Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • CA borrows over $3 billion to cover costs
    A stethoscope, pen and calculator on top of a piece of paper with numbers on it

    Topline:

    California’s Medicaid program has borrowed $3.4 billion from the state’s general fund — and will likely need even more — to cover ballooning health expenses for 15 million residents with low incomes and disabilities.

    Why now: The state Department of Finance disclosed the loan to lawmakers in a letter late Wednesday noting funds were needed to make critical payments to health care providers in Medi-Cal, the state’s version of Medicaid. A document circulated by state Senate leaders warns that additional funding may be needed to cover expenses through June 30, the end of the fiscal year.

    Why it matters: The cost overrun adds a new layer of difficulty for Democrats who control the legislature and are already grappling with congressional budget plans that could slash Medicaid funding, which accounts for 60% of Medi-Cal’s $174.6 billion budget. President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers have also criticized California Democrats for covering residents regardless of their immigration status.

    California’s Medicaid program has borrowed $3.4 billion from the state’s general fund — and will likely need even more — to cover ballooning health expenses for 15 million residents with low incomes and disabilities.

    The state Department of Finance disclosed the loan to lawmakers in a letter late Wednesday, noting funds were needed to make critical payments to health care providers in Medi-Cal, the state’s version of Medicaid. In recent months, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration has warned of skyrocketing health care costs, including higher prescription drug prices and increased enrollment by newly eligible seniors and immigrants without legal status.

    Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer said the loan will cover Medi-Cal obligations through the end of the month. He declined to specify the total of the program’s potential shortfall. However, a document circulated by state Senate leaders warns that additional funding may be needed to cover expenses through June 30, the end of the fiscal year.

    The cost overrun adds a new layer of difficulty for Democrats who control the legislature and are already grappling with congressional budget plans that could slash Medicaid funding, which accounts for 60% of Medi-Cal’s $174.6 billion budget. President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers have also criticized California Democrats for covering residents regardless of their immigration status.

    Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon downplayed the loan. “Rising Medicaid costs are a national challenge, affecting both red and blue states alike,” Gardon said. “This is not unique to California.”

    Health officials last year said the state would spend roughly $6.4 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year to cover immigrants without legal status, which the Democratic governor has hailed as a key step toward his goal of providing “universal coverage” for Californians. In recent testimony, however, finance staff told legislators that health benefits extended to all income-eligible immigrants without legal status are projected to cost roughly $9.5 billion, of which $8.4 billion will come from the general fund.

    Republicans called for fresh scrutiny of the state’s decision to cover residents without legal status. “This program is out of control,” Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones posted on the social platform X. “We are demanding a full hearing and a full cost analysis so the public knows exactly where their tax dollars are going.”

    Patient advocates objected to Republicans singling out the expansion for immigrants.

    “Health care costs are influenced by many factors including prescription drugs, hospital costs, and more,” said Rachel Linn Gish, a spokesperson for Health Access California, a consumer health advocacy group.

    According to a fall update from the Department of Health Care Services, Medi-Cal spending grew due to higher-than-expected enrollment of seniors, fewer Californians losing Medi-Cal coverage than anticipated, and increased pharmaceutical spending, as well as expanding coverage of immigrants. For instance, the state is spending $1.1 billion more on residents who were expected to lose coverage after the covid-19 pandemic, and an additional $2.7 billion more than anticipated to cover unauthorized residents.

    Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said he’s committed to maintaining the state’s expansions of Medi-Cal services.

    “There are tough choices ahead, and Assembly Democrats will closely examine any proposal from the Governor,” he said in a statement. “But let’s be clear: We will not roll over and leave our immigrants behind.”

    Senate leaders said they were looking closely at the state’s estimated costs and caseloads and would recommend cost containment measures as part of their budget proposal in the coming weeks.

    Scott Graves, budget director at the California Budget & Policy Center, said it’s not unusual for the state government to make adjustments when spending doesn’t line up with projections.

