed reductions relating to Medi-Cal and our immigrant communities.

We were able to delay some of those changes and scale them back in other ways. We also completely rejected the Governor's proposed cut to in home to IHSS, In Home Supportive Services, both in various respects, including with respect to immigrant Californians. We reduced the premium that the Governor proposed by 70% and delayed its implementation by two years.

And we also ensured that seniors are not ever required to pay those premiums. We also ensured that in terms of new enrollments that youth who then age out and turn 19 will continue to be enrolled in the Medi-Cal program and also that anyone who does not pay a premium and drops out of the program has six months to re-enroll.

This budget represents the work of 56 Budget Subcommittee hearings and four full hearings of the Budget Committee. I want to thank each of our Budget Subcommittee Chairs, as well as our amazing budget staff, both in Budget Committee and the Pro Tem's office for their incredible work. I want to thank my staff as well.

We know there is significant uncertainty when it comes to our budget and our economy given some of the destructive actions of the federal administration, both in threatening to withhold money, the proposal to take a wrecking ball to Medi-Cal that is currently moving through Congress, as well as the President's chaotic on again off again trade wars against our largest trading partners, which are having huge impacts.

But we are working hard both in this budget and going forward to keep California's fiscal situation stable to to try to avoid the most draconian cuts and to support all Californians in any way possible. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Blakespear, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, I rise in support of this budget, and I will be voting aye today. I recognize that budgets are a compromise, and I want to recognize the hard work of both our Budget Chair and our leadership, as well as the staff for the many committees on both sides of the aisle who have worked very hard on this budget.

And just to say again that I know that nobody gets everything they want in a budget, but I also think it's important to take the opportunity when we are moving forward our legislative budget to express some of the things that remain of concern to me.

And one of those is that we have not adequately reduced the expenditures in the budget so that the critical programs that we fund are in line with our revenues. What we're doing essentially is deferring hard decisions to a future date. It's important to recognize that our legislative budget is increasing even more than the Governor proposed our internal borrowing from the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainty.

What we're doing is essentially moving even more money from our savings account into our checking account to cover our bills. And this is not a sustainable approach to balancing a budget. It's important to remember what the LAO admonished In May. And Mr. President, permission to read one sentence from the Legislative Analyst Office.

Without objection.

Thank you. The LAO said, although we have not previously recommended the Legislature take decisive action to address structural deficits, the state's persistent fiscal imbalance and the added downside risks, particularly from potential federal actions suggests a need for a more proactive approach.

This is a tempered warning, but we would be wise to heed the advice to take a more proactive approach. Stated more directly, we have to right size our spending. All of us in this chamber adjust our spending in our own households to fit our income. When we make more money, we spend more money. When we make less money, we spend less money. And we have to do this as a state, and we all know that that requires hard choices.

I fear and I warn that the budget proposal as it currently stands will require us to make deeper cuts in the future because of both internal structural deficits that we are not resolving today and because of clearly stated threats from the federal government. I'd like to highlight a few things that are important in the budget.

I'm very grateful that we are asking for a more nuanced analysis of which vacant agency positions should be eliminated instead of a wholesale sweep of 6,000 positions. I'm grateful that we're lowering the amount of money being diverted from Prop 4 to backfill environmental priorities that are already in the budget.

I support reauthorizing cap and trade and limiting CAL FIRE's costs assigned to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to just two years. I also want to address Proposition 36. It is the right thing to do for us to include funding for the implementation of Prop 36. The legislative budget has allocated 110 million for the implementation of this.

Prop 36 passed with 68% of voters in support. And as you all likely recall, Prop 36 increases sentences on certain drug and theft crimes. The proposed funding for Prop 36 includes 30 million for trial courts to handle increased workload and 50 million for the Department of Health Care Services to support behavioral health programs that are serving offenders.

I spoke with the San Diego County Sheriff yesterday, and she expressed deep concerns that there is no additional funding directed to sheriff's departments. Sheriff's departments are responsible for the housing, transportation, food, medications, and other expenses associated with those in custody because of Prop 36.

She said that San Diego's County's daily census has gone up about 400 people a day, from 3,900 a day to 4,300, because of Prop 36. Most of these people are not in there on theft charges. They are in there on drug charges. So as a reminder, the people in custody have two prior convictions, and now with props 36 this is their third charge. The threat of jail time is a key incentive to pursue rehabilitation, but importantly, they are in jail.

Since the law went into effect, it has cost the San Diego County Sheriff about 15 million more so far to manage about 1600 additional people who have been arrested on Prop 36 charges. So her main message was not to forget about them.

In final negotiations with the Governor over the ultimate budget, I hope that the state sheriff's departments can be considered. It's very important that we do not break faith with the voters who supported Prop 36 in large numbers and expect the State of California to follow through and to implement it.

The next item of import in our budget is a recognition of our years long, seemingly endemic homelessness crisis and affordable housing crisis. I'm glad to see affordable housing funding for state tax credits and MHP funding. I'm grateful that there is at least a promise to fund 500 million of HHAP, or Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention funding.

Many cities and mayors around the state are upset that for the first time in eight years these dollars may not be available. The jurisdictions we represent are counting on us to make this a priority. Without this funding, cities will not be able to focus on decreasing unsheltered street homelessness.

There will be a loss in shelter beds, outreach scaled back, and projects in the pipeline failing to launch. Unsheltered street homelessness will certainly not improve with less financial assistance. I strongly support adequate funding tied to clear, timely accountability metrics. I want to ask that we collectively come together to identify a solution to finding HHAP dollars and encampment resolution funds for the cities and counties that we all represent.

Next, I'd like to address Medi-Cal. One year ago, we budgeted for Medi-Cal costs to be at three and a half a billion dollars. The actual costs are triple what we expected, costing the state nearly $10 billion. This is objectively a massive unexpected increase and we need to have cost containment. The longer we go without it, the more the costs will continue to escalate.

I want to recognize that the budget before us today does make some strategic changes, and we are proposing to reduce some benefits allowed through Medi-Cal. I also know that some of these changes are too much for some of my colleagues, and I appreciate and recognize the values that they are prioritizing when looking at the entire budget.

But when I'm looking at the entire budget and all of the many important things that we fund, my perspective is that some changes in Medi-Cal are needed to create cost containment. The proposed legislative budget reinstates a reasonable asset limit, which means that someone can still qualify for Medi-Cal if they own their own home and they have money in the bank up to $130,000.

We are eliminating coverage for some non-essential and expensive name brand drugs. For people who are undocumented or have other types of visas that are less than full citizenship, we are proposing a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for any new enrollee who is older than age 19. This freeze doesn't start until six months from now.

No one currently on Medi-Cal or who gets onto Medi-Cal would be disenrolled, and if someone on Medi-Cal accidentally becomes disenrolled, there would be a six month grace period to re-enroll. We are also proposing a $30 monthly premium for those age 19 to 59, and our budget preserves Prop 35 money for its intended purpose. While I support the current legislative budget, we must be clear eyed in recognizing that likely federal cuts to Medicaid will have us revisiting this very difficult issue of our medical costs in just a few short weeks or months.

It is clear to those who are watching the California budget or who are watching California that California is under assault from a lawless federal administration that is hell bent on stripping our authority and and slashing our funding in many different categories. So it is essential that we get our house in order and that we prepare ourselves as best we can to weather the storm. As the fourth largest economy, we should be well positioned to do this. Part of weathering the storm is having a buffer.

