The California State Assembly convened on June 13, 2025, to discuss the proposed budget, which has sparked significant debate among members regarding its implications for various communities and services across the state. The session highlighted concerns over fiscal sustainability, healthcare access, and funding priorities.

The meeting opened with Assemblymember Gallagher expressing deep concerns about the budget's projected costs, which have ballooned from an initial estimate of $4 billion to $12.1 billion. Gallagher warned that the unsustainable nature of this budget could lead to cuts affecting the most vulnerable populations, emphasizing the need for fiscal responsibility. He acknowledged the Republican caucus's influence in restoring funding for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and developmentally disabled programs, but cautioned that a $5.5 billion gap remains unaddressed.

Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez followed, sharing her gratitude for improvements made to the budget while expressing dismay over proposals that threaten healthcare access for immigrant families. She argued that the elimination of certain healthcare provisions would exacerbate health disparities and harm vulnerable communities. Rodriguez stressed the importance of maintaining healthcare as a human right and urged her colleagues to consider the long-term consequences of the budget's provisions.

Assemblymember Patterson criticized the budget for lacking adequate funding for housing and healthcare, labeling the governor's proposals as inadequate. He pointed out that the budget borrows from education funding and fails to address the rising cost of living, calling for a more serious approach to these pressing issues.

Assemblymember El Hawari echoed concerns about the budget's impact on immigrant communities, arguing that freezing Medi-Cal enrollment and imposing premiums would create a two-tiered healthcare system. She urged for a delay in implementing these measures to allow for more comprehensive solutions that protect vulnerable populations.

Assemblymember Randula, drawing from her experience in healthcare, expressed her disappointment with the budget's approach to immigrant healthcare access. She emphasized the need for a system that values all individuals, particularly those who have been deemed essential during the pandemic.

Assemblymember Bonta acknowledged the budget as a work in progress, highlighting both its positive aspects and the tensions it creates. He noted the need for continued assessment of its impacts, particularly on undocumented communities, while recognizing advancements in childcare and corrections reform.

The session concluded with a consensus that while the budget contains some improvements, significant concerns remain regarding its sustainability and the potential harm it may inflict on vulnerable populations. Assembly members expressed a commitment to ongoing discussions to address these issues before the budget goes into effect.