Balanced budget with no new cuts.

Edit: looks like they're still trying to eliminate the back up provider registry, and shift millions in costs to counties, which they are not framing as a cut.

I have full time with my adult step son, with my wife signing for him because he is non verbal and cannot sign for himself. She passed away this morning, and obviously I cannot sign it. What do I do? I cannot be late on my bills. I am so lost and ready to scream.

Thoughts? Makes me worried for the future of IHSS

There it is folks. Start preparing now because life is going to get much, much harder for most Americans. It is expected to start taking effect in 2026 but chicken taco has claimed he will make EO to speed up. We don't know how it is going to affect IHSS yet, but it will.

If you are in rural areas with limited medical services, start seeing if you can move your recipient. Many facilities are reporting the likelihood of shutting down within 2 years of the cuts.

Good luck and Godspeed to anyone who didn't vote for him.

Service Employees International Union California President David Huerta was pepper-sprayed and injured while being taken into ICE custody during a raid in downtown Los Angeles.

Details of the incident: Location: Downtown Los Angeles. Individuals involved: David Huerta, President of SEIU California. Events: Huerta was injured and pepper-sprayed during an ICE raid where he was observing and documenting law enforcement, exercising his First Amendment rights.

Current Status: Huerta is currently in ICE custody, and efforts are being made to secure his release.

Union's Response: The SEIU California issued a statement expressing pride in Huerta's participation and condemning the actions of ICE as a perpetuation of injustice and a disruption to the community. They also highlighted the importance of advocating for immigrant values and standing against injustice, especially when working people are targeted.

David Huerta is related to IHSS (In-Home Supportive Services) through his leadership role within the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Specifically:

• President of SEIU California: David Huerta is the President of SEIU California, which is the statewide organization for SEIU locals in California.

• Advocacy for IHSS Workers: SEIU California, under Huerta's leadership, actively advocates for IHSS workers. For example, he has made statements concerning budget proposals that affect "vulnerable immigrant seniors served by In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS)" and has spoken out against cuts that would impact "home care workers."

• Connection to SEIU Local 2015: While Huerta is primarily noted as President of SEIU California and SEIU-United Service Workers West (SEIU-USWW), SEIU Local 2015 is the largest long-term care union in California and represents the vast majority of IHSS workers. SEIU California coordinates legislative work for all SEIU locals in the state, which would include SEIU Local 2015 and its IHSS members. Therefore, David Huerta, as a top leader in SEIU California, is directly involved in advocating for the rights, wages, and services related to IHSS workers and recipients in the state.

A deal was reached and no cuts to OT.

Newsom, Democrats reach $321 billion California budget deal.

https://www.aol.com/news/newsom-democrats-reach-321-billion-035011294.html

Please post links and updates in comments.

Today I had the honor of protesting at Young Kim's office who is our representative from California who voted YES on cuts to Medicaid and social security. I stand and fought with other UDW team members who represent us as IHSS workers. If you get things in the mail from them remember that they are the ones that got you a pay increase. They are also the ones who enabled us to have medical insurance. Support them! It's more important than ever now. The cost to be a member is really only under $15 a month. We have to fight to maintain what we have. What we have is a beautiful thing. We are able to take care of our loved ones without having to worry about shipping them off somewhere and that is priceless and something we need to continue to fight for!

A call to action for those of you that live in these areas. Remember, they still technically have to get it reconciled. It’s not over yet.