And to that end, I am grateful that the Legislature is proposing a constitutional amendment to increase the potential maximum annual deposit into the rainy day fund from 10% to 25% of General Fund revenues in surplus times. This is being responsible and preparing for the times of uncertainty, which we know we have and will have in the future. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Niello, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. The gentlelady from Encinitas, in stating she's going to support this bill, actually gave many of the reasons why this budget is not supportable, and I will not be supporting it. Many of my Republican colleagues will speak to a lot of details because there are a lot of issues with this budget.

I will only speak to two. One is probably the biggest weakness of this budget is that it does nothing about a structural deficit. We have existing programs that are growing at a faster rate than revenues are, and that's without any projected problem with the economy. It is unsustainable, for sure.

And in fact, the budget that we're voting on today as compared to the Governor's May Revision, which I also didn't like, but this budget actually makes the structural deficit worse. The other issue... And I want to emphasize something we talked about in Budget Committee, and that is that there is a lot of hope behind this budget.

It was stated at a press conference that hopefully we'll see a miracle. And for that reason, we pushed out certain proposals of the Governor. And I criticized that by stating that a budget based on hope is a budget that is destined for trouble. And there was another comment in the Budget Committee that endorsed again the reason for hope, so I will repeat, a budget that is based upon hope is destined for trouble. The other issue is the inadequate funding for Proposition 36.

Now, Proposition 36 had really two key components. One had to do with serial theft and the other has to do with the treatment mandated felony mental illness and substance abuse treatment. The money that is in this budget, number one, is wholly inadequate to address those issues. The really expensive part is treatment.

I believe it is the stronger part of probably Proposition 36 because we're talking about improving lives. Yes, at the threat of jail time, but that's why drug court before Proposition 47 was so successful. We are trying to improve lives, and quite frankly, it doesn't work without the supervision and accountability of probation staff in the various counties.

And not only is the funding for the implementation of Proposition 36 inadequate, the probation departments have actually been reduced in funding to provide that key accountability and supervision of the drug treatment. I have a statement by an individual that went through drug court in Riverside County recently. Permission to read?

Without objection.

At first, I didn't take the program seriously. I thought I could play the game, bend the rules, manipulate the system, and see how much I could get away with. Like many others, I saw it as a way to avoid prison. That's how a lot of us came into this program, thinking it's an easier option.

But it is more than that. The judge saw right through me and sent me to county jail for five days. And during that time, sitting in a cold cell alone with my thoughts, I had a moment of clarity. That was a wake up call. Something had to change. The moment was a turning point.

I decided I was done running. I committed. The program is not a shortcut around accountability. It is accountability. And if you let, it becomes the foundation for a new life. The structure of the program gave me the routine I desperately needed. Daily check ins, group meetings, drug testings, case management. At first, it felt like a lot.

But that structure created accountability, and accountability built trust. This program gives you the opportunity, the structure, and the tools to create a life worth living, but you have to truly commit. This was a life saved. Continuing on the addiction cuts life short. We are not doing people any favor by allowing them to continue to suffer on streets, continuing to abuse drugs.

What we have funded in this budget, both by handicapping probation and wholly inadequate funding in the first place, is destroying our ability to improve lives. In fact, it is a budget that destroys lives. We must fund that program. It is the compassionate and humanitarian thing to do. I urge a no vote on this budget, and I urge its provision for Proposition 36 being significantly increased.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Laird, you are recognized.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I rise in support of the budget. And I am one of the few legislators here that was here in the really bad times in the budget. And it's interesting because there are comparisons made, but they are not apt.

If you look at what happened in those budgets, there was no rainy day fund of any kind. There was this small reserve that was just supposed to handle things that changed during the year. There was not a reserve of tens of billions of dollars, which this Legislature did in the last 10 years.

So if you look at what had to be done then. Firefighting was cut. Higher education was cut. Dental services were completely cut. Various levels of environmental protection were cut. That is not what we are doing now. And so it shows exactly what we've done over time in stabilizing this budget and keeping the commitment to what we want to do. And in front of us, we have a balanced budget.

And it's very interesting to hear the debate thus far because in the debate thus far it is, geez, we're not funding these certain programs, but the budget isn't balanced enough. It's like those two things are hard to say in the same sentence. Because we have really presented today a balance budget that mitigates the most draconian cuts that were suggested while trying to deal with some of the issues that moved the budget into balance.

And it was also said at our budget hearing that somehow this wasn't done in the light of day. Well, we had over 70 budget hearings in this chamber. I know in my own, we had hundreds of people offer public comments and we considered every single major item that existed in the education budget and vetted it completely in public and took public comment. And what we did is we gave direction. We said these are the things we would like to see in the final budget.

And what you see today reflects that direction out of a public process. The Governor originally in January wanted to cut the University of California and the California State University system by 8%. In the May Revise, he wanted to do 3%. Now we are figuring out a way to do the same amount as in the current year.

And it should be recognized that as good as that is for where we are, with labor contracts and inflation, it's still hard for them to keep pace. We have made a fundamental difference in student aid. When you look at how much debt there was. As I said on this floor earlier with the University of California, 67% of the students graduate with no debt. The rest graduate with an average of 17,000 in debt.

And that's because of the work we do here on this floor and the fact that we have restored the Middle Class Scholarship in a way that it keeps the family's ability to do that limited debt. And it gives them the signals they plan right now for the next year what to accept. That is being responsive to both what we heard and the needs in California. There is also a 2.3% COLA for the Proposition 98 school agencies, which is is not what we might want it to be, but will help them keep pace.

There is a $500 million discretionary fund for grants under Proposition 98 that will allow school districts to deal with needs they have that aren't met by the COLA. And then the Governor in May wanted to do a change in the formula as it affected community colleges, and he wanted to make it retroactive a couple of years.

And this budget reverses that retroactivity so that community colleges that already have their budget shut down for those two years do not have to go back and adjust them because something we do now. So this budget threads that needle. It really... There are cuts, but there are protections.

We really try to keep as much of it going as we can, and we are responsive to what we have heard. And so I think we still, I know, have two weeks of negotiations to go with the administration to finalize the budget. But this is a great framework. This is a great framework to start that discussion, and it really is about the future of California. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Cabaldon, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. We teach our undergraduate students in budgeting that budgets are, at their core, a statement of our values and what we believe in and how. We teach our graduate students though that the budget, those values have to translate to the spreadsheet, that we have to match our means with our ends, that we have to pay attention to the boring stuff as well in a budget. And in California, it's no different.

Our debates here on the floor are often about the biggest picture issues possible. But for Californians, what they want to know is if there's a fire, will CAL FIRE be there with a helicopter and with a firefighter? Can they be assured when they turn on the tap in the morning to get to make their coffee or to take a shower that our clean water regulations are being enforced by the state agencies?

Can they go to the state park this weekend after a week of working two jobs? Are we doing our job in order to keep all of the operations of what state government fundamentally is viable? That's what a budget must do. And that's why the voters in 2010 said, look, no more politics, no more of this like waiting to pass a budget because you're fighting and fighting and fighting and fighting over ideological issues.

Get your job done, pass a budget, and keep state government working. I'm very proud of what's of the proposal that's on the floor today because this gets those things right. In our Budget Subcommittee, we held 12 hearings for I think 50 hours in total on some of the big issues of our time, housing being one of them.

Let's just recall the Governor, in a game of chicken, a dangerous game of chicken, said, I'm proposing zero, absolutely nothing for housing and homeless assistance. I'm proposing zero, absolutely not a single investment of a dollar to build new affordable housing projects.

And yes, I'm taking on the Governor. That's my constitutional obligation to do in a democracy. Nothing for housing and for homelessness in this budget. And this bill before us today proposes to spend even a shade of the resources that we have been devoting to tackling those big challenges.

