The change, approved in the state budget in June, reverses part of a 2024 policy that eliminated asset limits for these groups. California reinstated a $130,000 cap at the beginning of this year; the new limit will sharply reduce it. A primary home and one vehicle are exempt, but assets such as savings, some retirement accounts, life insurance policies and burial plots can count toward the cap. Applicants must also meet income limits, which are about $1,800 a month for a single person.

For Oakland resident Julia Feinberg, 37, that could mean spending roughly $10,000 from her emergency savings. Feinberg, a licensed therapist with a degenerative neuromuscular disorder, uses a power wheelchair and receives about 19 hours of caregiving a day through Medi-Cal.

Without that care, she said, she would likely have to live in a nursing home rather than work and live independently. She also fears losing access to a disability program that provides additional caregiving hours and has a multiyear waitlist.

“We keep having to have the same fight over and over and over again,” Feinberg said.

The change is part of a wider retrenchment after years of Medi-Cal expansion. Experts estimate combined federal and state cuts could leave more than 2.2 million Californians without coverage over the next four years, doubling the state’s uninsured rate.

People with disabilities say savings are often needed for expenses that Medi-Cal does not cover. Elizabette Guéçamburu, 44, who has spinal muscular atrophy and lives near Patterson, is saving toward a used wheelchair-accessible van that she estimates would cost about $75,000. Home accessibility work, including ramps and bathroom modifications, can cost tens of thousands of dollars, she said.

Guéçamburu works part time as a bookkeeper on her family’s farm. After her father was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2024, he could no longer provide her care. That same year, California removed the asset limit, allowing her to qualify for Medi-Cal.

Now, she said, she is considering placing an inheritance from her grandmother in a special needs trust controlled by a family member. She has also asked her family to remove her from inheriting part of their century-old farm, fearing that assets could put her health coverage at risk.

“I have to surrender our legacy just to have medical security and have the ability to live my life,” Guéçamburu said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom eliminated the asset test in 2024 after a yearslong campaign by older adult and disability advocates. Two years later, facing a $12 billion budget shortfall, he proposed restoring the former $2,000 limit, saying enrollment had grown to more than twice the level anticipated. The Legislature instead approved the $130,000 cap, later reducing it to $21,000 in the June budget.

State data show about 600 people lost Medi-Cal when the $130,000 limit returned. Advocates expect more people could lose coverage under the lower cap. The state did not publish an estimate of how many would be affected before lawmakers approved it. The Department of Finance estimated that restoring the $2,000 limit would cause 62,000 older adults and people with disabilities to lose coverage over two years.

Camille Nguyen, an attorney with the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, said many people affected have kept their retirement savings in cash rather than building wealth through home ownership.

“They have all of their life savings in cash savings instead of a house,” Nguyen said. “That is the amount they are expecting to live off of for the rest of their life.”

Lindsay Imai Hong, California director of caregiving advocacy group Hand In Hand, said advocates want the next governor to take the asset test off the table permanently.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton said he opposes asset limits, arguing that people should not lose coverage for saving money. Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra did not answer specific questions about the policy. A campaign spokesperson said federal cuts under President Donald Trump were squeezing Medi-Cal and said Becerra would seek sustainable savings while protecting access to care.