The (Lack of) Gender Dynamics of Gubernatorial Executive Orders

How do governors utilize state executive orders to effect policy changes? Are there differences between male and female governors? Though various works have examined the dynamics of presidential executive orders, few have examined how governors employ executive orders at the state level. We present results of a pilot study on how gender influences use of gubernatorial executive orders. Contrary to much of the literature on gender dynamics, we find minimal differences in the ways that female and male governors use gubernatorial executive orders. Female governors do not appear to rely more or less on unilateral orders than do their male colleagues. Although we do find some evidence that female governors are less likely to issue cultural and economic executive orders than socialissue and public-health executive orders, the difference between female and male governors across most issue areas is minimal. These results have important implications on studies of gender dynamics, the unilateral executive, and gubernatorial behavior

Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors: 2008

Revenue poured into state governments as the U.S. economy expanded between 2003 and 2007, prompting the nation's governors to expand state budgets and offer the occasional tax cut. But now that the economy has slowed and revenue growth is down, governors are taking various actions to close rising budget deficits. This ninth biennial fiscal report card examines the tax and spending decisions made by the governors since 2003. It uses statistical data to grade the governors on their taxing and spending records -- governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades, while those who have increased taxes and spending the most receive the lowest grades. Three governors were awarded an "A" in this report card -- Charlie Crist of Florida, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Eight governors were awarded an "F" -- Martin O'Malley of Maryland, Ted Kulongoski of Oregon, Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, Chet Culver of Iowa, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Bob Riley of Alabama, Jodi Rell of Connecticut, and C. L. "Butch" Otter of Idaho. Republican governors, on average, received slightly higher grades than Democratic governors. More importantly, there has been a disappointing lack of major spending reforms among governors of both parties in recent years. State tax policies have also been uninspiring. Most tax cuts pursued by the governors have been small and targeted breaks, not broad-based rate cuts that can foster economic growth. Fiscal policies need to be improved if the states are to meet the huge challenges ahead. Medicaid costs continue to rise, state debt is soaring, and the pension and health care plans of state workers have huge funding gaps. At the same time, rising international tax competition makes it imperative that states cut tax rates to attract jobs and investment. Governors don't have an easy job, but they do need to pursue more aggressive fiscal reforms to meet the challenges of an increasingly competitive economy

Governing New Jersey: Reflections on the Publication of a Revised and Expanded Edition of \u27The Governors of New Jersey\u27

New Jersey’s chief executive enjoys more authority than any but a handful of governors in the United States. Historically speaking, however, New Jersey’s governors exercised less influence than met the eye. In the colonial period few proprietary or royal governors were able to make policy in the face of combative assemblies. The Revolutionary generation’s hostility to executive power contributed to a weak governor system that carried over into the 19th and 20th centuries, until the Constitution was thoroughly revised in 1947. Before that date a handful of governors, by dint of their ideas and personalities, affected the polity in meaningful ways. Derived from a lecture delivered at Rutgers University’s Eagleton Institute on March 11, 2014, this essay focuses on the long history of the executive office, assessing individual governors and delineating the qualities that made them noteworthy, for good or ill

Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors: 2002

Against the backdrop of the worst state budget crunch in years, this report presents the findings of Cato Institute's sixth biennial fiscal policy report card on the nation's governors. The report card's grading is based on 17 objective measures of each governor's fiscal performance. Governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades. Those who have increased spending and taxes the most receive the lowest grades.This year, two governors receive the highest grade of A: Bill Owens of Colorado and Jeb Bush of Florida. Four governors receive the lowest grade of F: Gray Davis of California, Don Sundquist of Tennessee, Bob Taft of Ohio, and John Kitzhaber of Oregon.Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Stephen Slivinski, a former fiscal policy analyst at the Cato Institute, is director of tax and budget studies at the Goldwater Institute.The governors of some of America's most populous states and their grades are George Pataki of New York, B; George Ryan of Illinois, D; and John Engler of Michigan, B.State governments faced a combined budget gap of more than $40 billion in 2002, largely as a result of an overspending binge in the 1990s. Most governors will confront more tough budget choices in 2003. We hope that governors do not make the mistake of raising taxes to try to balance budgets, as many did in the economic slowdown of the early 1990s. Instead, by reducing spending and cutting tax rates, governors can return their states to fiscal and economic health. If they do, we will have many high grades to reward on the next Cato fiscal report card