But our Subcommittee has also worked on the small step to make sure that our animal testing laboratories got a couple million dollars in order to deal with bird flu and a lot of other emerging health threats in California, because Californians expect that their food supply will be safe and that we'll be there for them.

We provided additional benefits for wildfire victims, for veterans, and for others in terms of tax relief. And so items big and small are in this budget that represent the real values of California, while also representing our responsibility to deliver a balanced budget that keeps the doors of California open.

I also want to note and give my tremendous gratitude to our leadership, to the Pro Tem, and the Budget Chair, that this budget proposal does not include any trailer bill or any other legislation that would extralegally extra-constitutionally advance the project to describe the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta and tells the Governor no. You want to propose that, you're going to have to come through the full light of day in policy committees.

So this bill before us today represents, as the Senator from San Luis Obispo and Santa Cruz has said, this is not the most crazy budget we've ever experienced. This is a normal budget in the arc of history. And let's be honest, it's only going to get potentially more challenging as we go. But let's remember that every single California household is doing the same thing tonight.

Every small business, every nonprofit is trying to figure it out. And they're like, well, could we pay that bill next week? Maybe could we change our payment date from June 26 to July 1 just to be able to hold on for another month? This budget does all of those things too. But also every household, every nonprofit, every small business is having to make tough choices. We are as well. This budget gets that balance right, and I urge an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Strickland, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, I rise in opposition to SB 101. I do want to commend the Budget Chair for all the hard work that is put into this, but I want to start with this. I've heard some of the debate blaming the federal government on our deficit. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, we've had structural deficits here in California for the last three years. Three budget cycles of deficits. And to push it on to a federal government saying that's why we have a deficit is just not factually incorrect. That's number one. Number two, I do have a different perspective.

Coming here in the Legislature, I was here about 12 years ago, a little over 10 years ago, and stand on this floor. Our entire budget was $98 billion. $98 billion just a little over 10 years ago. Members, where we are now is we tripled the budget in that 10 year time frame. Tripled.

I would argue that California doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a wasteful spending problem. In fact, now that we tripled the budget, you would think that we have all these great services and that we had rapid growth of population. Let me talk about the population. First time in America, first time in California history since the Gold Rush.

We have more people leaving the state than coming in. That's why we lost congressional representation after the census. And the projection of the next census is we'll lose three to four more congressional seats because more people are leaving the State of California.

This beautiful weather to go to the middle of the desert of Arizona, humidity of Florida, or the cold weather in Idaho instead of saying, well, we have an oasis here. Large portion because of affordability crisis we have here and the policies that happen in this Legislature.

And again, when you overspend and you spend triple the amount, you would think that we'd have a lot of things to show for it. No. We have a crumbling infrastructure. We spent $27 billion on homelessness, and the problem's worse today than after spending that 27 billion. We also have a rising crime in California.

That's the reason why Prop 36 was supported so overwhelming by Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. I'll get back to Prop 36 in a moment. Members, a lot of my colleagues did talk about the family budget. Yes, the family budget is very important because families have to stay within their budget.

I will point out that this budget is 3.5 billion more than the Governor's Budget. So I believe this Legislature has an addiction to spending. Addiction to spending because the Governor lowered it and now this Legislature is increasing it by 3.5 billion. How are they doing that?

They're doing it by additional borrowing that most families can't do in their budget because the credit card's maxed out. And I'll tell you, the California credit card is maxed out. They're taking money from reserves and they're having rosy projections on things, like for example, the high speed rail.

They're saying we're gonna get all this money from the federal government and we're having rosy projections in order to balance the budget. Members, I will concur. I will argue that this budget, even though you say it's balanced, is not balanced. I will make a prediction that we'll have a massive deficit next year. Why?

Because again, we're spending more than we're taking in and we've been doing it for now three years. We're kicking the can down the road because we're not balancing the budget today. And I will project that we will have a massive deficit next year because of the budget we're passing this year.

We're kicking the can down the road to whoever the next Governor is down the line. Members, you mentioned that we don't have suggestions in terms of cuts. We have plenty of suggestions. We've thrown out suggestions in terms of cuts and things that we do want to spend money on. We have our priorities.

I do want to commend the other side for restoring the cuts from the Governor in terms of the CSU, UC system, and the Middle Class Scholarships. That's something that we as Republicans wanted to fund. I also would like to say thank you kind of for Prop 36, kind of.

Because the funding you put in there really doesn't scratch the surface. We all know that. And you have one time funding. This is going to be ongoing. Members, it is a priority of Californians. And I think the most essential role of government is public safety to keep us safe.

Prop 36, Members, let's be clear. Prop 36 should have been the first thing funded, fully funded. You know, I can't recall, and I've been at this a long time, the last initiative in California that passed all 58 counties. Even the most liberal counties of Marin and San Francisco voted affirmative of this initiative.

This initiative passed 58 counties and almost 70% of the vote. In order to get there, Members, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans voice said we want to make crime illegal again in California and we want to invest in mental health and we want to make sure we stop these smash and grabs throughout the State of California.

Members, you should have heard the voices of the people last November because that should have been the first thing you fund. What did you fund? I'll tell you. You fund the high speed rail. This is a project that actually now the projection of spending of one project is more than the entire state budget was 10 years ago, spiraling out of control.

And Members, I will tell you right now, you know it and I know it, this high speed rail will never be built as proposed to the people of California. A high speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles. I will say right now, you know it, I know it, will not be built moving forward. But what we do is we continue to fund billions and billions of dollars that are wasting that we can spend. I have a proposal.

Lower the gas price prices for everybody in California. That would help with our affordability crisis in California. Lower the gas prices for hard working California families. But we also have other options. We have other options. We have shovel ready projects in LA Metro that will be very helpful.

Instead of wasting money on high speed rail, it'll be very helpful for us getting ready for the Olympics in 2028, the World Cup the year before that. We have Bay Area BART request. But, you know, you did spend 750 million in Bay Area transit, so you did your job, you know, supporting bringing the...

I'll commend the Chair from San Francisco. You did a great job at bringing money back to your home community. You did a fantastic job doing that because the $750 million for transit I know is a top priority, and you worked hard. So I give you credit. No, I give the Chair credit because he really did work hard for his community. But I would say when you look at this overall budget, Members, is not the priority of California. We overspend.

We're going to be back here in the next 2-3 years because we are creating a structural deficit that's going to be hard to get out of. And what was your response to the Governor? Your response was we don't like your cuts. We're just going to spend $3.5 billion more and have even a deeper structural deficit.

Members, I urge a no vote on SB 101. I urge us to push back on the Governor and get fully funded in Prop 36. And I urge us, we need to reduce spending in order to have a balance, a real balanced budget for Californians that all Californians can be proud of. I urge your no vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Caballero, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. So now you have to get me up to defend high speed rail. Let me just say that that's a subject for another day because I've got tons of data, and we'd be here all afternoon if I started trying to defend it. But let me just say that.

We can debate about whether high speed rail will ever end up moving people at the speed or be able to be an important transportation route that connects the Central Valley, which is really isolated right now from Southern California, an important, important resource for the State of California.

But that we'll do that another time when we're talking about things like cap and trade and all that kind of good stuff. But let me just start at the beginning because there's been some discussion here about how our economy is not in peril because of actions that are happening way beyond our control.

And the bottom line is our economy in California is heavily dependent on the stock market and on startup companies that create investment opportunities, bring dollars into the State of California, put people to work, but also bolster our revenue income.