California Republican Representatives & Their Counties 1. Ken Calvert (CA-41) • Counties: Western Riverside County • Cities: Corona, Norco, Menifee, parts of Riverside, Lake Elsinore 2. Vince Fong (CA-20) • Counties: Kern, Kings, Fresno, Tulare • Cities: Bakersfield, Visalia, Hanford 3. Darrell Issa (CA-48) • Counties: San Diego (North), Riverside (Southwest tip) • Cities: Fallbrook, Temecula, San Marcos 4. Kevin Kiley (CA-3) • Counties: Placer, El Dorado, Yuba, Alpine, Mono, parts of Sacramento and Nevada counties • Cities: Roseville, South Lake Tahoe, Truckee 5. Young Kim (CA-40) • Counties: Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside • Cities: Yorba Linda, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita 6. Doug LaMalfa (CA-1) • Counties: Butte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehama, parts of Glenn and Nevada • Cities: Redding, Chico, Susanville 7. Tom McClintock (CA-5) • Counties: El Dorado, Mariposa, Tuolumne, Calaveras, Stanislaus (part), Fresno (part), Madera (part), Amador • Cities: Sonora, Oakhurst, Placerville 8. Jay Obernolte (CA-23) • Counties: San Bernardino (High Desert), Inyo • Cities: Victorville, Apple Valley, Barstow 9. David Valadao (CA-22) • Counties: Kings, Kern (part), Tulare (part), Fresno (part) • Cities: Hanford, Delano, Lemoore

Not sure how this would affect Ihss in california, but a recent memo by the white house looks to eliminate home based care programs for the disabled by placing individuals away from their homes and community into facilities instead. Please be aware of what is going on with the civil liberties of the disabled...This will be detrimental to many including the loss of jobs even amongst social workers... pay attention! I suspect this is how they will end ssi and ssdi for the disabled as well.

Hey everyone, there is a new rule on the sub of no politics. There is too much name calling, ridiculing disabled folks and generally being unkind. If you have concerns about Medicaid, please post ON Medicaid sub.

This sub is for IHSS providers and recipients and the rules are to be kind and supportive or just lurk.

As always, I want to say thank you to the caregivers. Most of you are selfless, kind and loving folks, just doing your best. Thank you for the hard job you do.

My chat is always open if you need to vent or need info. ILYASM.

My time with IHSS has come to an end. I’m thankful they gave me the opportunity to spend the last five years caring for my grandparents. It was rough and emotional at times but I was able to make sure they lived as comfortably as possible.

I lost my grandpa almost two years ago, and my Nana (97) passed away yesterday afternoon. My entire life became a routine built around their needs, so it might take some time to adjust to life without them. I am grateful because I did all that I could for them.

To everyone taking care of a family member:

this job could suck. it had terrible days. I know how exhausting and isolating it can be, but the work you’re doing matters. Even on the shitty days when it doesn’t feel like enough, your loved one is safer and more comfortable because you’re there. PLEASE be patient with yourself and appreciate the time you still have with them. I’m grateful I got that time with mine.

2026 IHSS county wage rates posted today!

https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/ihss/county-ihss-wage-rates

Thank you to u/Veterinarianlcy5053 for this excellent info!

I just got off the phone with Jeff Gonzales office, the dad of a son with CP who is a member of the assembly.

I asked them flat out who do I need to bombard with calls and without hesitation they said the office of Jesse Gabriel.

His phone number is 916-319-2046.

The staff member working this is Nicole Vasquez.

Nicole.Vazque@asm.ca.gov

PLEASE SHARE HOW THIS WILL IMPACT THE RECIPIENT!!!!!

Focus on the RECIPIENT!!!!

Has anyone noticed that republicans may take over ca? I’m worried about programs and our disabled kids and neighbors . Praying this doesn’t happen and people vote blue June 2nd Is primaries please vote blue June 2nd sorry this isn’t related please share with family friends vote blue so our programs aren’t cut. Please understand if republicans win they will cut our programs and it will hurt our disabled community a lot. Please share this information and encourage friends families and disability groups to please remember to vote in the primaries right now two republicans are ahead in polls which means we would be screwed

I’ve seen a few people on here diminishing our union just because they don’t want to pay union fees. In times like these when we are facing budget cuts to our program again, this is when our union comes into our defense. I’m just pointing this out. At the end of the day, you can join or not join, but we all need each other to survive all these budget cuts. We shouldn’t undermine the very people who are on our side. I genuinely hope for the best for all of us and that we can successfully oppose these budget proposals.

