Court Expands Governor’s Right to Veto Parts of Bills

A state appeal court Friday expanded the governor’s right to veto legislation selectively and upheld Gov. George Deukmejian’s veto of $9.7 million in welfare appropriations two years ago.

A San Mateo County legal aid group had sued over the cut, arguing that Deukmejian’s action took money from the needy. The Legislature joined the suit, claiming that by vetoing the item Deukmejian had overreached his authority.

Lawmakers had voted to allow welfare recipients to collect their money more quickly once their requests for aid were approved.

The change, which would have cost $9.7 million during 1984-85, was included in a bill that implemented several aspects of the state budget.

Veto Used Often

The Legislature did not dispute Deukmejian’s authority to excise $9.7 million from the budget. Deukmejian has used the “item veto” 125 times on other budget implementation bills.

Rather, legislators challenged the governor’s right to remove only that portion of the implementation bill that changed the eligibility date for welfare recipients.

“It was felt (that) the governor had overstepped his bounds,” said Mark F. Terry, a lawyer who represented the Legislature. “We wanted some standards for the use of the item veto.”

In upholding the governor’s action, District Court of Appeal Justice Betty Barry-Deal concluded that the disputed provisions in the two bills were “so intimately related” that one could not be vetoed without the other.

Called ‘Alarming’

Dissenting Justice Clinton W. White charged that the ruling is “alarming,” and “dramatically alters the delicate balance of power between the Legislature and the executive.”

“The potential for direct legislation by the governor is unleashed with no standards to restrain future chief executives,” White said.

Lawyers involved in the case expect an appeal to the state Supreme Court.