And the bottom line is that two things that have been impacted that have hurt us greatly are the tariffs and the fact that the stock market has gone crazy because businesses can't rely on either borrowing or the investment of private dollars because everybody's scared.

So that has affected California's economy and that's why we're in the situation that we are, number one. Number two is reserves are specifically designed to help us during times of economic downturn. They are designed to be the backup for us when we need revenue and we think that there are some important things that are happening in our state that we need to address.

So it's been said that... Well, let me start off by saying first I rise in support of the budget because I really do believe that this budget is going to improve lives. There are resources that we have put back into the budget and that we've prioritized because we've gone home and constituents have told us these are important to us and we want you to fund them. And principle among them is Proposition 36.

We are going to have to do a lot of work around Proposition 36 to get it right, but there is money in the budget for that, and for that I'm very, very thankful. There's money for our universities to fix libraries, to bring them up to seismic safety, student aid, middle class scholarship program.

There's funds for clean air to improve air quality, which is a huge issue in my district that has some of the dirtiest air in the state. Important funds for health care programs to improve our neighbors' health. There are funds for firefighters so that they can become full time year round to help us when we have our fires.

Resources for behavioral health services to improve the mental health in our communities. Resources for important housing programs. So if seniors are important, if foster youth are important, if IHSS workers are important, homeless individuals are important, if people looking for a job and looking for workforce development is important, if public safety or survivors of violent crime is important.

I can go on and on and on. But the bottom line is this budget reflects the values of the State of California because it reflects the values of our constituents. When we've gone home, they've said this is what we want. When we've gone home, they've said, please don't cut these services. We desperately need them. And so I respectfully ask for your aye vote on this budget bill.

Thank you, Senator Caballero. Members, we are going to take a 10 minute recess so that you can go grab your lunch, go to room 215, you can eat it there. We will reconvene in 10 minutes to continue the discussion while folks, Members are going in and out eating their lunch. So 10 minutes recess starting right now. The timer is on. We will reconvene in 10 minutes to continue discussion as Members are in and out eating their lunch.

Senator, we're going to continue on our debate and discussion on the budget. Senator--

I didn't get that. Could you try it again?

I don't know where that came from.

Again, members, we are going to continue our discussion and debate on the budget. Senator Choi, are you ready to speak?

Yes, I am.

You are recognized.

Yeah. Even though I see not many members are back, for the benefit of time, I will begin. I rise in opposition to SB 101. Here are my some of the concerns and the Comments on the 2025-26 California State budget, which appears structurally imbalanced. First, it is a deficit budget relying on fragile revenue.

The Legislative Analyst Office flags a $12 billion shortfall in 2025-2026 despite optimistic revenue assumptions labeling the budget only roughly balanced. This bill is built on the backs of the high income capital gains, causing a precarious, precarious dependence on a few stock rich Californians.

With the LAO's projecting spending growth at 5.8% annually versus about 4% of revenue, structural deficit risk remains high. Secondly, the budget shows temporary fixes, not the long term solutions. The governance funding strategies lean heavily on one time measures like rainy day reserve withdrawals, program delays, and internal cash borrowing. Short term patches obscure deeper structural imbalance.

Over two thirds of solutions are non recurring, failing to curb long term obligations. Third, explosive out year liabilities even for the 2025-2026 deficit remains at about $12 billion. The LAO's Merins deficits could soar to 20 to $30 billion annually in the mid-2020s over the 2024-28 period.

Projected $155 billion in accumulated operating deficits starkly outpaces about $240 billion in revenues. Fourthly, via cost shifting, the deficit budget also relies on shifting costs rather than reducing them, such as relocating General Fund obligations to special funds. Problematic since many special funds are themselves nearing insolvency. Such maneuvers create future liabilities, not true fiscal discipline.

Fifth, equity and service at risk. To balance the ledger, the budget proposes freezing medical access for undocumented immigrants, rolling back health benefits and training in home caring. Over time, this cuts for this disproportionately unvulnerable groups undermining California's progressive equity commitments, fueling backlash from hospitals, unions and advocacy groups.

Although I am deeply concerned about the continuing medical health benefits of undocumented people who are causing part of the large part of this deficit problem this year or coming years. Bottom line, California's 2025-2026 budget averts short term fiscal crisis, but only by scouring real structural challenges.

It depends heavily on volatile capital gains, one time adjustments, and the cost shifts. Without decisive lasting reforms such as modernizing tax policy, reigniting in unsustainable spending growth, reducing out year liabilities, and stabilizing special funds, the state is merely postponing the inevitable. Here are recommended areas suggested.

Fixed tax on reform, broaden revenue base with the tiered income, capital gains floor, and corporate contributions, spending controls, cap discretionary annual spending growth, new revenue growth about 4%, long term budgeting, implement multi year budget assessments to oppose structural gaps.

Revenue strategy. Institutionalize revenue smoothing mechanisms to dampen volatility, special fund oversight, align liabilities to appropriate the funds, ensure solvency. Overall, this budget isn't balanced. It is just a claim. It's calm before the storm. Mounting deficits, equity trade offs and the looming budget crisis.

Lawmakers must move forward band aid solutions or be left filling a fiscal hole created by short sighted policymaking. I urge you a no vote on this budget bill item.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Perez, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I want to start off by acknowledging I think first some positives here. And as someone that serves on the budget sub one Committee on Education, I think we saw a lot of positive movement on this budget. We've rejected cuts to K through 12 education.

We've rejected and eliminated proposed cuts to the UC system and the CSU system. We've sustained critical funding for middle class scholarships. We've expanded nutrition programs.

We're including funding to make schools meals available during the summertime, during a time when we know so many low income families are struggling to access food because school is not in session and making sure that that's taken care of.

In addition to that, expanding access for behavioral mental health services, something that was also a huge priority for us as well.

We know so many of our kids, particularly those in the Los Angeles area, have been struggling with the trauma of the fires and are now continuing to struggle with the trauma of seeing immigration raids take over their TV screens and wondering what's happening as they hear these conversations happening in the classrooms.

So all of this is incredibly important. You know, we've included funding here for the HAPP program after we saw the Governor make an entire cut to HAPP funding. And that funding is critical. That is what provides shift shelter for unhoused community.

That is how we're going to see a reduction, frankly, on unsheltered homelessness and a reduction in the encampments that we've seen across California and that so many of our constituents ask us to take action on. These are all things in the right direction. More funding for building affordable housing. All things that I want to highlight.

I think one of the things that concerns me is I recognize you know that we are continuing to face budget challenges. We know that in this budget we're relying on some of our reserves, and we are anticipating facing more financial challenges in the months to come should the big ugly bill pass in Congress.

We know that that bill is being proposed to provide major tax cuts for corporations and for billionaires, and that they are moving that bill forward by cutting some of the many services that so many of our constituents rely on, whether it's health care, whether it's food and other things.

But one of the things that I want to bring out about this budget, because I know we've discussed a lot about it, I know so many members in this room in both houses have done such tremendous work to get us a balanced budget, as well as our budget chair and our senate pro tem.

But what's deeply concerned me over the last several months is that in talking about this budget and the challenges, the fiscal challenges that we've been facing, the blame has been almost entirely blamed on the immigrant community. And that, I think, has been incredibly alarming.

We've heard conversations about Medical some that have even happened in this room, others that have happened across media, that it is immigrants that have created these fiscal challenges with Medical.

But one of the things that does not get often discussed is that health care costs have risen dramatically for almost every state in the country, that includes states like Pennsylvania that do not provide coverage to those that are undocumented into immigrant communities. And they have seen larger costs percentage wise, than even California's seen.

