JUDGE GOES TOO FAR IN RULING ON FUND BILL

This strange business of state funding for family planning services and how a federal judge has, practically speaking, taken over the duties of both the legislative and executive branches of Missouri's government, continues to twist along a tortured trail.

It started last year when the Missouri Legislature appropriated funds for social services that included family planning, but specifically barred Planned Parenthood from receiving any of the funding as it had in the past. The legislators didn't want Planned Parenthood to get state funds, because the organization performs abortions at some of its clinics. Overwhelmingly, a majority of legislators are opposed to abortions.

Planned Parenthood sued, and a federal judge, Fernando J. Gaitan Jr., ruled that the Legislature's exclusion of Planned Parenthood was unconstitutional. In effect, the judge -- rather than the legislators and the governor -- decided where the funds should go.

This year, the Legislature took another stab at excluding Planned Parenthood from the state funding package. It changed the wording in an attempt to avoid the federal judge's previous order.

Here's where the story gets screwy. Gov. Mel Carnahan favors giving state funds to Planned Parenthood. But he signed the new funding bill this year and then immediately asked Attorney General Jay Nixon to go back to Judge Gaitan and find out of the exclusion of Planned Parenthood would pass muster. Nixon did nothing to defend the bill as passed by the Legislature, claiming instead he was representing the Department of Health in asking for the clarification.

The judge didn't mince any words. He said the this year's bill was just as rotten as last year's. In effect, he said the state had to give some of the family planning money to Planned Parenthood.

But wait a minute. Isn't the Legislature supposed to decide how money is spent? Particularly if the governor signs the bill?

It seems the process has been badly skewed. If the judge doesn't like the bill, throw it out. Make the Legislature go back to Jefferson City and pass another bill. But it just isn't right for a federal judge to decide how to spend taxpayers' money.

And then there is the cloud on the attorney general. Just exactly who is he supposed to represent? That's the issue behind an appeal of the judge's decision. Ten legislative leaders -- including both Republicans and Democrats -- are seeking to take the issue another step. Last week, Judge Gaitan ruled last week that the legislators had no legal standing to intervene. What? Aren't they the very legislators who passed the bill in the first place? No legal standing?

Now the legislators have appealed Gaitan's decision.

A larger issue remains: the duties of the attorney general. State Sen. Steve Ehlmann of St. Charles, a Republican, suggests there may be legislation next year to clarify the attorney general's role when state law is challenged in court. That might be a good law to consider, given the turn of events in the case of the family planning funding.