Three Cheers--and a Boo : Wilson makes the right call on trio of bills but wrongly vetoes domestic-partner legislation

If April, as T. S. Eliot wrote, is the cruelest month, then for the governor of California September is surely the busiest. If you’re keeping score, more than 1,000 bills remain on Gov. Pete Wilson’s desk--and he’s signing or vetoing as fast as he can.

Four measures that Wilson has acted on are of special note. He was right on three of these.

AB 2802: Obviously recalling last year’s devastating wildfires, Wilson prudently signed legislation authorizing a test program for the firefighting plane known as the CL-415, the “Super Scooper.”

The Canadian-built aircraft, able to scoop up 1,600 gallons of water at a time to dump on fast-moving fires, could prove to be a key weapon in the state’s firefighting arsenal, one it should have had long ago. But there still remains the very large matter of funding for the test program. The governor and the Legislature must write that check.

AB 3432: A bill authorizing localities to require attorney/lobbyists to register and disclose lobbying activities is short and to the point and will cost little. Earlier this year the Los Angeles City Council passed a similar disclosure ordinance, backed by the city Ethics Commission. The new law drew jeers from some lawyers who had tried to hide behind the attorney-client privilege to protect themselves from lobbying disclosure requirements. AB 3432 reinforces the notion that a more open government is a cleaner government. Wilson deserves credit for signing it.

SB 1427: In the face of a high-priced public-relations campaign by pharmaceutical companies, Wilson did the right thing by vetoing a measure that would have limited a pharmacist’s ability to substitute lower-cost generic drugs for brand-name pharmaceuticals. Proponents insisted the legislation would have protected patients and consumers. But the real protection would have been extended to the market for more expensive brand-name drugs.

AB 2810: Last week Wilson vetoed a measure to allow those in long-term relationships (mainly senior-citizen couples who fear losing Social Security benefits if they marry, and gay couples) to visit one another in the hospital and assume conservatorship if one partner is incapacitated. The bill would have also made it easier for a surviving partner to inherit joint property.

In his misconceived veto message, Wilson said the state should not encourage “some substitute” for marriage. However he then ordered the state Health Services Department to develop regulations allowing adults to designate whomever they choose as hospital visitors. Such rules won’t have the same teeth as law, nor will they affect those hospitalized after being incapacitated without warning. A bad call.