    Last year, for instance, the state borrowed $1.75 billion against its general fund when revenues from a state provider tax were delayed. Prior to that, Department of Finance officials said, California took out a similar loan in 2018 for $830 million.

    “The reality is all of these are just estimates, especially with a very complicated program like Medi-Cal,” Graves said, noting that $3.4 billion is roughly 2% of the state’s overall Medi-Cal budget. “It seems like we’re on the verge of making a mountain out of a molehill.”

    Mike Genest, who served as finance director under Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, agreed that adjustments can be routine. But he said the magnitude of Medi-Cal’s current overrun was not.

    “For this to happen in the middle of the year — we’re only in March — I mean, that’s pretty astounding,” Genest said.

    California Democrats continue to characterize Trump and congressional Republicans as the biggest threat, pointing to the House budget plan to shrink Medicaid spending by as much as $880 billion. They say cuts of that magnitude would leave millions of residents uninsured, reducing access to preventive care and driving up costlier emergency room services.

    They cautioned that some short-term cost increases could be driven by newly eligible residents seeking long-delayed care, which could level off in coming years. However, some acknowledge difficult decisions ahead.

    “We definitely have to ensure that those who are our most vulnerable — our kids, those with chronic conditions — continue to have some sort of coverage,” said Democratic Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, a San Diego County physician. “The question is, what will that look like? To be quite honest with you, at this point, I don’t know.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

  • Bass, Raman to appear at the Skirball Center
    Two women, one with light-brown skin tone and one with brown skin tone, speak into microphones side by side on a panel, both mid-gesture.
    The two candidates for L.A. mayor, incumbent Karen Bass (left) and challenger Nithya Raman, are set to appear at a forum sponsored by a coalition of Jewish groups at the Skirball Cultural Center.

    Topline:

    Incumbent Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and her challenger City Councilmember Nithya Raman will appear at the Skirball Cultural Center in a forum Tuesday night.

    The backstory: The forum, which starts at 6:30 p.m., is sponsored by a coalition of Jewish groups including Jewish Federation Los Angeles, Jewish Family Services and the Anti-Defamation League of L.A. LAist will broadcast the event at 8 p.m.

    The details: Alex Cohen, a Spectrum News One host, will engage in separate conversations with Bass and Raman on a range of issues including homelessness, the cost of housing and basic city services like pothole and street light repair.

    Timing: The debate comes at a critical time in the campaign, with ballots expected to go out to voters Oct. 1.

    Fundraising: The forum occurs as the latest fundraising totals show each candidate had raised about two-and-a-half million dollars, with millions more being spent by outside groups on behalf of each candidate.

    How to listen: Tune your radio to LAist 89.3 FM, listen in the LAist app, ask your smart speaker to play LAist 89.3 or click on the listen button at the top of this or any page on LAist.com. Need more help? We have additional tips.

  • Sponsored message
  • A judge rejected the administration's efforts
    A man with light blond hair sits in a leather chair, head tilted back slightly. He wears a navy suit, white shirt, and bright blue dotted tie with a small flag pin on his lapel. An American flag hangs behind him.
    President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Sept. 28, 2026, in Washington.

    Topline:

    A federal judge on Monday blocked the authority of President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold some federal counterterrorism funding from states that don’t meet its election administration demands.

    Why it matters: Courts have largely rejected the administration’s previous efforts, which reflect untrue claims about widespread voting fraud and come ahead of November’s midterm elections where Democrats seek to take control of one or both chambers of Congress and check Trump’s power.

    What the judge said: U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in Washington, D.C., wrote in a 24-page opinion that federal agencies didn’t have the authority from Congress to add such conditions to the grants, and that the conditions didn’t meet legal thresholds requiring them to relate to the underlying grant purpose.

    The backstory: Over the summer, a FEMA antiterrorism grant announcement included a list of election-related requirements, saying that 20% of grants for states and urban areas would be withheld until they comply.

    A federal judge on Monday blocked the authority of President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold some federal counterterrorism funding from states that don’t meet its election administration demands.

