Newsom’s latest budget contradicts his “California for All” promise.

By Chris Hoene, especially for CalMatters

This comment was originally posted by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Guest Comment written by

California has built a reputation as a bulwark against President Donald Trump’s agenda. But when it comes to the state budget — California’s most powerful tool for change — that resistance fades.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2026-27 budget proposal does not include investments to protect Californians from federal cutbacks and ongoing threats.

Federal policymakers have cut health care, food assistance and other basic benefits that must be paid for ICE’s tight budgetas well as tax cuts for the wealthiest households and most profitable corporations.

So far, California’s budget response has been cautious, reserved and inconspicuous.

When Newsom took office in 2019, he frames his vision as “California for All,” that would be it ensures that families can meet basic needs such as housing, food and healthcare. That promise now collides with a budget proposal that doesn’t match the vision with meaningful solutions.

Today, families across the state face increased housing costs, food insecurity, health care threats and continued risks to their well-being. The recent cuts enacted through Trump’s mega-bill, HR 1, will deepened these challenges and increasing poverty as layoffs take effect.

The stakes are not abstract. Federal cuts to Medi-Cal could leave up to 2 million Californians without health insurance and cost the state tens of billions of dollars in federal funding each year.

SNAP cuts could cost California $2.3 billion to $5.1 billion annually and more than 3 million households risk losing part of their food benefits.

California continues to have highest poverty rate in the countrytied only to Louisiana. It is time for the Governor and Legislature to seriously consider common sense solutions to raise the revenue needed to meet the needs of all Californians.

Yet even as the state stands to lose billions in federal funding and millions of Californians lose access to health care and food assistance, the governor wants the state to continue spending billions on corporate tax breaks.

Some of these state tax breaks benefit the same high-income corporations and wealthy individuals who just received unprecedented federal tax giveaways under HR 1, which directs more than 40% of its tax breaks to the richest 5% of Americans. (20% of the bottom 20% of the US population will receive less than 1% of the federal tax cut.)

California has the tools to protect the people who call the Golden State home, and none of those options require panic, austerity, or accepting the damage done to us by Trump and the Republicans in Congress.

Almost half of profitable corporations filing taxes in California pay not more than $800 minimal state tax despite collectively reporting billions in profits.

The state can begin to collect more by closing the “water’s edge” loophole, the state’s the largest corporate tax breakwhich allows corporations operating internationally to avoid $3 billion to $4 billion in government taxes each year by hiding profits in offshore tax havens.

In addition some of the most profitable corporations in the world requested research and development tax credits, costing the state more than $2.5 billion in 2023 alone. Closing these ineffective and misdirected loopholes would generate ongoing revenue to help offset federal damages and strengthen economic security for all Californians.

The 2026-27 state budget will help define Governor Newsom’s legacy. History will not judge this moment by speeches and social media postsbut by answering the question: Were Californians safer and better able to afford their daily necessities when Newsom left office — or were they more exposed to the harsh reality of Trump’s agenda?

Newsom’s final budget, which will be finalized later this year after negotiations with legislative leaders, will answer that question and determine whether the promise of “California for All” will be fulfilled through real action or kicked down the road to his successor.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.