The Brief

Perhaps no state has more to lose than California in the federal budget proposal House Republicans passed this week.

That spending plan sets up significant cuts to Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income people. California has taken just about every route and opportunity to expand the Medicaid program. Today, 14.9 million Californians are enrolled in it, and federal funding cuts would almost certainly roll back services and coverage for some of them.

Looking for a way to offset the cost of extending President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, the House advanced a bill Tuesday that directs the Energy and Commerce Committee to find $880 billion in spending cuts over the next 10 years. Those cuts, budget and health policy experts say, would largely have to come from Medicaid, also known as Medi-Cal in California.

The Senate voted for its own, narrower budget bill last week. Next, both chambers have to work out their differences and agree on one budget.

At this point, it’s not clear which Medicaid services would be cut or how many people exactly would lose coverage because lawmakers can hit the spending reductions in a number of ways.

Still, enrollees, health advocates and providers in California and across the country are now grappling with what the cuts would mean for them and the people they care for. In press conferences and online meetings, they’ve called the proposed cuts a “five-alarm fire” and Republicans’ vote “the ultimate betrayal” of their constituents.

Their outcries echo the first Trump administration, when in 2017 House Republicans voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The law ultimately survived, but that health care vote helped stir up the “blue wave” that flipped Republican House seats in the 2018 election.

“These cuts would rip care away from children, seniors, disabled Californians, and more while raising costs for everyone, all to give tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy,” Amanda McAllister-Wallner, interim executive director of Health Access California, a health consumer advocacy group, said in a statement following the House vote. “This is just the beginning — we will be pushing our California congress members at every turn to put the health of their constituents first.”

Medicaid is the backbone of California’s social safety net. It covers half of all children and 40% of all births. It also covers long-term care services for seniors and disabled people.

Since 2014, the state has expanded the program big time — first to more adults allowed in the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act, and gradually to low-income immigrants, regardless of their legal status. Cuts to the scale that Republicans in Congress are proposing, advocates and providers say, would be harmful across the board.

Hospitals, doctors and county officials are also speaking out against the proposed cuts because Medicaid is a key payer, especially for those located in rural areas or communities with high poverty rates. If these facilities can’t keep their doors open, entire communities, not just people enrolled in Medicaid, could lose access.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, has said savings could be accomplished through eliminating Medicaid fraud and waste — although that would only get Republicans so far. Johnson has cited about $50 billion in alleged fraud, a small slice of the GOP’s goal total, the Washington Post reports.

Cuts would leave big budget hole for state

Medicaid accounts for a significant portion of states’ budgets. The program is jointly funded by the federal government and states, meaning federal cuts would leave major budget gaps that would force reductions in services and enrollment, and also could trigger cuts to other state programs. California’s budget includes $161 billion for Medi-Cal, of which more than half is paid for with federal funds.

Based on proposals that Republicans in Congress are considering, California could lose $10 billion to $20 billion a year, the California Budget Policy Center estimates.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland on Feb. 20, 2025.

(

Jack Gruber

/

USA TODAY via Reuters

)

A big question mark is how exactly Congress will meet its savings goal — Republican lawmakers have floated a number of proposals, but it’s unclear yet what could stick.

They’ve proposed imposing work requirements, for example. The idea behind that is enrollment would drop as people who don’t meet the requirements get kicked off the program. But the spending reductions from such a policy would not get Republicans all the way to their target, said Edwin Park, a research professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy.

A second proposal would require restructuring the program so that instead of the federal government paying states a fixed percentage of Medicaid costs, it could set a spending cap per enrollee.

Under the Affordable Care Act, California opened up its Medi-Cal roll to low-income adults who had previously not been covered. The federal government pays California 90% of the cost for this expansion group — that’s up from the state’s 50% regular match rate. Republicans may also choose to eliminate the increased match rate for adults covered under this expansion.

“One reason that these types of cuts are popular among federal policy makers is because…it really allows the blame to be placed on governors and state legislatures,” Park said. “The federal government is cutting federal funding, making it harder for states to finance their share of the cost of Medicaid, but it’s not actually saying ‘You have to cut eligibility in this way or cut provider rates in this way.’”

“It’s really, ‘States, you figure it out, you have to balance your budget,’’” Park added. “And you know, there’s only three choices: higher taxes, cutting the rest of the budget, which is primarily education in California, and then, most likely, really dramatically cutting Medi-Cal in the state.”

Coverage for seniors and people with disabilities

President Trump and Republicans have promised to not touch seniors’ Medicare, but millions of seniors also rely on Medicaid. In California, about 2.2 million seniors and people with disabilities are enrolled in Medi-Cal, according to data from the state’s Department of Health Care Services.

Traditional Medicare does not cover services including dental, vision and hearing benefits. Seniors typically have to buy into a Medicare Advantage plan to get that covered. Low-income seniors in California can access those services with no or at a low-cost through Medi-Cal.

Nursing home stays and in-home care are also largely covered by Medicaid. Nationally, about 6 in 10 nursing home residents are covered by Medicaid, according to an analysis by KFF, a health polling and research organization.

“Medicare has huge gaps in coverage and Medicare is really expensive,” said Amber Christ, managing director of health advocacy at Justice in Aging, which advocates on behalf of older adults. “It is Medicaid, not Medicare, that is the primary payer of long-term care in this country.”

Because of their high needs, seniors and people with disabilities are the most costly population. In California, they make up about 15% of the people enrolled in Medi-Cal, but account for roughly half of all the program’s spending.

“So if the state wants to go where the money is, that’s seniors and people with disabilities. That’s long-term care, nursing home care, community-based services,” said Park. To protect the coverage of this population, he said, the state would have to consider potentially making larger cuts for other groups of people.

A safety net for California kids

More than 5 million kids in California are insured through Medi-Cal and the accompanying Children’s Health Insurance Program. It pays for their preventive care, such as immunizations and screenings, but it also covers support services, such as counseling and therapy. For about 160,000 children in the foster care system, it also pays for an array of social services.

Getting kids insured has long been a priority for California. When the state began expanding Medi-Cal to undocumented people in 2016, children were first in line.

Perhaps less known is that Medi-Cal is also a big player in services provided at schools. It helps fund services and equipment for students with disabilities, such as hearing aids and specialty transportation. It reimburses school districts for certain providers, including psychologists and social workers, for example. Across the state, some districts also provide physical and mental health care to children and their family through school-based health centers that also draw down on Medi-Cal funding.

“The rates of depression and anxiety among youth are rising at alarming rates, and for many, Medi-Cal services are their only option for care,” said Michele Cantwell-Copher, the Fresno County Superintendent of Schools, on a media call with advocates and parents on Thursday. “Ensuring that children have access to the mental health support they need is critical to their well-being and their success in schools.”

Medi-Cal is a keystone program for many kids but also for their birthing parent — it pays for about 40% of the state’s births. California offers coverage for pregnant people at slightly higher income levels than the regular cut-off, allowing more to qualify. It provides coverage during their pregnancy and 12 months postpartum, paying for standard obstetric visits, prescriptions, laboratory services, doula services and hospital care.

“If we want kids to have a healthy start, that means making sure that their birthing parent has access to health care,” said Mike Odeh, health policy director at Children Now. “Those early years really are important for both babies and parents. There are a lot of services in that time period that really are critical, and any reduction in those services could have very bad effects.”

Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF), which works to ensure that people have access to the care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford. Visit www.chcf.org to learn more.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.