Preemption and Guaranteed Income: Three Things Innovators Can Do Now
Post by Mary Bogle
Americans are looking for bold new solutions to entrenched problems like poverty and income inequality. High quality experiments on GI fit squarely into this space.
Across the country, momentum for guaranteed income (GI) is growing. Over 150 cities, counties, and philanthropic partners have run or are running pilots to test how direct cash transfers can cut poverty, stabilize families, and spark innovation. The evidence is clear: unconditional cash reduces hardship and stress, improves financial stability, and gives people the dignity to make their own choices, like taking time to provide more parenting for children if that is their wish. GI, which emphasizes liberty and efficiency, is also a uniquely American approach to helping our neighbors. The long-term story on GI and economic mobility is still being written—but that’s one of the many reasons experimentation, longer timelines, and state–local partnerships need to be protected.
As learning grows and innovations spread, a quiet battle is unfolding: more than 10 state legislatures have moved or are moving to preempt local governments from launching or sustaining guaranteed income programs. In a handful of states, preemption is already a reality; in others, it’s an active political flashpoint. If you’re working in a preemption state—or worried that yours might be next—this post offers a quick scan of what’s happening and three things you can do now to respond.
A Tale of Two States: Innovation v. Incineration
California and Texas illustrate opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to testing GI: one is creating space for innovation, while the other is moving aggressively to extinguish the concept.
California has passed legislation to expand GI-like benefits and features several programs to provide monthly payments to low-income seniors to help offset rising living costs. Numerous local jurisdictions—such as Los Angeles County, Stockton, and Santa Monica—have launched their own cash programs with strong state–local alignment. The state’s posture has been largely supportive: providing grant funding, offering technical assistance, and learning from pilot outcomes to inform broader policy debates.
Texas, by contrast, has become a testing ground for preemption efforts. In early 2024, Harris County—one of the largest and most racially diverse counties in the country—announced a guaranteed income pilot designed to provide low-income families with modest, monthly cash allotments. Before the program could fully launch, state leaders invoked the Texas Constitution to strike it down, arguing that direct cash transfers violated state prohibitions on “gifts” of public funds. At the same time, the legislature has introduced measures to strip home-rule authority from Austin and attempted to block the city from initiating any new GI programs in the future following its very successful pandemic-era pilots. This represents a two-pronged preemption strategy: one that retroactively dismantles local innovation and prospectively prevents new programs from taking shape.
These contrasting cases—California’s supportive environment vs. Texas’s restrictive preemption—underscore why advocates need to understand their states’ specific legal and political landscapes. Preemption doesn’t look the same in all places; it can take different forms, operate through different channels, and carry very different consequences for local innovation.
Three Things You Can Do to Address Preemption
Even in restrictive environments, proponents of GI are not powerless. Here are three practical steps you can take:
1. Map Your State’s Preemption Landscape
Start by understanding what kind of preemption you’re dealing with. Is it clear or explicit (a statute banning cash transfer programs)? Vague or implicit (budget riders, home-rule changes, or legal ambiguity)? Proposed legislation, or already enacted? Knowing the details will shape your strategy. For an overview on preemption of guaranteed income pilots, as well as numerous other policies like immigrant sanctuary and minimum wage, check out LSSC's 2024 End-of-Session Report: "Preemption’s Role in Undermining American Democracy." The Economic Policy Institute also has a nifty preemption tracker for workers’ rights.
Promising Practice: Partner up with legal clinics and state municipal leagues to publish easy-to-digest legal memos for city officials and nonprofits. Help from lawyers familiar with GI programs can be invaluable for clarifying what’s allowed and identifying potential legal workarounds.
2. Strengthen Coalitions Early
Preemption fights are political. They are often triggered not just by GI itself but by broader state–local tensions around taxation, housing, or labor policy. Build broad coalitions before preemption lands on the legislative agenda—including local governments, philanthropic funders, business allies, and community groups.
Promising Practices: Seek out other regional or state pilots to form a GI coalition and then reach out to groups with similar agendas. Together is better when it comes to defeating preemption since the big corporate donations that undergird legislator support for preemption policies are best countered through grassroots voter campaigns like those sponsored by SiX.
3. Design for Resilience
Where possible, GI proponents can structure pilots and partnerships to make them harder to shut down. That might mean relying on philanthropic or local general funds that are not subject to state budget control; choosing lead partners that are less vulnerable to political turnover; or embedding GI within broader policy packages that have bipartisan appeal (e.g., workforce development, early childhood education, or housing stabilization).
Promising Practices: Even in preemption states, data collection and storytelling can continue. Documenting hardship reductions, mental health improvements, financial stability gains, and participant experiences can help make the case for future policy changes when the political winds shift. Framing GI as part of a broader economic mobility or workforce strategy also helps by making it harder for opponents to single out cash transfers for political attack.
From Research to Action
Americans are looking for bold new solutions to entrenched problems like poverty and income inequality. High quality experiments on GI fit squarely into this space. Whatever you think of the outcomes from GI pilots so far, the idea that more testing is needed should not be controversial.
Preemption is a fast-moving, under-covered issue in the guaranteed income space. But it doesn’t have to catch pilot developers off guard. By tracking developments, sharing strategies, and building resilient programs, we can bridge research to action—and help local communities keep innovating, even in challenging political climates.
If you’re working in a preemption state and have strategies or experiences to share, LSSC would love to hear from you. Together, we can build a stronger field that’s ready for an economically uncertain future.
Mary Bogle is a principal research associate in the Housing and Communities Division at the Urban Institute. She is also a member of the Local Solutions Support Center’s 2025 Research Cohort.