Lawmakers could override almost any of Newsom’s vetoes. Why don’t they do it?

Nearly all of the 189 bills vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom this year passed the Legislature with the support of more than two-thirds of lawmakers, meaning those lawmakers’ votes alone would be enough to override the governor’s veto.

But this almost never happens. In fact, the last time the Legislature overrode a governor’s veto was in 1979.

So why don’t legislators fight for bills that enjoy such wide support?

Party loyalty and self-defense, says Dan Schnur, a professor of politics at the University of California, Berkeley, USC and Pepperdine University.

“A governor who has been rejected is generally not a happy governor, and unhappy governors tend to issue more vetoes, especially to members who voted to reject,” he said.

The Democrats’ current majority – 93 of 120 seats – also means that a legislator opposing the governor can be easily replaced among the politically favored.

In other words, Schnur said, it’s a modern version of the saying, “if you’re coming for the king, you better not miss out.”

Monday was the deadline for the governor to take action on 1,206 bills the Legislature sent to his desk out of 2,159 bills introduced during the regular session this year. Newsom has vetoed about 15.7% of all bills passed — slightly higher than the state average of 15% in recent years.

Of the 189 vetoes, 170 bills – about 90% – were passed by more than two-thirds majorities in both the Assembly and the Senate, according to Digital Democracy’s analysis. About 96% of vetoed bills were passed by a two-thirds majority in at least one house.

Overriding a veto requires a two-thirds majority in each chamber, which would mean at least 54 members of the Assembly and 27 members of the Senate. (Democrats currently make up 62 of 79 Assembly members and 31 of 40 state senators.)

The Governor vetoed bills for a variety of reasons, as expressed in his veto messages. According to an analysis by lobbyist and Capitol Hill watcher Chris Micheli, Newsom rejected 30% of the bills due to budget concerns and 27% due to policy disagreements. He vetoed another 22% as unnecessary or stepped on the toes of other state agencies or local governments.

Asked whether the number of vetoed bills that passed with broad legislative support indicated a lack of connection to the executive branch, Izzy Gardon, a spokesman for the governor, said: “The executive branch and the legislative branch are independent branches of government. The Governor’s decisions regarding legislation are made solely on the merits of each bill.”

The last veto override in 1979 concerned a bill by then-Assemblyman Lou Papan that would have banned banks from selling insurance. This was vetoed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown. It was Brown’s second veto override in 11 days.

If this resolution were to be rejected, the legislative leadership would have to be involved in a political revolt.

Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Democrat from Santa Rosa, has recently shown some willingness to stand up to Newsom, initially refusing to convene the Senate for the governor’s desired special session on gas prices. But he declined to comment on when he would consider overriding the governor’s veto.

State Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas also declined to comment.

Thad Kousser, a politics professor at the University of California, San Diego, said one reason the Legislature might leave the governor’s veto unchallenged is to allow the governor to do the dirty work.

“They are happy to allow the governor to be an opponent and kill the bill without having to vote against it,” he said.

Sen. Scott Wiener, whose drug cost-cutting bill was vetoed last month despite widespread support, called the governor’s action a “really, really bad veto” but stopped short of calling for it to be rejected.

The bill, co-authored by both Democrats and Republicans, passed in both chambers with a vote of 70-0 in the Assembly and 38-2 in the Senate. If signed into law, it would require licensing for pharmacy benefit managers – companies that act as intermediaries between insurance companies and drug manufacturers to process claims and negotiate drug prices.

In his Sept. 28 veto, the governor said he didn’t think the licensing plan would solve the problem of rising drug costs and that more data was needed.

But Susan Bonilla, chief executive of the California Pharmacists Association, which sponsored the bill, pushed back on the issue. She said a study was conducted back in 2020 and those recommendations were added to the bill.

Bonilla – a former Assembly member from 2010 to 2016 – said the Legislature should consider overriding the veto rather than trying to re-pass the bill next year because patient access to medicines is an urgent issue and protections will take time to implement.

She added that sponsors spent years working on the bill with various legislative committees, as well as the state departments of insurance and justice.

She says redoing the process is not a wise use of legislators’ time or taxpayer resources.

“Our elected officials overwhelmingly supported this bill,” she said. “They see the need, and I think it’s very, very important that they continue to take action and try to override the veto.”

Wiener, a Democrat from San Francisco, told CalMatters he is evaluating next steps for the bill, including reintroducing it next year.

“I firmly believe that the Legislature should override the veto from time to time,” he said. “We are an equal authority and we have the power to replace it. “I’m not saying we should do it willy-nilly, but periodically, on important issues, we should be willing to change our mind.”

That said, since it hasn’t happened in almost half a century, Wiener isn’t holding his breath.

“There is a cultural dynamic on Capitol Hill where veto override just doesn’t happen,” he said. “I think you have to figure everything out in advance, which is obviously always the preferred route,” he said. “But in that case… there’s really nothing to work with.”

Some lawmakers also say they understand the governor’s reasons for vetoing their bills.

Assemblyman Juan Alanis, a Modesto Republican, commended the governor for keeping the state budget in mind when he vetoed Alanis’ bill to address homelessness and youth unemployment.

The bill passed nearly every committee unanimously; by 97% of the votes in the Assembly and 100% of the votes in the Senate.

“I think it’s also our responsibility as lawmakers to pay attention to where taxpayer dollars are going to be able to see where they’re coming from,” he said.

Alanis said he would take into account the costs the governor raised in his veto and try again next year.

He said if the Legislature overrode the veto, it could only have the opportunity to do so a certain number of times. Therefore, in his opinion, it is worth reserving this option for important issues worth fighting for – for example, public safety issues.

“I think, I hope and I wish that we push this and use our power to do this,” he said. “I think time will tell whether we will continue to do this in the future – if he vetoes some of the bills that we think are really needed here in California.”

Thomas Gerrity, a member of the Digital Democracy team, contributed to this story.