Governor's powers are divided into formal and informal powers. formal powers are powers of the governor derived from the state constitution or statute; informal powers are resources related to the person holding the office rather than the office itself ("Governors'," 2015) Formal powers differ across all states because the state constitution lays out different powers that a governor can have. Some examples of formal powers of governors are, tenure, appointment, executive order, executive amendment, veto [package veto, pocket veto, line item veto][etc.]. The ability to veto gives the governor leverage against other policy makers [they can threaten to veto] and gives them more control over final policy outcome. The governor is also able to check the executive branch by …show more content…
As important as informal powers are, I believe formal powers are more important because informal powers enhance the reach or the formal power. Someone can be very well spoken and charismatic but if they are unwilling to exercise formal powers or can't make sound policy decisions, they would not make a good governor and would have a hard time convincing the public that they were. However there are [successful] policy makers who are not known for their public speaking skills; for example Thomas Jefferson was such a bad public speaker that he declined to deliver a State of the Union address to Congress ("Standard," n.d.), or former governor/congressman Bobby jindal who “said what he wanted to say rather than what the audience wanted, or needed, to hear” (Baldoni, 2014). Of all the formal powers I think that The power of appointment is the most important because it allows the governor to surround themselves with people that they trust and who think similarly to them - more importantly it allows the governor to surround themselves with people that will agree with them and do what they
The office of president of the Republic of Texas was superseded and the state governor was first established in the Constitution of 1845 (“Phillip, Fry,” 2010) The Constitution of 1845 vested executive power in the governor and the election was done by the qualified voters of the State. In comparison, the Constitution of 1876 created plural executive, dividing the executive power among a governor, lieutenant-governor, Secretary of State, comptroller of public accounts, treasurer, commissioner of the general land office, attorney general and all of the officers of the executive department. All of these positions are elected by qualified voters except the Secretary of State who is appointed by the governor. The governor remains the commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the State and the militia in both the Constitutions. Also, the Constitution of 1845 placed a limit on the governor’s salary to two thousand dollars annually, which was amended on November 2, 1954 removing this limit. Although there has not been much change in the requirements to become a governor, the Constitution of 1845 limited the governor to two two-year terms in six years compared to the four-year term in the Constitution of 1876 (“Constitution of Texas,” n.d.; “Texas Constitution,” n.d.)
Harrison, L. H. (Ed.). (2004). Kentucky Governors (Updated ed., pp. 217-220). Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.
As the President of the United States, a president have powers that other members of the government do not. Presidential power can be defined in numerous ways. Political scientists Richard Neustadt and William Howell give different views on what is presidential power. These polarized views of presidential powers can be used to compare and contrast the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Can you imagine president controlling your life? The constitution use three different forms to make a group or a person from getting too much power on his hands. The are three types of power that each contusion have in order to keep power equal. One of them is Legislative Branch Congress “Can approve Presidential nominations”(Document C). It’s a example how governments try to keep power equal.
...iminal code, and the Court of Criminal Appeals, both are equal in prominence and decision-making capability. M most positions in the US Government outside of the President and Congress are appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate. In Texas, only the Governor's and Lt. Governor's aides and some cabinet positions are appointed, all other positions are elected, including that of the State Attorney General, Comptroller of Public Accounts (basically, the State Accountant and Tax Assessor), and Railroad Commissioner (who controls and regulates the state's land and mineral resources).