And so I want to point this out because this narrative is dangerous.

And part of the reason why I see this narrative as being so dangerous is while these conversations have been happening in media, while these discussions have been happening even here on the floor, I as a Latina, have seen an increase in frankly racist remarks that have been targeted towards me around these very subjects.

People accusing not just immigrants and not just those that are undocumented, but Latinos and Latinas as being a weight that's somehow dragging down the system. That we are the ones that are causing this budget crisis. And it's really disturbing. And so I want to point out that our words matter and the context of these discussions really matter.

For us to continue to allow for our budget crisis to be blamed on one group of people is incredibly dangerous, especially when we have evidence all over the country that healthcare costs have risen as a result of pharmaceuticals and other costs that are related to providing these services.

And we need to have a very honest conversation about that. When you look at other states, the evidence is very clear.

If this was just an issue of providing funding and in our Medical system for those that are undocumented, then you would only see states such as New York, the State of Illinois, other states that provide healthcare services to immigrants, only be facing these fiscal challenges. They're not.

There's a reason why Pennsylvania has been included in that lot, despite the fact that they do not provide those kinds of services.

So I want us to be very clear. In addition to that, as has been highlighted before, because we are going to be facing additional budget challenges in the months to come that I anticipate, and I do believe we're going to have to revisit this conversation.

I want this body to be prepared to have a real, meaningful discussion around revenues. I think that that is very necessary. We know so many corporations, large corporations, rely on our Medical system and intentionally avoid paying their workers benefits like health care so that they can go and rely on Medical.

They underpay their workers so that they can rely on SNAP. We've heard so many of these stories over the years, and it's now time for us to begin having that conversation.

If these same corporations, if these same billionaires are going to be trying to work out mega tax breaks off of all of the services that so many of our constituents rely on, we need to hold them accountable. You know, it was said today by actually many in this room that budgets are not infinite. They're not.

And so we have to have that honest conversation about what is happening. When I talk to people, Californians across the board, people see wealth and equality going crazy across the board.

And if you, you can feel it when you go to the grocery store, when you see prices soaring. And it's not just here in the state, it is all over. You know, people feel it in their pocketbooks. They feel like their dollars are going less and less.

It's time for us to have a meaningful conversation about what's happening with wealth inequality and about what's happening at the federal government. These things are all connected. And, you know, this is, this is an important discussion that we need to have. So, you know, I'll be voting yes on this budget today.

But I do want to highlight that I think we are avoiding some of the bigger, tough discussions around what we need to do to truly reach a balanced budget.

And yes, we have to do cost containment, but yes, we also have to talk about revenues and we also have to talk about what's happening at the federal level because it is very, very clear the impacts already. We have already seen the federal government cut $5 billion from our state's budget and that's mostly been to education.

Those things are going to have impacts and they're going to have impacts on some of the most low income students and some of the most rural parts of California. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Menjivar, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. I definitely want to echo everything my colleague from, the Senate from Pasadena just said and I don't need to go into everything that I mentioned today in Budget Committee. Definitely want to copy and paste that. But I want to add some additional additional things.

One, one of the things that stood out in conversations in the past couple of days is that this budget will not kick people off of Medical and that's utterly false, respectfully.

DHCS has provided us numbers that would say that on the freeze of expansion next year we're going to 32,000 people are going to fall off of Medical and it will grow to approximately 673,000 by 28-29. That's because of. You have to have savings with the freeze by default.

We're not doing this to not having savings. So the savings would have to come from people actually losing medical that's attributed to the churn rate. So these are direct numbers coming from the department. So I would respectfully ask and say that we shouldn't be spreading that because people will lose Medical.

And given today's news that now all Medical data has been sent to the feds for immigration purposes and that alone will create the savings in the state of California. They got what they wanted. People are going to unenroll for Medical because of this. I could never tell anyone right now say stay in Medical.

People's information is at at risk right now. I've talked about. I get a budget needs to be passed. The budget will be passed. My vote is not needed for this budget to pass.

But what is needed is a senator to go back to her district and say I stood and fought for you because you asked me for this, because you look like me, because your community is my community and we're suffering right now, we're hurting.

I needed to be able to stand firm and tall to my constituents and say that this is why the reason I dissented.

And to add to the senator from Pasadena, a recent bipartisan survey conducted that in California, given the choice between two possible budget solutions terminating coverage of undocumented people or raising taxes on the wealthy, 55% said they prefer increases to taxes. So I think we need to have a conversation on revenues.

Our revenue stream is not the same anymore. We need to reevaluate that and we need to have a serious conversation about not always going to cuts. It can't always be the cuts. That can't always be our first go to. We should do something more bold and brave to change the system here in California.

And again, I'm not going to. I'm going to end now. But this quote from our president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mr. President, with permission to read.

Without objection.

Summarizes how I feel and I hope people would understand. May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Weber Pierson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Senators, I rise today in support of SB 101. And I want to begin by thanking our Chair Wiener and our pro tem for their long hours of negotiation and deliberations with the assembly and in the coming days with the Governor's office.

I also want to in particularly give a very special thanks and shout out to the staff for budget sub 3 for their hard work and the many hours that they have put in over the last few months. I want to begin by acknowledging some of the concerns that I do have.

I agree that dipping into our rainy day funds, like many of my colleagues, are concerning. You know, California is a home to about 40 million residents and we believe in providing services and opportunities to all that live here. But the only way that we will be able to continue to do this is by exploring alternative revenue options.

And so this too must become a serious part of our conversations, not just here in the Senate, but also in the assembly and at the governor's office. That being said, this was an extremely difficult budget year, especially in the Health and Human Services Subcommitee.

Many of our discussions were around the in home supportive services and the unsatisfactory immigration status population. Additionally, so much of what we do in the health and human service area is severely impacted by the federal government.

Many budget cuts are augmented, backed up by federal dollars, which many of which have been cut, are proposed to be cut or are under the threat to be cut.

And so unfortunately, what we are doing today is only temporary as it looks likely that we will have to revisit the budget as the federal regime continues to target this great state. Earlier, the Senator from Huntington Beach stated that California does have a budgetary problem.

But I'll tell you this, it's going to get a whole lot worse based off of what the federal government is doing. You know, California gives the federal government $83 billion more than what we get back. That's our money.

Billions of dollars to go to services for our residents. Within the health care space alone, within the Medicaid space alone, the billions of dollars that they're talking about cutting at the federal government is going to hurt our residents. It's going to hurt our hospitals. Those doors will continue to close.

So yes, when we talk about what's happening with our budget, we can't just look at what's happening here because we have revenue that comes our revenue that's supposed to come back to us from the federal government that is at significant harm. And while this budget that we present, our solutions today are no way perfect.

And no one is going to ever be happy with everything. For example, I am worried about Prop 35 and whether our plan truly aligns with what the governor supported, what the voter supported.

But our budget does continue to keep our promises to ensure that our most vulnerable Californians are safe and healthy and also fulfills our legislative duty of delivering a balanced budget proposal to the Governor on time. What we rejected and what we have decided to fund are in line with California values.

Earlier, a Senator from Fair Oaks spoke about the hope that he hears many of us talk about on our side of the aisle. And although hope is not a strategy alone, it is a powerful motivator and crucial element of a successful strategy. Therefore, we must have hope for a better tomorrow.

We must have hope that our financial outlook will be improved as we continue to work to make that hope a reality. And that's what we've done. In sub 3 in order to hold the critical health and social services Californians hold dear. Let me be very clear. We will not be disenrolling anyone from Medical.

