Chapter 6: Governors and the Executive Branch



Chapter 6: Governors and the Executive Branch

Tasks: Mapping, Univariate, Scatterplot, Cross-tabulation

Data: STATES, USTRENDS, USPRES

During the colonial period of U.S. history, the governor was usually appointed by the British crown and had a great deal of power and authority over legislation. However, after the Revolutionary war, governors were viewed as the symbols of former English rule. Thus, the powers of governors in the newly created states were weakened as a symbol of the distrust Americans had for executive power. The newly written state constitutions had an early emphasis on legislative authority and diminished powers for state governors.

However, over the years, with the faltering and perceived weaknesses of state legislatures and the growing demands citizens placed on state government, governors have gradually gained more power and many of the early restrictions that limited their roles in state politics and policy were removed or greatly reduced. Certainly, compared to the President, most governors appear to be “weak” executives because they do not command the media attention for their actions and their policies. However, the image of weak governors is rapidly changing stereotype. Today, state governors have emerged as the most significant forces in state policymaking.

The importance of governors did not happen overnight. It has taken several years for governors to shed the negative image most Americans have had of state executives. During the 1960s and 1970s, most Americans had a negative view of government.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.1]

|> Data File: |USTREND |

|> Task: |Historical Trends |

|> Variables: |78) GOV.CROOK? |

During this era of civil rights, this negative impression of our elected leaders was especially focused on state governors. Governors were viewed as obstructionist men (and they were all men) who opposed progress and innovation. For example, many people often recall the image and actions of Alabama governor George Wallace who adamantly fought against integration and fought to maintain the policies of segregation.

But today, governors, when compared to the Congress and state legislatures, are viewed as policy innovators and able to make swift and decisive decisions. In this way, governors are becoming more like the President in that they enjoy higher approval ratings than state legislatures. Also, like the President, the foremost resource of the modern governor is that of persuasion – the use of charm, personal appeal, solid arguments and the status of the office – to pursue their own policy agendas.

Career Path

In terms of a career pattern, it is typical for most governors to have started out in state legislatures or some other high profile state or local office. For example, many governors have been local prosecuting attorneys. Several governors have jumped straight from the state legislature directly to the governorship. Some have been lieutenant governors or holders of another state-wide elective office, such as secretary of state or attorney general, prior to becoming governor.

Today, governors are even considered prime candidates for the office of President. In recent years being a governor has replaced membership in the U.S. senate as the immediate steppingstone to the White House. This has not always been the case throughout U.S. history.

First let’s look at the number of presidents who were governors before the Civil War. In order to do this, we will use the subsetting facility of MicroCase to look only at pre-Civil War presidents.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.2]

|> Data File: |USPRES |

|> Task: |Univariate |

|> Primary Variable: |21) GOV? |

|> Subset Variables |35) ERA |

|> View: |Pie |

Once you select 35) ERA as the subset variable, a menu will appear with categories to select. Use your mouse to check off the category for pre-Civil War presidents. Make sure that the option of “Include Selected Categories” has a black dot in the circle. If this option is not selected, click on it with your mouse.

As you can see, 14 pre-Civil War presidents (or 87.5%) never served as a governor prior to becoming president. Only 2 pre-Civil War presidents (or 12.5%) were governors before they were president.

Now let’s contrast this period to post-Civil War presidents. To do this, let’s click on the “change variables” button at the top right of the screen; then click on the 35) ERA variable to highlight it and then right click on the variable and select the “modify” option. Now, deselect the pre-Civil War category and check off the category for post-Civil War presidents.

During this period, as you can see, 14 presidents (or 53.8%) were not governors before becoming president but 12 post-Civil War presidents (or 46.2%) held the office of governor before being elected to the highest office in the land.

Another measure of the increased prestige of governors can be found in the fact that of the four of the last five presidents were former governors (only George H. Bush was not a governor). Carter was the governor of Georgia, Reagan was the governor of California, Clinton was the governor of Arkansas and George W. Bush was the governor of Texas. Recently, we have also seen some members of Congress leave their seats to run for governor of their state.

