When Antoinette Martinez rolls her cart through the produce section of the FoodMaxx in Watsonville, her 5-year-old son, Caden, often asks for strawberries and blueberries.
Sometimes Martinez bends, but usually she sticks to the produce on sale: Roma tomatoes for 69 cents a pound, cucumbers at three-for-99 cents. And banana bunches are relatively cheap.
“If it’s not under a dollar, then I don’t buy it,” Martinez said, bypassing $2 lettuce as Caden clambered into her grocery cart. “It’s about stretching the dollar.”
The food budget isn’t as tight as it used to be since Martinez, a single mother, got a job at the Second Harvest Food Bank in Santa Cruz County. She helps people sign up for food stamps, known in California as CalFresh.
Between her $2,380 monthly paycheck and about $100 she receives in CalFresh, Martinez can make it through the month without her or Caden ever going hungry.
But under a new proposal from the Trump administration, Martinez and her son would lose their food stamps. So would many clients she helps at the food bank, along with an estimated 3.1 million Americans.
Californians are likely to be hit particularly hard. Here’s why:
The proposed rule, announced last week, would undo the ability of states to provide food stamps to households that have incomes above the federal food stamp limit — 130% of the federal poverty line — but hefty expenses.
That would have the biggest impact in states like California that have raised the minimum wage to try to chase the skyrocketing costs of housing. As California’s minimum wage creeps toward $15 per hour by 2023, many more workers could be bumped off food stamps when their monthly incomes rise above the federal limit.
Under current law, a California family of two with a gross monthly income between 130% and 200% of the federal poverty level — or between $1,784 and $2,744 — can qualify to receive CalFresh as long as their net income after housing, child care or medical costs falls under 100% of the poverty level, or $1,372.
For now, Martinez falls right into that bracket.
The rule would also cut the benefit for families who have savings or assets above a federal limit that many states, including California, currently waive. That limit — $2,250 for most families — is only slightly over the median monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment in California ($2,110) and about half that of a two-bedroom in San Francisco ($4,730).
“It’s clear that states like California are a target on this,” said Jessica Bartholow, a policy advocate for the Western Center on Law and Poverty.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue said that the proposal to eliminate what he called a “loophole” would reduce fraud and save the federal government money — more than $9 billion over the next five years, according to a federal estimate. The proposal could go into effect following a 60-day public comment period.
“Our job is to make sure folks have the tools they need to move away from (food stamp) dependency… and preserve the benefits for those most in need,” Perdue said.
But advocates counter that the move would largely cut benefits for working families who spend large chunks of their paychecks on housing and caretaking costs for young children or ill or disabled family members.
“There’s actually no evidence that making someone hungrier makes them less dependent on public benefits. And there’s plenty of evidence showing the opposite,” said Bartholow.