Gubernatorial Power and the Nationalization of State Politics

Reviewing Saladin M. Ambar, How Governors Built the Modern American Presidency (2012) and Thad Kousser & Justin H. Phillips, The Power of American Governors: Winning on Budgets and Losing on Policy

Leadership Matters: Governors' Pre-K Proposals, Fiscal Year 2009

Through an annual review of governors' budget proposals and state of the state addresses, rates governors' commitments to early education, from "heroes" to "all talk and no action." Summarizes all state and District of Columbia pre-K budget changes

Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors: 2004

As states continue to claw their way out of the worst state budget hole in years, this report presents the findings of the Cato Institute's seventh biennial fiscal policy report card on the nation's governors. The report card's grading is based on 15 objective measures of fiscal performance. Governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades. Those who have increased spending and taxes the most receive the lowest grades. Our analysis shows that states that keep tax rates low and restrain spending growth have the best economic performance and thus the best longterm fiscal health.This year, four governors receive the grade of A: Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Craig Benson of New Hampshire, Bill Owens of Colorado, and Judy Martz of Montana. Four governors receive Fs for their poor performance in dealing with the state fiscal crisis: Bob Holden of Missouri, Bob Taft of Ohio, Edward Rendell of Pennsylvania, and James McGreevey of New Jersey.The grades of the governors of some of America's most populous states are Jeb Bush of Florida, B; George Pataki of New York, B; Rick Perry of Texas, B; and Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, D

Governing the governors : a case study of college governance in English further education

This paper addresses the nature of governors in the governance of further education colleges in an English context (1). It explores the complex relationship between governors (people/agency), government (policy/structure) and governance (practice), in a college environment. While recent research has focused on the governance of schooling and higher education there has been little attention paid to the role of governors in the lifelong learning sector. The objective of the paper is to contribute to the debate about the purpose of college governance at a time when the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) commissioning era ends, and new government bodies responsible for further education and training, including local authorities, arrive. The paper analyses the nature of FE governance through the perspectives and experiences of governors, as colleges respond to calls from government for greater improvement and accountability in the sector (LSIS, 2009a). What constitutes creative governance is complex and controversial in the wider framework of regulation and public policy reform (Stoker, 1997; Seddon, 2008). As with other tricky concepts such as leadership, professionalism and learning, college governance is best defined in the contexts, cultures and situations in which it is located. College governance does not operate in a vacuum. It involves governors, chairs, principals, professionals, senior managers, clerks, community, business and wider agencies, including external audit and inspection regimes. Governance also acts as a prism through which national education and training reforms are mediated, at local level. While governing bodies are traditionally associated with the business of FE - steering, setting the tone and style, dealing with finance, funding, audit and procedural matters – they are increasingly being challenged to be more creative and responsive to the wider society. Drawing on a recent case study of six colleges, involving governors and key policy stakeholders, this paper explores FE governance in a fast changing policy environment

Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors: 2006

This report presents the findings of the Cato Institute's eighth biennial fiscal policy reportcard on the nation's governors. The report card's grading is based on 23 objective measures of fiscal performance. Governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades. Those who have increased spending and taxes the most receive the lowest grades

Estimating the Impact of Gubernatorial Partisanship on Policy Settings and Economic Outcomes: A Regression Discontinuity Approach

Using panel data from US states over the period 1941-2002, I measure the impact of gubernatorial partisanship on a wide range of different policy settings and economic outcomes. Across 32 measures, there are surprisingly few differences in policy settings, social outcomes and economic outcomes under Democrat and Republican Governors. In terms of policies, Democratic Governors tend to prefer slightly higher minimum wages. Under Republican Governors, incarceration rates are higher, while welfare caseloads are higher under Democratic Governors. In terms of social and economic outcomes, Democratic Governors tend to preside over higher median post-tax income, lower posttax inequality, and lower unemployment rates. However, for 26 of the 32 dependent variables, gubernatorial partisanship does not have a statistically significant impact on policy outcomes and social welfare. I find no evidence of gubernatorial partisan differences in tax rates, welfare generosity, the number of government employees or their salaries, state revenue, incarceration rates, execution rates, pre-tax incomes and inequality, crime rates, suicide rates, and test scores. These results are robust to the use of regression discontinuity estimation, to take account of the possibility of reverse causality. Overall, it seems that Governors behave in a fairly non-ideological manner.median voter theorem, partisanship, state government, taxation, expenditure, welfare, crime, growth