    Courts have largely rejected the administration’s previous efforts, which reflect untrue claims about widespread voting fraud and come ahead of November’s midterm elections where Democrats seek to take control of one or both chambers of Congress and check Trump’s power.

    U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in Washington, D.C., wrote in a 24-page opinion that federal agencies didn’t have the authority from Congress to add such conditions to the grants, and that the conditions didn’t meet legal thresholds requiring them to relate to the underlying grant purpose.

    Neither the Department of Homeland Security nor its subagency handling the grants, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, immediately responded to a request for comment. The grant conditions were the latest in a line of actions by Trump’s administration to shape how elections are run, a task that has long been the job of states.

    The plaintiffs that sued were Columbus, Ohio; Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee; and El Paso and Harris counties in Texas.

    Over the summer, a FEMA antiterrorism grant announcement included a list of election-related requirements, saying that 20% of grants for states and urban areas would be withheld until they comply.

    The program includes more than $1 billion for states and local and tribal governments for a variety of programs aimed at preventing terror at crowded places, online, with border security — and around elections. FEMA expects to award 56 grants.

    The list of items for states includes verifying the citizenship of all registered voters and election workers.

    Places that use electronic voting systems that use barcodes or QR codes to count votes would have to submit plans to switch to hand-marked paper ballots. Every jurisdiction would have to show it audits results.

    In the lawsuit, the cities and counties said FEMA had no authority to impose those conditions, “not under its governing statute and not under the Constitution.”

    Congress authorized FEMA to help jurisdictions protect critical infrastructure from terrorism and cyberattacks, not to decide who can vote, how ballots must be counted or how states maintain voter rolls, the cities and counties wrote.

    “Never before has FEMA purported to regulate how states and counties run elections,” they said in the lawsuit.

  • The declaration speeds up rail protection projects
    A photo of a cliffside with a pedestrian bridge cracked in the middle. A train track is visible below it.
    The Mariposa pedestrian bridge damaged by a landslide in San Clemente.

    Topline:

    The Orange County Transportation Authority board on Monday declared coastal erosion conditions an emergency, allowing the agency to speedily replenish sand at San Clemente’s disappearing beaches in an effort to protect the coastal rail line.

    The details: The agency plans to place 690,000 cubic yards of sand across North Beach, Mariposa Point and San Clemente State Beach. The efforts will create between 80 and 130 feet of additional dry beach. By declaring the coastal erosion an emergency, the agency can waive normal bidding and contracting requirements.

    The backstory: Erosion and landslides along the iconic rail corridor from South Orange County to the San Diego County line have caused several disruptions since 2021. Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency last week in preparation for the El Niño storm, which is expected to severely impact California’s coast.

    Officials said: O.C. Supervisor Katrina Foley said red tape has hindered the agency’s ability to proactively protect beaches. “By aligning OCTA with the County and State’s declarations of emergency, we can potentially advance approximately 690,000 cubic yards of sand along San Clemente years ahead of schedule to restore our beaches while protecting our coastal communities and rail corridor,” Foley said in a statement.

  • Gov. Newsom signed new laws increasing safeguards
    A man with medium-tone skin in a dark gray sit and tie gestures as he stands behind "Seal of the Governor of the State of California"
    California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks about his state budget proposal Thursday, May 14, 2026, in Sacramento, Calif. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

    Topline:

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has beefed up protections for reproductive and LGBTQ+ rights in his latest rebuke of what he and advocates say are attacks from the Trump administration.

    Why it matters: The outgoing governor signed over a dozen bills into law, some authored by Bay Area lawmakers, that increase safeguards around LGBTQ+ identity data, change how health insurance companies reimburse for HIV prevention drugs and expand access to medication abortion on certain community college campuses.