I said that on Tuesday, I said that on Wednesday, and I will say it again today. No one will be disenrolled for Medical. That means no one currently covered will automatically lose their health care coverage. And some of those savings that people are wondering where it would come from can come from not enrolling any new individuals.

And the Senator from San Fernando Valley just spoke and said that she could not tell people to enroll because of what ICE is doing. Not going to disagree with that, but that has nothing to do with our current budget. That is what is happening at the federal level.

And in the future, if anything happens, any administrative errors or individuals forget something and they become disenrolled, they will have a six month timeline for them to re enroll. That's something that we put in that was not in the Governor's proposal. So we are keeping the promises that we have made.

Additionally, monthly premiums for the UIS population will be implemented at $30 a month and not the $100 a month. That's a 70% decrease from what the Governor proposed. This budget recognizes the importance of our IHSS workers to their patients and their families and the importance of continuity of care and how critical that is to healthcare outcomes.

And, therefore, we will not be capping providers to 50 hours for in home supportive services so that they can stay with the patients that they are serving. California values our seniors and recognizes the hard work and contributions that they have made to their families, their communities and this great state.

And we also recognize our responsibility to ensure that they are not left behind. Therefore, the Medical premiums for the UIS populations will stop at the age of 60 and we increase the asset limit to $130,000 up from the 2 to $3,000 that the Governor proposed this May.

California has been and will continue to be a reproductive freedom state, a state that others look to when they discuss women's reproductive rights and the ability to get comprehensive health care. This is extremely important to me as a board certified OB-GYN.

We will hold the line against cruel federal cuts to family planning programs with this budget and therefore we will not cut funding to family planning services. Additionally, this budget will ensure that there is oversight making sure that the organizations and programs the state funds are held accountable.

This budget will require data collection and audits to ensure the programs we fund are actually helping those that need it. This budget has been negotiated by leadership and will hold the line against those cuts which target our most vulnerable and stand in line with California's values and promises.

Once again, I want to thank the leadership and the chair for their tireless negotiations and for the talks that they will have to have in these upcoming weeks.

And I want to close by reminding people and restating that what is being done at the federal level is going to have massive detrimental implications within the health and human services here in California. So unfortunately, this will not be the last discussion that we have this year on this issue.

But as of right now, I'm gladly supporting SB 101 and ask for your all support as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Rubio, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. Senate colleagues, today we take actions on this budget that's shaped by incredibly, incredibly difficult cuts to our state, to our communities and our families. While I'm very proud that we've protected some of our core priorities here in the state.

I also want to acknowledge the pain that's being felt across so many sectors and across so many of our families that are currently in dire need of services. Every Senator here has spot for programs that matter deeply to their communities, including myself.

And I know that I personally wasn't able to fully meet the priorities of my district, but I know I'm not alone. That was every single member of this body, and that's what compromise looks like.

Still, we felt the line on so many of the most critical investments for California's future as a whole, such as wildfire mitigation, which is very important to me, not only as chair of the Insurance Committee for seven years, but having toured so many devastated areas across our state.

We also make sure that we have funding to protect our firefighters and make sure that they have what they need to take care of California when necessary, and more importantly, funding to help restore some of these victims who have lost everything and have been displaced and have nowhere to go.

I think we need to continue to put them in our thoughts and prayers and also ensure that we continue to fight as we see the needs that continue to come.

Their issues are not resolved. As a teacher, I can say that I am very proud that this budget sustains meaningful continued education funding for K-12 career technical education, higher education, meals for our students that in times like these are so necessary.

Middle class scholarships as we know that it is necessary that our future generation is have a chance at achieving their own dreams. At a time when students and schools are still recovering from years of disruptions from COVID, displacement from ICE raids, fires, the list goes on and on. The funding for education, it is incredibly important that continues to be at the forefront of our discussions.

And we are also rejecting 2,000 asset tests for seniors and disabled individuals instead of restoring the threshold to 100-- I'm sorry, that we are rejecting the the cuts that the governor proposed. And we are not forcing families to sell everything that they have to qualify for Medi-Cal.

I think that it's important that we recognize that even if people have money and homes, it doesn't mean that they have wealth. Some homes have value, but people don't have enough funding to continue to sustain it. And if they lose their homes and everything that they have, we end up in a much worse situation.

So I'm really happy that we are protecting the most vulnerable, seniors, those that are disabled. We're protecting those families that are one paycheck away from losing everything and their health care should not be one of them. That is a basic lifeline. That is a need that we should try to to maintain for every single Californian.

And again, while we didn't get everything that we needed for housing, I think it's important to note that this budget does reflect investments in affordable housing production and homeless support, which is also one of my biggest budget priorities in the district.

And I know again, these funds won't meet the scale of need, but it keeps us on the right path. And today's vote is very difficult, we know that, but it reflects a compromise that none of us wanted, but here we are.

And I think that one of the things that we need to take into consideration is that we still don't know where we're going to land as it pertains to the cuts at the federal government.

And I know all of us here are committed to continuing the conversation, pushing to restore the programs that are being cut and continue to meet the needs of our communities. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Arreguin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. I also rise in strong support of SB 101. And I want to speak on the issue of Proposition 36 funding and implementation as the Chair of the Senate Committee on Public Safety.

And want to just acknowledge the work of my colleague, Senator Richardson, Chair of Budget Sub 5 on this important issue. We are honoring the will of the voters.

$110 million is earmarked in this budget: 50 million for behavioral health services, 30 million for court costs and implementation, and 15 million for pre-trial services and to fund public defenders who are going to be providing legal representation for individuals that are charged under Prop 36.

And let me put this in context. The Governor's Budget didn't have anything around Prop 36. And to my Republican colleagues who supported Prop. 36, the proposition had no money included in that proposition. It was a unfunded mandate. So that puts the responsibility on us, the legislature, to have to fund the implementation of this important measure.

And we are committed to honoring the will of the voters and making sure this is implemented the right way.

Which is why over the past several months we've had several conversations, joint conversations with Budget Sub 5 and the Public Safety Committee about how is this being implemented on the ground at the county level, at the state level, at the local level and what are the needs.

And I'll have to say that we don't yet know what the true costs are for implementation of this measure because we're what in month six or seven since this law took effect.

And so it's going to take time for us to understand what the needs are and to budget appropriately to help support those needs at the state and local level as well. I also want to just address one issue and discount one issue that was also addressed.

You can't use cap and trade, the GGRF, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, to fund Prop 36. So I hear all this conversation about high speed rail. Oh, we're, we're spending billions on high speed rail. You can't use that fund, which is funding high speed rail to fund Prop 36 implementation. That needs to come from the General Fund.

And we are doing that as part of this budget proposal that we are considering today. So once again, it's going to take years to implement this measure. This is year one of a multi-year implementation plan. And it's going to require cost sharing, a partnership between the counties and also the state as well.

Keep in mind the counties control behavioral health services, the court legal process. The cost can't be borne just completely on the states. It also has to be borne by the local and county levels as well. And I just want to acknowledge there are ways that we could also fund this as well through Prop 47 savings.

I'm gonna lift up the work of my seatmate, the Senator from Santa Ana, who has a bill to use some of the Prop 47 savings to help implement Prop 40, Prop 36. There's no doubt that funding for treatment is woefully inadequate in the state.

This is the beginning of an investment that we'll make over several years to help ramp up the amount of treatment beds and treatment services in California so that people aren't sitting in jails, which is what's happening now, to be quite honest with you.

You know, the number of people that have been charged under treatment mandate of felony far outweighs the people that are being charged under retail theft provisions of Prop 36. And they're just sitting there in a jail costing the counties and the state a lot more money to incarcerate them than to get them the treatment that they need.

