No, I’m not referring to Governor Schwarzenegger’s heyday in cinema terminating cyborgs or director Quentin Tarantino’s ubiquitous movie character of the same name. What I am talking about is a literacy bill, Assembly Bill 1030, to be more exact. The author and first-term legislator, Assemblywoman Anna Caballero, (D-Salinas) targeted dropouts for special attention through the existing California Library Literacy and English Acquisition Program. The bill intended to focus libraries on helping dropouts between 16-25 years old learn practical literacy skills and according to some, was callously vetoed by our esteemed Governor, or so it seems.

Being a zealous promoter of literacy I wondered how anyone could kill a bill that ostensibly did just that. I received the same reaction from my family and friends, not to mention associates. The governor suddenly became "My Governor" as in "your son/daughter" just backed the family car into a hydrant. I admit I got a little defensive, but not so much to protect the Governor himself, as to protect the adversarial process so prevalent in American politics. All right, I confess, I minored in American Government but please don’t hold it against me.

The point is, a bill is not necessarily vetoed because of what it represents. Often a veto occurs because of the language or content. The bill’s author may have introduced additional requirements that may narrow or enlarge the scope of the bill’s original intent or perhaps a trailer, sometimes referred to as "pork" (because it usually benefits the author’s star constituents) is added, so the pork portion of the bill gets passed when the major ticket item does.

Another reason for veto may be the bill is mirrored in current law and becomes a duplication of effort. The Governor has attributed the latter as the reason for veto in this case. A brief analysis of the bill as submitted may reveal as much or quite possibly more.

As is often the case in politics there is more to an event than meets the eye. On its face the bill is all about literacy, but a closer look reveals another issue entirely e.g., funding. You see, in order for local libraries (city and county) to partake of the state’s generosity, a.k.a. mandate money, they must match their prior fiscal years’ budget of total private fundraising dollars. Ms. Caballero contends, since libraries are first in line to have their budgets cut, they should not have this burden hanging overhead and provided for as much in her proffered bill by deleting that requirement entirely.

While at first glance this makes perfect common sense it also removes the affixed safety net in current state law. That is to say, when the allotted monies run out, and without private funding they most certainly will, the local libraries will necessarily gnaw into the State coffers thereby supplanting state funds, as opposed to the currently preferred method of supplementation that private funds provide.

Furthermore, the fundraising portion represents the local incentive for being involved in the current projects. This is much like an employer matching funds in a 401K plan. If the employer matches little or no money the employee has little or no incentive to put much aside, however, if the employer matches or doubles the contribution employees tend to contribute more.

Additionally, these fundraising monies are also a reflection of the communities "good faith" in their own neighborhood libraries. According to California Library Literacy Services in 2005-06 the State allocated approximately $5 million for the [Literacy] Program. One hundred and one (101) library jurisdictions received funding and over 100,000 low-literacy adults and children were served.

At last count, that good faith money generated by local libraries has amounted to at least four times the amount the State budget allots each fiscal year, without any sign of decline. What this boils down to is the old adage near and dear to every politico’s heart nationwide and that is, "If it ain’t broke don’t fix it."

The Californian.com, an Internet magazine, quoted Gov. Schwarzenegger as saying, "This bill would simply authorize the provision of such services to a specific subgroup of the same youth population". Caballero responded, "That's the point." While this sounds like a meeting of the minds it’s really one of those so close yet so far things. Here the Governor is pointing out the subgroup already provided for is the same target group in Caballero’s bill. She says while this may be true, less than five per cent of that group took advantage of the service.

This bill would have provided a more focused outreach and programming to specifically meet their needs. As chair of the Assembly Select Committee on Youth Violence Prevention Caballero knows, perhaps better than most, how these young adults manage to slip through the cracks. First dropping out of school because of inferior literacy skills and then falling into the street culture of drugs and gangs and ultimately prison. These young adults need options and literacy skills need to be at the top of that list.

Assemblywoman Caballero received criticism from her constituents who said she didn’t push the bill hard enough and this being her first term, lack of experience was a factor in its failing. While voters have a right to their opinion Assemblywoman Caballero deserves much more credit for her effort.

Simply put, the bill was a victory by virtue of its defeat. Because of its duplicate effect chances of the bill passing were minimal. Coupled with eliminating the libraries fundraisers, we’re talking certain veto. So where’s the victory? A shrewd politician might say just in presenting the bill Ms. Caballero shows the state Library they have an ally. Then she draws attention to the lack of focus on young adults need for access to literacy programs. All amidst the indignant uproar of a literacy bill being vetoed. Not bad for government work, huh?

Author’s note: Sources consulted were: Senate Committee On Education, Jack Scott, Chair 2007-2008 Regular Session Assembly Bill 1030 Bill Analysis and The Californian.com, "Governor Vetoes Caballero Literacy Bill" (Oct., 12, 2007).