Governor Hits Role of Atty. Gen. in Prop. 51 Ads

Gov. George Deukmejian charged Wednesday that Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp is “really reaching” and playing on people’s emotions in a television commercial urging voters to oppose Proposition 51, the “deep pockets” insurance initiative.

Deukmejian specifically objected to Van de Kamp’s assertion that Proposition 51 would protect toxic polluters from being held fully accountable in court suits. And the governor revealed that he personally told the attorney general so during a gentlemanly argument over the commercial.

The Republican governor clearly is sensitive about the whole toxics issue this year because his handling of chemical waste cleanup is a key weapon in the political arsenal of Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, his reelection campaign opponent.

Sees a Smear

In a long Capitol press conference, Deukmejian said he had “lost some respect” for Bradley because of his “very irresponsible and negative . . . efforts to smear me.”

On other subjects, Deukmejian:

- Said he would oppose legislation being contemplated by the Pentagon to repeal a governor’s power to prevent National Guard troops from being sent to military exercises in such places as Honduras, where a few dozen California guardsmen now are policing a road-building project. Some governors have objected to national guardsmen being assigned to Central America. Deukmejian does not, but he asserted that the federal government needs no additional authority over the guard; it already has enough power to call it up in an emergency.

- Disclosed that he appeared in a television campaign commercial for state Sen. H.L. Richardson (R-Glendora), who is running against former Lt. Gov. Mike Curb for the Republican nomination for lieutenant governor. But Deukmejian insisted that this TV posing with Richardson did not amount to an endorsement; that it was “simply a matter of accommodating” the legislator because he lacked films of previous meetings between the two. Curb, who lost to Deukmejian in a bitter gubernatorial primary four years ago, has been running old TV footage of him and the governor together.

Backs Proposition 51

Deukmejian formally endorsed Proposition 51 two weeks ago, thus aligning himself with most mayors and local governments, but putting himself at odds with three leading Democrats: Assembly Speaker Willie Brown of San Francisco, Bradley and Van de Kamp, who generally is believed to be positioning himself to run for governor in four years.

Proposition 51 would limit a court defendant’s share of damages for pain and suffering to the defendant’s actual percentage of fault. Under the present law, a defendant also can be made to pay for the pain and suffering liabilities of other defendants if those parties are unable to pay. Backers of the June 3 ballot measure contend that local governments often wind up paying the bill because they possess the deepest pockets of wealth.

In his TV commercial opposing Proposition 51, Van de Kamp declares: “It’s my job to see that murderers and rapists are punished and that toxic polluters are stopped. But the chemical companies behind Proposition 51 say that toxic polluters who cause cancer shouldn’t be held fully accountable. Californians are fed up with letting wrongdoers off easy.”

The toxics theme also is highlighted in another anti-51 commercial, which features actors instead of the attorney general. A “toxic polluter” is shown telling a colleague after the passage of Proposition 51: “Don’t worry, it makes sense to dump the stuff here in California. Even if we’re caught, it won’t cost us much.”

Deukmejian, confining his comments to the Van de Kamp commercial, said he told the attorney general that his assertions in the TV film were not directly relevant to the “deep pockets” issue. “It’s using the toxics issue as an emotion effort, apparently, to try to somehow get people to think that Proposition 51 is going to protect toxic polluters,” the governor complained.

Can’t Cite Cases

“I haven’t heard of any cases where the communities have suffered tremendous losses as a result of the deep pockets rule relating to toxics issues. . . . So I just think they’re really reaching in that particular commercial.”

Deukmejian said that Van de Kamp told him he felt “satisfied” that he was on the right track in the commercial, which currently is being shown statewide. The two argued about the commercial over lunch in the governor’s office last Thursday.

Bradley, in his radio campaign commercials, has charged that Deukmejian received $248,000 in political contributions from firms that handle toxic wastes and then vetoed 21 bills to clean up toxic pollution. The mayor also charges that Deukmejian received $709,000 from insurance companies and then blocked legislative efforts to hold down insurance rates. Deukmejian has responded that most of the insurance bills cited by Bradley died in legislative committees controlled by Democrats.

“Some of the recent charges that the mayor has made in his radio commercials are totally without any foundation, without any documentations, without any proof whatsoever,” the governor told reporters. “It does appear that they decided to engage in a smear effort. . . . I don’t have any personal dislike for the mayor. I certainly have lost some respect that I had for him in the past.”