    Why now: Newsom’s package of new laws is only the latest instance in which California has been at odds with President Donald Trump over policies focused on transgender residents. The administration unsuccessfully sued the state over its refusal to ban transgender athletes from girls sports. The president banned transgender people in the military early into his second term, but one of the bills Newsom signed this weekend expands veteran benefits to service members who were discharged under that policy.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has beefed up protections for reproductive and LGBTQ+ rights in his latest rebuke of what he and advocates say are attacks from the Trump administration.

    The outgoing governor signed over a dozen bills into law, some authored by Bay Area lawmakers, that increase safeguards around LGBTQ+ identity data, change how health insurance companies reimburse for HIV prevention drugs and expand access to medication abortion on certain community college campuses.

    “The Trump administration has launched an all-out assault on the LGBTQ community, using medical records to target U.S. service members and civilians alike, hurting countless people and betraying hard-won trust,” Newsom said in a statement. “California will not stand for it.”

    Newsom’s package of new laws is only the latest instance in which California has been at odds with President Donald Trump over policies focused on transgender residents. The administration unsuccessfully sued the state over its refusal to ban transgender athletes from girls sports. The president banned transgender people in the military early into his second term, but one of the bills Newsom signed this weekend expands veteran benefits to service members who were discharged under that policy.

    Tony Hoang, executive director of Equality California, said the signings were yet another show of how the state responds to the dismantling of LGBTQ+ protections.

    “California has spent decades building some of the strongest LGBTQ+ civil rights protections in the country, and we will continue building on that progress as long as our community remains under attack,” Hoang said in a statement.

    The California Family Council, an advocacy group with a stated goal of “advancing God’s Design for Life, Family, & Liberty,” has opposed at least one of the signed bills, Senate Bill 1114, over what they say is a prioritization of ideological confidentiality over child welfare.

    SB 1114 limits when sexual orientation, intersex and gender identity collected can be shared. Healthcare providers are also required to notify the attorney general when they receive subpoenas for protected healthcare activities.

    “1114 does not protect children; it protects bureaucratic secrecy at the expense of parents and families,” the group said in opposition earlier this year.

    Newsom also signed SB 934, authored by San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener. The law updates the state’s ban on conversion therapy in response to the U.S. Supreme Court striking down a conversion therapy ban in Colorado.

    Newsom has long championed LGBTQ+ rights since he was mayor of San Francisco, including issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in defiance of a federal ban. But he’s also faced criticism for previous comments on transgender athletes and a recent veto on a bill that would have prevented future governors from honoring extradition requests for gender-affirming healthcare providers facing charges in other states.

    In March of last year, Newsom said on his podcast while in conversation with late conservative activist Charlie Kirk that it was unfair for a transgender teenage girl to compete in a track and field competition.

    Newsom told KQED’s Political Breakdown that he disagreed with “vitriol” in discussions surrounding the topic, but that it is “unfair in these circumstances.” Months later, Newsom said it needed to be more clear when transgender girl athletes can participate alongside cisgender girls.

    Separately and in a veto message a week ago, Newsom said that he agreed with AB 2164’s authors about the importance of protecting gender-affirming healthcare. But he said he was “troubled by the precedent that would be set if an outgoing administration agreed with the Legislature to erode the executive authority of an incoming Governor.”

    A Senate bill, co-sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, strengthens access to the HIV prevention drug PrEP by improving reimbursement practices for healthcare providers. The law requires health insurance companies to cover long-acting injectable PrEP through medical and outpatient prescription drug benefits, which Lara said will remove “unnecessary barriers” to the care.

    “By enacting this first-of-its-kind state law, California is again leading the country in making sure insurance companies never stand in the way of people accessing HIV prevention,” said Tyler TerMeer, CEO of San Francisco AIDS Foundation.

    Newsom’s signature on reproductive rights bills could include an expansion of abortion services to community college campuses.

    Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, who represents San Francisco, authored AB 2540, which requires community colleges with student health centers to offer medication abortion services if lawmakers dedicate funding.

    Stefani said in announcing the legislation in April that the services are “essential health care, full stop. Yet too many community college students face real barriers to accessing care.”

    The state already requires schools in the University of California and California State University systems to offer the same services.