So I know we're all committed across the aisle to help fund and expand treatment in California. This is the beginning. Let's work next year and the year after that to make sure that we continue to ramp up the implementation of this measure. This is a start and we'll continue to prioritize it.

I also just want to address briefly a few other issues. Respectfully, to my friend, the colleague from Huntington Beach talked about this budget creating a massive deficit.

And I would posit that the massive deficit that's being created that we will deal with now, you'll deal with in the next year, is because of this administration's disastrous trade and economic policies that are damaging the state's economy.

In addition to the looming significant cuts that will be implemented by the House Republicans spending bill, which will decimate Medicaid and require us to have to go back to the drawing board to make even further cuts to make sure we can fund healthcare, universal healthcare in California.

So let's just put this in context and really talk about what's really going on here. It's because of the larger economic climate that we're facing in the state that is hurting California's budget and hurting California, including increasing the cost of living for people in the state as well.

On a different matter, frankly, we were faced with an impossible task. Given all those factors, how do we create a balanced budget? How do we prioritize the many needs that we have in the state? And I would say that this budget balances many of our state's critical priorities.

And specifically in housing, it reverses cuts that are critical to helping build low income homes in California such as the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program and the Multifamily Housing Program. Yes, we're not providing enough money for the HHAP or flexible homeless funding program. Keep in mind the Governor's Budget zeroed out that program.

But this is the beginning. And I would also encourage, maybe we should move up round seven so we can get those existing dollars out the door now while working to identify the funding for future years to make sure we can increase our investment in addressing homelessness in California.

Lastly, on Medi-Cal, I just want to lift up the really difficult work of the Budget Sub Chair, Senator Weber Pierson and Budget Chair Wiener on addressing what I frankly say was a really bad proposal that would have not only increased health care costs and make it unaffordable for so many Californians to access medical, but would have further reduced the number of undocumented Californians that can access health care.

And so I think we have done the best we can to reverse some of the most problematic parts of the governor's proposal while making sure we have a balanced budget. So tough times are ahead. There's no doubt about that. But this budget is balanced, addresses many of our state's needs and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Richardson, you are recognized.

Well, thank you, Mr. President. As we close into the noon hour, I rise in support of AB 101.

And I want to thank our pro tem and the Chair of the Budget and Fiscal Review, Senator Wiener, the gentleman from San Francisco, for your leadership in bringing this bill forward.

As Chair of Budget Sub 5, which includes Senator Durazo, Seyarto, and Wahab, sorry I didn't put the cities in there, I want to thank everyone for their participation. And let's not forget that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you were with us in those budget hearings.

And so when we talk about the impacts of the federal budget and a few people have touched on it a little bit, but I'd like to crystallize it a little more. When we talk about the impacts of the Governor's Budget-- excuse me, not Governor, the Administration, the federal budget. I want to talk a little more on those tariffs.

What are the impacts of the federal government? It's led to a decline in our agricultural exports. It's added to disruption in supply chains. It's increased the cost for imported goods because we face reciprocal tariffs. It affects businesses and consumers.

And let's not forget our relationships with Canada, Mexico and China. If I may have permission to read.

Without objection? Seeing none.

The head of the Port of Los Angeles, the largest port in the United States, the largest in the Western hemisphere, said, "after 10 straight months of year over year growth, overall cargo volume has slowed due to the impact of tariffs on both imports and exports. May has marked our lowest monthly cargo output in over two years."

So it does matter. It does matter what happens in Washington and it matters what's happening right here. Now, the gentleman from Berkeley just went over what we worked really hard to help fix with Prop 36. Last time I heard we weren't supposed to pass propositions that didn't pay for themselves.

But let me point out a couple other things that many of you both on this side of the aisle and that one talked about were important. What about the $100 million for VOCA, Victims of Crime and Actions? What about-- I heard people over here talk about mental health.

Did you read in the budget where this bill approves funding for additional positions to staff a licensed 50-bed mental health crisis facility, California institution for men, one of the first one we've had in decades? It provides ongoing funding for community reentry programs for supervised persons beginning in 2025. I heard my colleagues here say we're destroying lives.

That doesn't sound like destroying to me. Providing ongoing funding for community reentry programs, the very items you reference. And then AB 101 provides 25 million from the General Fund to help us with the litter and the trash that all of our constituents face. Not Democrats, not Republicans, but Californians talk about.

And then of course, we have our research. We're the best. We're the best with UC and CSU. And we decided, we decided that it was important to maintain it. So as I go into these things that were important that were included in the budget, I want you to know I'm not going into this with my eyes closed.

There were some things I have concerns with. I have concerns that the Governor had proposed to cut ERF funds which are going to hinder us in our ability to get rid of encampments. There's also the California Internet crimes against children.

Did you know that in my Budget Subcommitee, the CHP presented us that there used to be around 3,000 cases of people who were committing sexual crimes against children on the Internet? About 3,000. It's now up to 30,000. These are crimes against children. So these programs are important, but we're faced with a challenge.

And when I look at this budget, it's not a perfect budget, but it's the best we can do right now. And I want to remind all of us this isn't the end. Since when did we call quits? The Governor gave his May Revise. He did his hit, now we're doing ours.

Now we've got to send our team that's able and capable to go and help fight for the best that they can give us. And I just want to-- You know, I've listened to everything that people are saying today. Did we forget that we're the fourth largest economy in the world? Did we forget how good we are?

We're not perfect, but we're sure better than most. And so when I look at this budget, this budget gives us a chance to keep walking, to keep fighting until we do have those additional revenues that we need. And to the gentleman from--where is he from--Fair Oaks, who talked about hope and we kidded, you know, let's tell the truth to the American people in California.

And some of us, we actually like each other. And we talked about hope. In these next two years, we have the Olympics, the Paralympics, we have the NCAA, we have FIFA.

The gentleman from Fair Oaks thinks all of those are already incorporated. I think we're going to smash it and we're going to do even better. I was here in 2007 in the Assembly when we were choosing between parks, libraries, the very essence of what makes California. And as bad as this is, it's not as bad as that.

And I do believe that we're not just a number of the fourth largest. We became the fourth largest because we worked together, we fought together, we made sure that our priorities were addressed, and we came back for another day. So this isn't the end. I'm ready for the next day.

And I'm encouraged that we have a team that's capable to fight that fight on our behalf. And with that, I ask for an aye vote on SB 101.

Thank you, Senator Richardson, Senator Wahab, you are recognized.

Thank you. You know, I just want to highlight that I do rise in support of SB 101. And I do believe that this budget is a compromise budget. None of us are 100% happy, and, you know, we are making cuts. There are vulnerable communities that I deeply care about that are going to suffer.

And I think that, yes, we, we could have done things differently. We could also adjust things differently. But we have a lot of questions. We have a lot of questions in our society right now. Right now as we speak, we don't know what's going to happen in regards to war.

From the international community, we generally don't know what the United States role will be. We don't know how the tariffs will impact our state economy, let alone our counties and our cities. We also don't know what is going to be the outcome of all the social unrest that we are seeing.

There are a lot of questions, a lot of people that feel uneasy, myself included. And I rise today as a Californian, as a proud American, to say that we are doing the best we can to lead our state.

And as Chair of Senate Housing, I've been consistent in our need to create housing opportunities of all types for all income levels.

And the reality is that while there's a lot that I can say that I'm disappointed in, and I have made those comments in Budget Committee, I also want to say I'm proud of the collaboration that I've had with Senate leadership to ensure we are funding $300 million in down payment assistance via the California Dream For All to promote homeownership, which is one of the biggest concerns of every single city in the State of California.