Special sessions can be called to complete unfinished tasks, discuss and outline the budget for the next fiscal year, cut the budget in an economic downfall incident, and if a war or natural disaster occurs. Last but definitely not least, the greatest power and influence the governor can have in office is by being what makes a politician so successful and popular, which is by building relationships and making friends within the bureaucracy. Since the governor of Texas has less formal power than most state governors have, they must develop collaborative relationships in order to construct their goals and achieve them. By developing relationships and appointing members to various boards, they can shift and reorganize the structure and environment of the bureaucratic system. Using the governor’s message power, which is any communication between the governor and the legislature, including the State of the State message, can be a great resource for the governor to use to promote and influence the legislature to pass certain bills or push for their agenda to be the top priority of
Our government here in Texas has three major parts that play a significant part in our decision making process. These levels have been deigned to decentralize power and make it more affective for the public's needs. The primary level is the Texas legislature. It is almost a given to say that everyone has at least heard of the legislature. Some variables that the legislature contains are the Lt. Governor, the Speaker of the house of Representatives and Committee Chairs. The Speaker acts as the presiding officer over the house and has two levels of power. These two levels are institutional powers which allow the officer to preside over the Legislative Audit Committee and Sunset Advisory Committee.
Here in Connecticut and across the nation, governors are often considered the key figures in state politics. Governors are considered key figures because they hold the supreme power of the state, this power is vested in them through the state constitutions. According to Gary Rose’s book, Connecticut Government and Politics,
Unlike the United States Executive Branch, where the President of the United States appoints his cabinet, the Executive Department of the State of Texas is all elected by the public with the exception of the Secretary of State and the State Board of Education, which are appointed. With this power being distributed by the voters, it makes the Executive Branch less powerful than the other two branches in the state. This weakness in the branch was even stated in a Wall Street Journal article by Jonathan Weisman in 2011, “By constitutional design that dates to Reconstruction, Texas has a weak governorship. In addition to the legislature, power is diffused among 270 agencies, boards and commissions”. This statement alone certainly conveys that the Executive Branch has clearly been weaker than the other two branches of authority in the State of Texas.
In Mellon’s article, several aspects are mentioned supporting the belief that the prime minister is too powerful. One significant tool the prime minister possesses is “… the power to make a multitude of senior governmental and public service appointments both at home and abroad,” (Mellon 164). Mellon goes on to state the significance the prime minister has when allowed to appoint the government’s key member...
The power of the Executive branch has expanded over time to become the most authoritative division of government. In contrast to the Constitution 's fundamental designer, James Madison, who predicted the Legislative branch would dominate due to it’s power in making laws and regulating taxes/spending, the executive powers have proven to be superior and ever broadening. From the birth of the Republic, the President has sought to protect his rights and seek beyond his restriction of power. Setting the precedent as early as 1795, George Washington refused to relay documents relating to the Jay Treaty to the House of Representatives and saw his actions as a justified act of “executive prerogative.” Moreover, weaving throughout the Nineteenth century, presidents such as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln conceived and added functions, such as the extensive use of the veto and the president’s direct and active role as Commander in Chief to their executive tool-belt. The Constitution communicates very little details regarding the President’s use of the power of veto and the role as Commander in Chief, but it was these presidents which established the major authority of the executive branch in these areas.
Several aspects of the executive branch give the presidency political power. The president’s biggest constitutional power is the power of the veto (Romance, July 27). This is a power over Congress, allowing the president to stop an act of Congress in its tracks. Two things limit the impact of this power, however. First, the veto is simply a big “NO” aimed at Congress, making it largely a negative power as opposed to a constructive power (July 27). This means that the presidential veto, while still quite potent even by its mere threat, is fundamentally a reactive force rather than an active force. Second, the presidential veto can be overturned by two-thirds of the House of Representatives and Senate (Landy and Milkis, 289). This means that the veto doesn’t even necessarily hav...
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.
in any group of people, and there will be struggle to achieve it--be it a
...ot function properly. Politics and administration should be seen as very interconnected. It is worth reiterating just as the structure of governments has changed over the years, the structure and role of public administration have also changes dramatically. Furthermore, it is important to state that public administration has grown from its traditional role of merely implementing policies adopted by the “political” branches of government to playing very significant role in the formation of public policies. This is definitely more evident in regards to professional expertise bureaucratic officials provide during problem identification, agenda setting, policy formulation, and evaluation that shape the content of public policy today. Overall, the idea that Wilson has proposed gives an accurate idea of what the relationship should be between politics and administration.