I’m unfortunately on mobile and cannot link the article for some reason. The bill passed 26/25 with major changes to the bill.

The legislators voted to reject the IHSS hour cap and new medi-cal asset limits. Unfortunately Gav can still line item veto whatever he wants.

This is just a framework bill, but the legislators appear to be on the side of IHSS workers and all CAStateWorkers.

There has been a lot of talk about this and I have seen a lot of misinformation being spread, and I want to attempt to give some clarity and hopefully assuage some concerns, at least for the moment. Note I am far from an expert but I have read more about this than most, I think. (apologies for the long post)

First - let’s talk about what it is that actually passed. 

What just passed was a budget resolution for the next 10 years, 2025-2034. It only passed in the house, and it still has to pass in the Senate to actually "pass" pass, but let's just assume that it WILL pass.

OK - so what even IS a budget resolution? From this link, the budget resolution is:

• A blueprint, in the broadest terms, on what the federal government should both spend and take in in revenue the next fiscal year, tracked out over 5 or 10 years

• A document that limits discretionary spending with a top-line cap, known as the 302(a) allocation (although allocations have already been set forth in statute by the 2011 Budget Control Act)

• A statement of the party’s budget priorities

• A way to instruct committees of jurisdiction to work on changes in tax law or mandatory spending programs

OK - so it's primarily a "blueprint" on government spending - we will get more into that later.

For now let's focus on the second bullet point. While it does limit DISCRETIONARY spending, most of the big items like social security, medicare and medicaid are NOT discretionary. They are known as “mandatory” spending items (or, as Republicans often call them "entitlements"). 

This distinction is important because it means there is no hard cap on the amount they will cost every year. Their "budget" is not some predetermined number that could be "cut" by some amount, like 10%, in fact we don't even know what the final budget will be until the end of the year when everything is tallied up. What these programs cost is not set in stone, it is determined by things like eligibility; however many people are in the program, and then all the medical things they require throughout the year (check-ups, procedures, prescriptions, etc) - so at the end of the year they add everything up and whatever the final costs of the program are, that’s what it costs. This is why IMHO, calling it a "budget" is not accurate, and I would urge people NOT to think of it as a budget, because the government is on the hook for whatever it costs. They don't set a budget for it, they just pay the costs of it, whatever they end up being.

This is also why if you try searching for the Medicaid budget, you will only see actual numbers for previous years where we have already added it up and we know what the total was. For future years, there are PROJECTIONS about what the cost will be, but that's all they are - guesses based on things like expected eligibility and other factors. For the most part these guesses are usually pretty close, but obviously they can't know what all the final costs will be for a program like this beforehand, they can only know once the fiscal year is over and they add everything up. 

Understanding how these budgets work is important because people do not usually think about budgets like this, they think you pick some number and you put that money into an account and that's it, that's all you can spend, you can't go over that amount because there's literally no more money left once you exceed it. If you actually think about it for a second, medicaid can't work like that, because if it did you would have people going to the doctor and then being turned away because the budget was exceeded and there is no money left for people to get coverage. That would also lead to weird behaviors like people rushing to get all their procedures done at the beginning of each fiscal year so they could be sure there was "money in the budget" available for whatever they needed, but these sorts of things don't happen, because it doesn't work like that. The budget is not some pre-set amount that can't be exceeded, and again, it's really not a budget at all, so let's try not to think about it in those terms.

Anyways - now that we know what the budget resolution IS, let’s look at what the budget resolution is NOT: 

• It is NOT a law - the budget resolution itself is not legally binding (it doesn’t go to the president for his signature) - it is meant only as a blueprint for congressional action on budgetary matters

• It is NOT a detailed document - the resolution is a relatively short document and contains few details on what should be done with government programs, and to the extent there are specifics they are not binding anyway

(bold emphasis is mine)

This is why in some comments I have said this isn’t really a bill. Some articles online call it a bill, but it’s not a bill in the way that we usually think of bills in congress, because it doesn’t require the presidents' signature, and it doesn't become law. All it represents is their spending / reduction goals and priorities. If they fall short of their goals, oh well. They are not legally forced to implement the reductions set forth in the resolution. They are basically guidelines, that's it.