We are also quadrupling the renter's tax credit to increase the parity with tax benefits for property owners. This is for the lowest income renters. We are also prioritizing $500 million towards the low income housing tax credits and $120 million for the multifamily housing program to promote the affordable housing project statewide.

68% of Californians feel housing affordability as the biggest issue. 63% feel the same about homelessness. And 94% of Americans, regardless of party affiliation, age or socioeconomic income, believes home ownership is a staple of the American dream. The fastest growing homeless demographic are our seniors.

Our parents, grandparents, children, we are all at the mercy of these intertwined crises and our budget should reflect our commitment to address these issues in substantial ways. And I do believe we are making the right step forward. And yes, like I said, if times were better, we could probably do more.

I'm proud of the work to restore $36 million for CalFresh fruits and vegetables program and reject the 3% ongoing reduction to our education systems. As we support today's budget, I want us to continue examining the need to fund housing, homeless housing, assistance and prevention for the next year.

Any lapse in funding threatens the entire network of care and services for unhoused people as well as making unhoused people. I want to state my appreciation for the 10 million allocated to the Children's Holistic Immigration Representation Project.

I did personally request that it be 33 million and fully funded, to ensure unaccompanied children receive legal assistance as well as a social worker to to support how they navigate the integration in California and their status. These are children. Given the events unfolding across our state, we need to consider increasing that allocation.

And I will state that time and time again. I also want to restate my support for funding Medi-Cal for all Californians. The reason why is preventative care actually yields savings on U.S. health care costs, which means investments in health care are not a drain on our systems. There is actually a measurable return on investment.

If you think of a person that is ill and they are unable to get the medical attention that they need, that burden starts to put pressure on their families. There are families that are either going to have to pay for it or wonder what they can do. Those are our Californians.

So as some say, it's the undocumented population. But those individuals have loved ones that are California citizens. Those people are struggling already with affordability and we need to provide more to all Californians. Additionally, undocumented immigrants contribute 8.5 billion to California's economy, making us the fourth largest economy in the world.

More than their economic contributions, undocumented immigrants are people deserving of humanity and care. While we cannot resolve their statuses, we can ensure they have access to health care, which is moral, just, fiscally responsible. And the idea that we must choose between providing care for those who are citizens and those who are not is a false choice.

It's a false choice rooted in the refusal to make choices elsewhere. The lack of leadership that we see at the federal level to make a decision to help people in the United States, one that was made by a president in the 80s to make the people that are working hard for our economy citizens.

There is a lack of leadership. We are seeing across the nation theatrics from every single corner when lives are at stake.

And I want to highlight this, and I've said this before, in my district there is an individual who is struggling young woman who basically told me she was so happy because she found a Starbucks gift card on the ground when she was walking to work.

And she said that I was able to tell my mom that I can buy you coffee because I was able to get 10 bucks off this gift card she found. Something that small is what people are struggling with.

So it's not the pet projects and the new technology coming out and the investments in things that people may not ever use, but it's the day to day life of individuals that are impacted with our budget. And so there is much talk about abundance and being the fourth largest economy.

But we never seem to apply that when we're talking about social safety nets. We never apply that to making sure that our most vulnerable community is taken care of first and foremost. And I want to highlight the role of government.

The role of government is to ensure we have public safety and order for all people within our state and country, to provide basic public goods and services and protect the rights and liberties of all people. Regardless if you're visiting or you've been here five generations, everyone is equal in our nation and that is what is being lost here.

So as it is the role of government to ensure basic rights and human dignity, I want to highlight and elevate the concern I have to ensure that as we are talking about both policy and budget, we uplift and prioritize the importance of due process, emergency medical care, protections against abuse, exploitation and discrimination.

We have so much more work to do and I look forward to the continued conversations on creating a budget that reflects our values and uplifts our most vulnerable community members. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Seeing no mics up for further discussion or debate. Senator Wiener, you may close.

Thank you very much, Mr. President, colleagues. Thank you for the robust discussion about this budget. I'm very appreciative. I do just-- I want to just briefly touch on two points. And I don't want to-- I'm not picking on him, but the Senator from Huntington Beach. First, this continued narrative that everyone's leaving California and everyone's fleeing.

Yes, there are people who leave because of the cost of housing and we are working real hard to address that. But we need to look at the facts that California's population is now once again growing, that we just transitioned from the fifth largest economy in the world to the fourth largest.

We have major businesses growing here and expanding here. We have startups that are absolutely exploding here. And so there are so many good things happening in this beautiful, amazing, brilliant state. And let's never lose sight of that in the political narratives that end up happening. I, also, the word addicted was used before.

And of course, there are addictions that are very harmful. And in this case, the reference was made to "an addiction to spending." That's not the addiction. The addiction that we have is to helping Californians. And that's the addiction in this budget, improving the lives of Californians. And that is a worthy addiction.

This budget and this body we're addicted to stabilizing people's access to health care, to investing in housing and public safety, to supporting our seniors, including those who are homebound, whether they are citizens or non-citizens. We are addicted to quality transportation.

And yes, that includes ensuring that the tax revenue engine of the State of California, also known as the Bay Area, can function and that people can get around via public transportation. We are addicted to supporting our K-12 schools and the UC and the CSU. So those are addictions that I am proud of in this budget.

And they are-- Those, whether you want to call them addictions or priorities, are all the more important right now as the current occupant of the White House works to destroy Medicaid, works to destroy higher education, and while he is threatening to pull K-12 funding from public schools in the State of California, they are doing that.

And so this budget emphasizes and shores up those priorities that this Administration is trying to destroy. In terms of why we are having challenges now. Let's be very clear because reference was made to the LAO before.

According to the LAO, the economic turmoil that this president is creating is a $16 billion hit to the budget of the State of California.

The tariffs that are creating chaos in the economy and the stock market and that are making goods more expensive, the tariffs that are hurting exports from California, including from our farmers who can no longer sell into markets that they've long sold into. That's a direct hit to our economy and to our budget.

This police state that they are creating, and it is a police state to engage in mass deportations of farm workers, of construction workers, of hospitality workers, of garment workers.

That's exactly what you do if you are trying to collapse an economy, deport the workforce, a skilled workforce of the people who allow this state to function and thrive and who pay taxes and allow businesses to pay taxes. The businesses don't auto generate their revenue. It's because of their workers that they're able to generate that revenue.

And the hit to tourism in California when you're deporting hotel workers, but also signaling to the people who visit the US that they're not valued allies anymore, as this president is doing to Europe and Canada and Mexico and other countries where we get flooded with tourists in this beautiful state.

And that generates jobs and generates tax revenue. So in so many ways, they are tanking the economy and tanking our tax revenues. And then finally, I just want to mention, budget debates are always interesting because people are of two minds. Sometimes people will say we're spending too much, but we also need to spend more in these areas.

And I'm not criticizing that at all. We all want to be responsible. And we all want to make sure that we're investing in the right ways. This budget does both. Is it a perfect budget? No budget is. Do I have my own desires for changes in the budget? Absolutely. I'm the Budget Chair, not the budget dictator.

We work together with our colleagues in the Assembly and now with the Governor to do the best that we can do to pass a balanced, responsible, timely budget that supports the people of California. That's what this does. And I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator Wiener. Secretary, please call roll.

[Roll call]

[Roll call]

Secretary, please call absent Members.

Secretary, please call absent Members.

[Roll call]

Ayes 26, nos eight. The measure passes. Moving on to consent calendar. Secretary, please call items on the consent calendar.