Susan Shelley: Jennifer Siebel Newsom scolds the press for doing its job

Like a homecoming queen at her 25th high school reunion, Jennifer Siebel Newsom expected more attention. 

“Ask about what we’re here for today. Don’t you think?” she demanded.

They were there, in Sacramento, for a bill signing and question-and-answer session about $90 million in new state funding for Planned Parenthood.

Siebel Newsom was irritated that journalists were asking her husband about other subjects, as reporters always do when the governor takes questions. That’s how you know you’re watching a news conference and not a cooking segment on the “Today” show.

A reporter asked a question about the closure of an oil refinery in the Bay Area, and after the governor answered it, his wife walked up to the microphone as if her name had just been announced as the winner of a Best Actress award. It was time to make everyone sit through her political speech.

“We have Planned Parenthood here and women are 51% of the population and the majority of the questions, all of these questions have really been about other issues,” Siebel Newsom complained. “You wonder why we have such a horrific war on women in this country and that these guys are getting away with it, and you don’t seem to care.”

Oh, please.

There is no “horrific war on women” in Washington, D.C., just the same ban on using federal funds to pay for abortion that has been the law since the Hyde Amendment was passed in 1976. President Biden signed Executive Orders 14076 and 14079 to try to provide some federal support for abortion. President Trump rescinded those orders. The One Big Beautiful Bill made clear that federal funds could not be used indirectly to pay for elective abortions. This was also the Obama administration’s policy.

There certainly was no “war on women” in front of Siebel Newsom at the bill-signing event. KCRA 3 political director Ashley Zavala pointed out that “most of the journalists in the room were women, including those representing television outlets, The Associated Press, Politico, The New York Times and CalMatters.” The only person attacking those women was Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

But since she’s insisting that we talk about the issue she was there to discuss, let’s talk about the sudden payment of $90 million to benefit Planned Parenthood while the state struggles to close a current budget deficit of at least $3 billion, and projected annual deficits of up to $35 billion.

How did $90 million materialize into the pockets of Planned Parenthood when the state doesn’t even have a budget yet?

The answer, it turns out, is that the $90 million is in last year’s budget. It wasn’t at the time. But it is now. 

Here’s how that happened. On March 20, 2025, the state Senate passed Senate Bill 106, one of many bills that were entirely blank except for these words: “Section 1. It is the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory changes relating to the Budget Act of 2025.”

On January 30, the blank bill went over to the Assembly where $90 million was amended into it for “funding grants to family planning providers for the provision of family planning services and family planning-related services.” The Assembly amendments also authorized the Department of Health Care Access and Information, in consultation with the California Health and Human Services Agency, to “determine the methodology and distribution of the grant funds.”

On February 9, both the Assembly and the Senate passed SB 106 and sent it to the governor’s desk. He signed it two days later, surrounded by female lawmakers and female Planned Parenthood employees and his wife, who complained that reporters didn’t care.

She’s lucky they didn’t, or they might have asked how a state that is running annual budget deficits as far as the eye can see could pull $90 million out of thin air to pay Planned Parenthood. By coincidence, the CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, Jodi Hicks, was a key supporter of Proposition 50, Newsom’s maneuver to convince voters to throw out the citizens’ redistricting commission’s congressional district maps and replace them with a bucket of blue paint.

By another coincidence, Jodi Hicks is married to the political consultant who drew the new partisan maps. 

But there’s nothing at all suspicious about $90 million of tax money being charged to last year’s budget to pay the organization that employs Jodi Hicks. This is not political patronage or payback. This is fine. 

Something else that’s fine is the stream of cash that keeps Siebel Newsom’s nonprofit organization generously funded by entities that, coincidentally, have business before the state.   

It’s legal in California for an elected official to call up businesses or individuals and ask them to donate to an entity for a charitable, legislative or governmental purpose. There are no contribution limits. There’s nothing to prevent an official from asking for donations to an entity that’s run by an immediate family member.

This is called a “behested payment.” Payments of $5,000 in a calendar year from a single source must be reported, and the reports are publicly available. 

Gov. Newsom regularly “behests” large sums of money for Siebel Newsom’s nonprofit organization, the California Partners Project, contributions that are reported as “charitable.” In 2024, Blue Shield of California Foundation agreed to give $50,000, the California Chamber of Commerce gave $25,000 and Pinterest gave $65,000. In 2021, the now-folded Silicon Valley Bank made four payments of $25,000 each. The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria donated $500,000 last year, bringing their total contributions to support the First Partner’s endeavors to $1.8 million.

In total, Gov. Newsom has hauled in more than $4.28 million dollars for his wife’s nonprofit by asking for these payments, a request backed up by the unspoken power of the office he holds. This is legal in California as long as the forms are filled out correctly.

If Siebel Newsom really wants journalists to pay more attention to what she’s doing, she’s likely to get her wish. Probably before the Iowa caucuses.

Write Susan@SusanShelley.com and follow her on X @Susan_Shelley