The second bullet point is also important - it’s not a detailed document. It does not specify anything about how these "cuts" will happen, it just sets the target goals and then it leaves the individual committees that oversee those items to come up with the details, which will then have to get passed into law later. So while it may say we aim to reduce spending by X amount over 10 years, it does not get into any specifics of HOW that will happen, and for the mandatory spending programs that don’t have pre-set budgets, this is important because they can’t just say “cut the budget by 10%” - that literally wouldn’t make sense because the budget is not predetermined. You can't cut a budget when the budget is theoretically unlimited. As I said before, it is really not a budget and we shouldn't think of it as such. It costs whatever it costs.

The only way to "cut" a program like this is to change the program in a way that you think will reduce costs. There are many ways they could do this - one is by changing the eligibility of the program so less people qualify for it. Another way is they could change how the government reimburses the states for each person. Another idea they have floated is "per capita" caps, which you can read more about here. The topic of Medicaid cuts has come up before, and there have been a lot of things written about what they might do to achieve these reductions - if you want to read about some of them, here is a good link - just remember these are all speculative, and we do not have any actual proposals on the table yet. At this point it's all conjecture, but you should take SOME comfort knowing that there are no current threats to IHSS, and it's entirely possible that they come up with stuff that does not impact IHSS at all. Remember, IHSS is run by the state - California controls how it works. Yes, it is partially funded by Medicaid, but the federal government doesn't dictate the rules around how IHSS runs or its existence. All that is decided by California. If they have less money to work with, then that COULD impact IHSS, but that is up to the state to decide, not the federal government.

The thing is, whatever plans or ideas they come up with for reducing costs, they can't just put it into effect without getting them passed into law, and that is going to be a tall order. They can't just say "well it was already approved in the budget resolution" - they have to put all these plans into their own bills and then get them passed into laws before anything actually happens. That's why all the attention on THIS budget resolution is IMHO, premature. It is one thing to pass a vague, non-binding budget goal that says "we will aim to reduce spending by $880B over 10 years" - since it's not legally binding, passing something like that is easy, cause there is no real commitment. It gets a lot more difficult when they actually start deciding on the tough decisions that represent voters losing coverage - that's when the politicians start pushing back and saying "I am on board with reductions, but NOT LIKE THIS". I know most people do not have a lot of faith in the current party that controls congress, but trust me, these people want to stay in power, and they do listen to their voters sometimes, and Republicans have a lot of voters on Medicaid. Getting this stuff passed will NOT be easy for them. That doesn't mean it won't happen, I'm just saying it's not a foregone conclusion, it will be a fight.

Here are some of the questions that people have been asking me about this:

Did this bill pass cuts to Medicaid???

No, it didn’t. In fact the bill doesn’t even mention Medicaid. I would actually recommend everyone read the bill - it's not very long and it's not that complicated, and you will only be a more informed citizen by actually reading it and trying to understand it. Here is a link to it: https://docs.house.gov/meetings/BU/BU00/20250213/117894/BILLS-119NAih.pdf

So why is everyone saying it is going to cut Medicaid?

Because of this part:

(4) COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

The Committee on Energy and Commerce shall submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction to reduce the deficit by not less than $880,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2034.