Roles of the Governor

Governors play several important roles within their state and state governments. Governors, in their various roles, must deal with an assortment of activities, both in regards to policy and administration. Governors serve as chief of state, commander in chief and chief administrator.

In their role as chief of state, governors represent their state on important formal occasions and in events dealing with other states or the national government. Dealing with the national government has increasingly become an important job for governors. It has not only become important to the political careers of governors but it has become an increasingly essential in regards to state fiscal affairs. Governors are not only central political figures within their states but are also major intergovernmental political figures. In a highly fragmented and diffused intergovernmental system, state governors are a pivotal link between the states and the national government. Today, they must be able to manage and attract money from the federal government.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.3]

|> Data File: |STATES |

|> Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |32) %REVFED00 |

|> View: |Map |

|> Display |Legend |

In this map, the darker the state the higher the percentage of revenue the state government receives from the federal government (in 2000). The states shown in the lightest color receive lower percentages of revenue from the federal government. From this map you might notice that there is no discernible regional pattern in terms of revenues states receive from the feds. That is, no one region appears to get more money from the federal government than another.

Now let’s look at the actual percentages.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.4]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|Variable 1: |32) %REVFED00 |

|> View: |List: Rank |

North Dakota ranked highest with 28.8% of its total revenue coming from the federal government. West Virginia ranked second with 27.5%. Montana ranked third with 26.9% of its revenue coming from the federal government. Moving down this list you discover that Nevada had the lowest percentage of federal revenues (12.9%), followed by Virginia (14.1%) and New Jersey (15.3%).

In the role as commander in chief, governors have control over the National Guard. However, when National Guard troops are called into duty by the national government, the guard is under the direction of the President. The National Guard (formerly called the state militia) may be called into service by the governor to perform rescue and relief missions in the event of a natural disaster or to enforce the law in instances of civil disorder, such as riots, labor strikes or campus disturbances.

As chief administrator, the governor is the state’s chief bureaucrat. Generally, governors are responsible for the management of all state administrative agencies. These agencies have grown both in terms of budgets and employees

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.5]

|> Data File: |USTRENDS |

|> Task: |Historical Trends |

|> Variables: |58) #ST&LC EMP |

As you can see, the growth in state and local employees has increased significantly over time. In 1945 there were slightly more than 317,000 state and local employees. Since the end of World War II, state and local employment has increased to more than 17 million employees. Along with the management of these agencies, the governor is also in charge of preparing the state’s budget and overseeing the implementation of state programs.

However, in some states, the governor’s role as chief administrator is weakened by the fact that agencies in the executive branch are independently elected and not part of a governor’s cabinet. Thus, if a governor wanted an agency or department to take some kind of policy action, he or she must convince the head of that agency, who may or may not be a member of the governor’s party, to go along with the governor’s request.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.6]

|> Data File: |STATES |

|> Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |112) #STELEC |

|> View: |Map |

|> Display |Legend |

As you can see, across the country every governor has to compete against another statewide elect official – anywhere from 2 to 12 others. Nevertheless, most states have a cabinet form of executive branch organization that concentrates responsibility and authority in the hands of the governor and creates a cabinet of department secretaries who are appointed by the governor. We will look more closely at these other statewide elected officials later in this chapter.

Governors, particularly in large states, also have a number of political and administrative staff. These staff members provide the governor with assistance to deal with the often complex and diverse problems facing the states. These staff may include those who work with the legislature, those who do liaison work with administrative agencies, federal agencies and local governments. There are staff members who also function as personal aids to the governor, such as a press secretary, budget director and executive secretary. Other staff may include a legal adviser and at least one speechwriter if not a team of them.

Research suggests that the governors’ staff members tend to be young (in their thirties), well educated and have political experiences and ambitions. Most of them have participated in election campaigns either for the governor or some other candidate of the same party. Many, of course, are lawyers. There are also a few professional planners, engineers, political scientists and public administrators who work on specific projects and a number of people with journalism or media backgrounds that advise the governor on public and press relations. The majority of these staff members are generally personal appointees of the governor. Party leaders usually play a minimal role in the selection of the governor’s staff.

