Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

Our latest headlines

Want more? Dive into the archives.

About Us

David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.

About California Progress Report.

Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).

Books

Some Surprising Advances and Many Disappointments in Schwarzenegger Vetoes on Final Day

Signed: SB 375, anti-sprawl land use planning; SB 1420, restaurant chain posting of information; SBx2 1 water funding; SB 381, internet voter registration; AB 2654, anti-dsicrimination; AB 2747 end-of-life care; AB 583, campaign finance reform for Secretary of State election.

Vetoed: SB 840, single payer health care coverage; SB 981, health care balance billing ; AB 1945, rescission of health coverage; AB 1806, fishery resources in Delta; SB 37, Electoral College interstate compact; SB 823, private postsecondary education oversight; SB 974, ports congestion and air pollution; AB 1717, workers’ compensation permanent disability; AB 437 pay discrimination against women; AB 1656, data breaches of personal identity information.

By Frank D. Russo

We’re still digging out from under the 300 bills Governor Schwarzenegger signed or vetoed yesterday before the midnight deadline he faced to put his final imprint on what became law in the 2007-2008 legislative session or ended in the ashcan. The fate of many of the major bills became known in the last slug of 30 bills signed and 35 vetoed that became known at 10:30 p.m. Listed above are just a few that caught our bleary eye.

All in all in 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed 771 bills and vetoed 415—a 35% kill rate. To put this in perspective--in 2007 Governor Schwarzenegger had a heavy veto hand but only used this prerogative on 22% of the 964 bills sent to him during that entire year. There was a sharp divide between bills sent to him earlier in the year--of the 301 bills arriving on his desk before the budget, only 19 were vetoed or 6.34%. In the one week period he acted on bills sent to him after the budget was signed—the crush of “end of session bills” that were held up until then—he signed 481 and vetoed 396—a 45% veto rate.

Whether this sets a record or not, there are many surprises and California will have new laws that will make a difference in our future arising out of this year’s session. Some of them will be considered landmark achievements. There also were many disappointments—some of them in expected vetoes of legislation and some in surprising and even strange vetoes. Lest we forget, all of what took place in the last week was after the many twists and turns of the legislative process which left many bills on the cutting room floor at one committee hearing or failed floor vote along the way. In many ways it is not what was passed, but that which wasn’t, including narrowing amendments taken to get some of these measures to the Governor’s desk--along with the vetoes--that should provide a roadmap for next year’s work with a newly elected legislature.

On many of the bills the Governor did not give a clue as to why he did not sign them, and instead employed a cryptic boilerplate veto message: “The historic delay in passing the 2008-2009 State Budget has forced me to prioritize the bills sent to my desk at the end of the year’s legislative session. Given the delay, I am only signing bills that are the highest priority for California. This bill does not meet that standard and I cannot sign it at this time.” How will this look in the future—next year or when history is written? In the hundreds of bills that met this fate there are many that were trivial or could be seen in that light. Some were amended down to the point of a pilot project or study or some other pale shadow of their former selves and the original intention of the legislator that introduced them. Even in this form, to the people involved, some of these were very important.

Until we know how the future plays out, we will not know if the generic message used to veto these bills—basically saying they were not important enough—will come back to bite the Governor with a remark starting out with, “If only he thought this was important enough to warrant his signature…” this calamity or that could have been prevented. Linking these vetoes to the late passed budget and not to the merits of the bills and providing an explanation may be seen as indifference—or even worse, a tit-for-tat mean spirited retaliation.

There will be a lot to note for celebration and others to mourn in the days and weeks to come. California begins voting next Monday as vote-by-mail ballots are available. As we turn to the upcoming elections, we hope to show how these bills and the election results have consequences for the lives of Californians and our future as a state.

Posted on October 01, 2008

Comments

Thank God the good Governator vetoed that horrible SB 823. It was an attempt for Perata to put a hit on ALL private schools in California. About 1/2 have already gone broke in the last couple of years, he wanted to kill off the rest of them.

Posted by: Bill at October 1, 2008 02:26 PM

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.

Stat tracker