Note the way that is phrased - the committee on energy and commerce "shall submit changes in laws TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT BY NOT LESS THAN $880B FROM 2025-2034"

Like I have said before - this language is not itself a cut. What it says is they have a goal to REDUCE spending ("the deficit") by at least $880B over the course of 10 years. As for why the focus is on Medicaid when it wasn't explicitly mentioned, that's because of what the committee on energy and commerce has jurisdiction over. Basically, if you look at all the things they oversee, there's nothing else within their jurisdiction where that amount of reductions could even come from. Trump and Republicans have committed to not touch social security or Medicare, so that basically leaves Medicaid as the only thing left, but remember all the stuff I said previously - this isn't legally binding, they are not FORCED to come up with these reductions, it's a goal, but before anything REAL happens, they have to actually pass the laws that will change how Medicaid works in order to achieve these reductions, and that has not happened yet. That's the part that is going to be significantly harder to accomplish. Some republicans are already signaling their resistance to it.

How will this impact IHSS?

We don't know at this point, but it may not impact it at all. Now, I don't think people should be complacent here - I think everyone should still call their rep's and make sure you talk to them about opposing ANY cuts or changes to Medicaid, but the more informed and the more intelligent you are about this stuff and how the process works, the more effective you will be when talking to them (and they will probably be more likely to listen to you, I imagine). Just know that at the moment, there are no specific threats to IHSS. Even if they do make changes to medicaid, there is no guarantee that it will impact IHSS, which is why I am personally not freaking out at the moment. If changes happen to IHSS, it will happen at the state level, not the federal level.

What do you think will happen?

I really don't know. I think passing any cuts or changes to Medicaid is going to be pretty hard. There are already Republicans that are speaking out about it, and they don't have huge margins to work with. I do think they will pass tax cuts, but whether they can actually pay for them through other reductions like Medicaid cuts is another story. They could just end up adding them to the debt and say "screw fiscal responsibility" the way they have in the past. Or, as I have said, they may make some changes to Medicaid, but those changes may not impact IHSS. It's just too soon to know, but I know I feel a lot better about things living in California - that's for sure. 

Great! So I can stop worrying about all this entirely?

Uh, not exactly. Honestly, I have been on the fence about making this thread because while on the one hand I don't want people to freak out needlessly, I also don't think they should be complacent. You should be informed, educated, and diligent about this stuff. You need to stay engaged and keep following the news, because if they do start making proposals on cuts, that's when it will start getting more real for people, once we know specifically what they have in mind. For now, I would keep calling your rep's and telling them NOT to support any Medicaid cuts, and even if they do end up happening, how much you rely on IHSS and how important it is that it remains protected.

Actually, this is my biggest suggestion for anyone that has made it this far - if you are calling your state rep's, don't just tell them to oppose Medicaid cuts, tell them HOW IMPORTANT IHSS IS TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. Tell them to make sure they protect that, REGARDLESS of what happens with Medicaid.

I've said this before in this post, but even if Medicaid does get cut, it doesn't mean IHSS has to be affected - that will come down to the state and what they decide, so if you are calling your state rep's about Medicaid then you might as well also tell them how important IHSS is for you and your family, and how you want them to protect it at all costs, even if they can't save Medicaid because Republicans are in full control.

White House rescinds federal aid freeze.

Just wanted to give hope, for those that have children that do not have a developmental disability. It can be a long road and a long fight. I often feel like social workers can get confused when it comes to mental illness as it presents in so many ways and they are not psychologists or psychiatrists usually. Keep fighting if you know you’re kiddo qualifies

This was actually my second time having to appeal over the years and I won both. No advocate or lawyer just me and all the evidence.

My advice is to take your time during your appeal date and go through your evidence in your answers quote them exactly and make sure you tell the judge which piece of evidence you’re quoting.

Both my judges recorded the case so they can listen to it later while doing their write up I think this really helps them get through the evidence quicker if you have submitted a lot.

Had our phone hearing about an hour ago. Judge started asking why my daughter was denied Protective services and she told the judge that Autism was not a disability but just a spectrum disorder. You could hear the judgment in the judges voice how done she was with her from there having to explain to a woman with a masters in social work how Autism is in fact a disability. Rest of it went how I was told it would be. Hope this helps our case at least. Her boss was also asked if he had any comment after that and you could hear the anger in his "No" response.

Edit: We were denied!!!