Bad-Faith Use of Line-Item Veto Devastates Lives

By Lori Saldaña
In early June, a 24-year-old woman born with HIV sat before the Budget Conference Committee in Sacramento. She appealed to lawmakers to save a drug program that keeps her and thousands of others alive and, in many cases, able work to live relatively healthy lives.
She was clearly nervous, perhaps because this was her first time talking about her condition in such a public setting. Yet her courage and simple plea moved all those who heard her testimony.
Weeks later, however, Gov. Schwarzenegger eliminated $52.1 million from these HIV/AIDS programs throughout the state with the stroke of his line-item veto pen. Today, Californians are asking how the governor can appear so isolated from the concerns of millions of our friends, family members and neighbors, living every day with devastating illness and disability.
Schwarzenegger took this action despite weeks of public testimony that was televised live each day. Legislators worked to minimize the effects of the budget shortfall on critical health care and social service programs, including preserving funding for programs that the governor had slated for wholesale elimination. Despite this, the governor chose to devastate or eliminate these programs by the use of the line-item veto.
However, it now appears he did so without legal or constitutional authority. Certainly it was done without public input, and without offering any discernable moral or fiscal justification to those whose lives are now considerably more difficult.
Here in San Diego, his line-item cuts will hobble efforts by North Park’s Bienestar, Family Health Centers and other service providers throughout the county who struggle to provide health care services San Diegans desperately need.
These reductions include $140 million cut from Healthy Families for children; $25 million from funding to support community clinics; $16 million from domestic violence program; $3 million from the Black Infant Care program;  and $2.3 million for senior services, including all funding for Alzheimer’s Day Care Resource Centers that serve 3,200 individuals with dementia.
Aside from the human cost, including a threat to public health and safety, many of these cuts will result in the loss of millions of dollars in matching federal funds desperately needed by California’s economy. In some cases, California receives matches as high as 9 to 1, so a state reduction of one dollar results in the loss of nine federal dollars.
What was apparent to legislators, and has been recently confirmed by legal counsel, is that the governor’s line-item vetoes are not only morally reprehensible and fiscally unsound, they are also unconstitutional.
California’s Constitution gives the governor “line-item” veto authority, permitting him to “reduce or eliminate one or more items of appropriation while approving other portions of a bill” [Cal. Const. Art. IV, Section 10(e)]. This line-item veto authority, however, only applies to appropriations — or allocations of specific amounts of money for spending.
The items in the budget bills that the governor signed last February were appropriations; the bills the Legislature sent him in July which reduced spending were not.
The California Supreme Court has held in previous cases that the line-item veto only applies to legislation that sets aside money for spending, or which adds new spending at the time it was originally enacted.
In other words, once the governor signs a budget, he doesn’t get a line-item “do-over.”
Throughout the budget-revision process, the governor refused to discuss additional revenues and was not able to work effectively with members of his own party who consistently withheld votes. He opposed a severance tax on oil companies, keeping California the only state without this program. He declined to raise taxes on alcohol and tobacco, despite broad public support.
Finally, when the Assembly passed a set of spending-reduction bills with bi-partisan votes in late June, Schwarzenegger invited Senate Republicans to his smoking tent and persuaded them to reject the compromise. This delayed the budget another week, and forced the state to issue interest-bearing IOUs to vendors and taxpayers.
In short: The governor’s attempts to show the Legislature “who’s boss” by delaying real solutions and abusing the line-item veto has cost the state billions, and forced many Californians to fear for their lives.
This is not an exaggeration. Lives are on the line when medication, health care programs and domestic violence shelters are eliminated.
Fortunately, the state’s constitutionwill ultimately decide who makes these cuts, and the $487.2 million in line-item cuts are now being challenged in court.
My colleagues and I hope that the outcome of this case will restore not only funding for these essential life-saving programs, but will also remind the governor of his personal responsibility for the lives and safety of thousands of Californians who depend on all of us for a fair and legal budget process.
Lori Saldaña represents the 76th Assembly District and serves as Assembly Speaker pro Tem.  Contact her at (619) 645-3090 or assemblymember.saldana@assembly.ca.gov.