Gaffe Poses an Abortion Problem for Legislators

SACRAMENTO —  An emotional family planning issue that lawmakers had hoped was behind them landed embarrassingly back on their desks Thursday, when it was discovered that clerks made a monumental mistake by leaving a controversial anti-abortion provision in the state budget.

The problem, which poses a political dilemma for both Republican Gov. George Deukmejian and Democrats in the Legislature, developed this way:

A provision prohibiting the use of family planning money to promote or advertise abortions was placed in the budget late last month as an amendment by Sen. H. L. Richardson (R-Glendora).

It was approved by the Senate, but it did not appear in a rival budget version passed by the Assembly.

Ordered Stricken

Then, during conference committee negotiations to resolve Senate-Assembly differences, the Richardson amendment was ordered stricken from the budget on a 4-2 vote.

Somehow, however, the committee staff left the section in the document, and it was still there when the budget was approved by two-thirds majorities of the Assembly and Senate last Thursday.

Embarrassed Democratic lawmakers said the budget was supposed to have been proofread by five different offices: the Department of Finance, the offices of the legislative analyst and the legislative counsel and the staffs of the Assembly and Senate fiscal committees. Members of the Legislature presumably also were in a position to catch the error before they voted on the budget.

Went Unnoticed

But it appeared that the mistake went unnoticed, even though the abortion matter was one of the most controversial issues in the budget. However, Assemblyman William Baker (R-Danville), one of the budget negotiators, said Thursday he knew about it but kept it “quiet” and did not even tell Assembly GOP Leader Pat Nolan of Glendale.

When it came time for a final budget vote, the Senate, erroneously believing the Richardson prohibition had been taken out of the bill, got into a big floor fight over the issue.

Sen. Alfred E. Alquist (D-San Jose), chairman of the conference committee, called Thursday’s revelation “an incredible succession of errors.”

He described the problem as “a printing error” and said he believed the governor, who still has not signed the budget, should deal with it as such.

However, Deukmejian is an opponent of abortion and already is under pressure from abortion opponents to veto funds to support a family planning office.

Use of Veto

Another budget negotiator, Assemblyman John Vasconcellos (D-Santa Clara), conceded that it was a “monumental mistake.” He said because the committee had so clearly acted to take the section out of the budget, the governor should remove it by his veto “in order to preserve the sanctity of the budget process.”

Vasconcellos prepared a letter for members of the conference committee to sign telling Deukmejian that a mistake had been made. However, a Baker aide said the assemblyman did not intend to sign the letter, because the lawmaker cannot remember voting on the Richardson abortion provision.

Democratic legislators and staff members who worked on the budget said they could not recall a similar situation ever occurring before and said they were searching for “options” they could employ if Deukmejian does not veto the abortion provision.

The issue was marked by ironies.

One is that Democratic legislators are confronted with whether to formally ask the governor to veto the abortion section. For years, they have argued that the governor has no legal right to veto so-called “control” language, claiming he can veto only individual appropriations.

However, the issue has never been resolved in the courts. Thus, they are in the awkward position of wanting the governor to veto language that they claim he has no legal right to veto.

In addition, the mistake surfaced a day after legislators sharply questioned Health and Welfare Secretary David Swoap about possible drafting errors in the governor’s toxics reorganization plan.

Part of Budget

Larry Thomas, the governor’s press secretary, said Deukmejian had made no decision on whether to veto the abortion provision. Thomas did note that it was an official part of the budget voted on by two-thirds of the members of the Legislature, and the governor could not ignore that. He also brought up the criticism directed at Swoap.

“It’s ironic that members of the Legislature who were so critical because of drafting errors in our reorganization plan today find themselves in a position of begging for some changes, because errors were discovered in the budget drafting process,” he said.