Newsom to deploy CA National Guard after millions at risk of delayed food assistance in shutdown – CalMatters

Report on California’s Progress and Challenges in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report analyzes recent events in California through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It covers the impact of a federal government shutdown on food security, challenges in sustainable urban development, legal issues affecting educational equity, and matters of access to justice. The findings indicate significant threats to SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), complex implementation issues for SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and ongoing debates surrounding SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Impact of Federal Government Shutdown on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

Disruption of Food Assistance Programs

A federal government shutdown poses a direct threat to California’s efforts to achieve SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) by disrupting federally-funded food benefits. The potential delay of CalFresh benefits jeopardizes the food security of millions of vulnerable residents.

• Approximately 5.5 million low-income Californians, including nearly 3.5 million children and senior citizens, face a potential loss of food assistance.
• The state distributes approximately $1.1 billion in CalFresh benefits monthly, highlighting the program’s critical role in poverty alleviation and nutritional support.
• The disruption affects not only existing recipients but also new applicants, further exacerbating food insecurity, which already impacted nearly a quarter of California households in 2023.
• Delays are also anticipated for the California Food Assistance Program, which serves noncitizen populations ineligible for federal aid, compounding inequalities.

State-Level Mitigation Efforts and Contribution to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

In response to the federal funding gap, the California state government has initiated measures to uphold its commitment to social safety nets, reflecting the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

1. Governor Gavin Newsom authorized $80 million in state funds as a provisional measure to support affected populations.
2. The California National Guard has been tasked with assisting food banks to manage the anticipated increase in demand, demonstrating an institutional response to the crisis.

Challenges in Urban Planning: Balancing SDG 9 (Infrastructure) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities)

Conflict Over Transit-Oriented Housing Development

A proposed public transit project in Southern California highlights the complexities of integrating sustainable infrastructure (SDG 9) with inclusive urban development (SDG 11). Local opposition to a bus corridor project has intensified due to its linkage with new pro-housing legislation.

• The North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project is designed to improve public transportation infrastructure.
• Senate Bill 79 encourages high-density housing development around major transit stops, a key strategy for achieving sustainable cities.
• Local opposition, citing concerns over neighborhood character, threatens the transit project itself. This demonstrates a potential conflict where local governments might undermine infrastructure goals to avoid associated housing development mandates.
• This situation underscores the challenge of aligning local governance with broader state-level objectives for sustainable and equitable urban growth.

Legal Developments Affecting SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

Re-evaluation of Targeted Educational Scholarships

A recent legal challenge against a University of California, San Diego scholarship fund has implications for initiatives aimed at promoting SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The lawsuit has forced a change in the eligibility criteria for a fund originally created to support Black students.

• The Black Alumni Scholarship Fund was established to increase educational opportunities and graduation rates for African American students, directly addressing historic inequalities.
• Following a lawsuit filed by a right-leaning nonprofit, the university was compelled to open the scholarship to applicants of all races.
• This development reflects a broader legal trend challenging race-conscious programs, impacting targeted strategies designed to advance educational equity for underrepresented groups.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • The article discusses the disruption of food benefits for “5.5 million low-income Californians,” which directly impacts their financial stability and pushes them further into poverty. The reliance on programs like CalFresh highlights the issue of poverty and the need for social safety nets.
2. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The central theme is the threat to food security caused by a government shutdown delaying “federally-funded food benefits.” The article explicitly mentions that “nearly a quarter of California households experienced some food insecurity” and that the shutdown is “literally taking food out of people’s mouths.”
3. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • The article touches upon this goal in the section “Black scholarship must allow white applicants.” It discusses a lawsuit against a UC San Diego scholarship fund originally created to “increase graduation rates for Black students,” raising issues of equal access to educational opportunities and financial aid in higher education.
4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • This goal is relevant in two contexts. First, the article notes that a separate food benefits program for “eligible noncitizens” will also face delays, highlighting inequalities based on immigration status. Second, the lawsuit over the scholarship fund for Black students directly addresses issues of racial equality and affirmative action in education.
5. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The section “Why a bus fight is now a housing fight” connects to this SDG. It discusses the “North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project” and a new law encouraging “new apartment projects around major transit stops.” This directly relates to creating sustainable transport systems and addressing housing needs in urban areas.
6. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
   • The article’s core issue, the “ongoing federal government shutdown,” is a clear example of institutional failure. The inability of the government to function and provide essential services like food benefits undermines the effectiveness and accountability of institutions. The mention of “Immigration arrests at CA courthouses” also touches on access to justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 1 (No Poverty):
   • Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable. The CalFresh program is a social protection system, and the article highlights its importance for millions of low-income Californians, including children and the elderly. The shutdown disrupts this system.
2. Under SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
   • Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round. The article directly addresses the threat to this target, stating that the shutdown will likely delay food benefits, jeopardizing access to food for 5.5 million people.
3. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.3: By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality… tertiary education, including university. The discussion around the UC San Diego scholarship fund, its original intent to support Black students, and the subsequent lawsuit about access for all races relates directly to the principle of equal access to higher education.
4. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… race, ethnicity, origin… or other status. The article touches on this through the challenges faced by noncitizens in accessing food aid and the debate over race-specific scholarships intended to promote the inclusion of Black students.
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… policies and practices. The lawsuit against the university scholarship fund, which argues that it is discriminatory, directly engages with this target.
5. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing. The article links a new transit project to a housing bill (Senate Bill 79) that “encourages new apartment projects,” highlighting the connection between infrastructure and housing development.
   • Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all. The “North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project” is a direct example of an initiative aimed at achieving this target by creating a bus-only corridor.
6. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The federal government shutdown described in the article is a direct failure to meet this target, as it demonstrates an institution unable to perform its basic functions and responsibilities to its citizens.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 1 & 2 (Targets 1.3 & 2.1):
   • Explicit Quantitative Indicators: The article provides several data points that can be used as indicators.
     • The number of people relying on social protection: “about 5.5 million low-income Californians enrolled in the program.”
     • The number of vulnerable people affected: “nearly 3.5 million children and senior citizens.”
     • The monetary value of the benefits: “California issues about $1.1 billion in CalFresh benefits every month.”
     • Prevalence of food insecurity: “In 2023, nearly a quarter of California households experienced some food insecurity.”
2. For SDG 4 & 10 (Targets 4.3, 10.2, 10.3):
   • Qualitative Indicators: The indicators are implied through the existence of policies and programs.
     • The existence of targeted financial aid programs: The “Black Alumni Scholarship Fund” serves as an indicator of efforts to promote educational access for specific demographic groups.
     • Legal challenges to existing policies: The lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation is an indicator of ongoing debate and legal action concerning equality and discrimination in educational access.
3. For SDG 11 (Targets 11.1 & 11.2):
   • Qualitative/Project-Based Indicators: Progress is indicated by specific projects and legislation.
     • The implementation of sustainable transport projects: The “North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project” is a concrete indicator of investment in public transit.
     • The enactment of pro-housing legislation: The passage of “Senate Bill 79, which encourages new apartment projects around major transit stops” is an indicator of policy efforts to increase housing supply.
4. For SDG 16 (Target 16.6):
   • Event-Based Indicator: The primary indicator is an event demonstrating institutional failure.
     • The occurrence and duration of a government shutdown: The “ongoing federal government shutdown” is a direct, albeit negative, indicator of institutional ineffectiveness and lack of accountability.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: calmatters.org