Formal Powers of the Governor

State residents expect their governor to take on many leadership roles and responsibilities. Citizens expect the governor to take address a variety of state problems ranging from economic development to long lines at the DMV. Generally, however, these public expectations far exceed the powers governors have to solve many citizen concerns.

Throughout the states, governors differ in the amount of formal executive and legislative power given them by state constitutions and in the amount of political leadership they can exert on any single issue. When we talk about the powers of governors, we are talking about their formal powers. Formal powers are those powers that can be found in a state’s constitution or statutes. The more important formal powers are those dealing with tenure, appointment, control over budget, and ability to veto legislation.

Tenure

During the past 30 years, there has been a strong trend toward giving governors four year terms. Historically, governors had short terms in office – usually one or two years. Gradually states moved to four-year terms for governors, which today can be found in almost all the states.

Another element of tenure power is term limits. A few states follow the model of the U.S. constitution which limits the president to serving two terms. In these states, governors can only serve two terms. Other states limit the number of consecutive terms to two terms as well. So, it would be possible for a governor to serve two four-year terms, leave office for one term and then serve another two terms.

Appointment

Another power that governors have is their appointment powers. Appointment power is the strongest when the governor can appoint people to any position without the approval of the legislature. Despite limitations on appointive power, it can be a powerful way for governors to influence state policy. Certainly, just because a governor appoints a person to a particular position does not mean that official will always agree with the governor but generally a governor will appoint someone with similar values and views on the issues as the governor. Having as many like-minded public officials in the government can only help a governor accomplish his or hers goals and priorities.

Budget

An important formal power most governors do have over the administration of state government is in regard to budgeting. Through an executive budgeting system state agencies must get their spending proposals approved by the governor or the governor’s budget director. The governor then submits a single executive budget request to the state legislature for approval.

Veto

In most states, every bill passed by the legislature must be accepted or rejected by the governor. If the governor accepts the bill, he or she signs it and it becomes a state law. However, if the governor rejects the bill, this is known as a veto. In the event that a governor vetoes a bill, most states require more than a majority of votes (usually two-thirds) of both houses of the legislature to override the governor’s veto. If the legislature does override a governor’s veto, the bill becomes a law without the governor’s signature. Also, some states give the governor the power to add amendments to a bill without vetoing the entire act. This allows the governor to resubmit the legislation to the legislature with the proposed changes. The legislature may either adopt the legislation with the proposed amendments or it can reject them and simply adopt the original bill.

Another type of veto found in the majority of the states is the item veto. This power is used to reject specific items contained appropriation bills. The objective of this veto is to give the governor a tool to limit spending for programs the governor feels are unwise or unnecessary without vetoing the entire bill. The goal of the item veto was to give the governor the power to limit state spending.

Index of Gubernatorial Power

Dr. Thad Beyle (unc.edu/~beyle) has, for many years, researched the formal powers of governors. Dr. Beyle has constructed a “Governor’s Power Rating” based on his on-going study of executive powers. The power rating he developed is based on six measures of institutional power – tenure, appointment power, the number of other statewide elected officials, budget power, veto power and party control. States are rated on a scale of 1 to 6 with 6 representing governors who have the strongest power. The results from 2002 indicate a national average of 3.5.

Let’s examine the specific states.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.7]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |111) GOVPWRRAT |

|> View: |List: Rank |

In 2002, the states of Utah (4.2 on the six-point scale), West Virginia (4.1), New York (4.1) and Alaska (4.1) give their governors the strongest formal powers. Governors in Vermont (2.5), Rhode Island (2.6) North Carolina (2.7) and Alabama (2.8) have the weakest institutional powers.

Governor and State Policy

A number of studies have documented the rise of American governors as major policymakers, even policy innovators. The policies of governors not only impact within their borders but many of their policies extend beyond their state borders. For example, state economic development policies have great impacts on the policies of neighboring states as well as national economic growth. Many governors have become famous for their innovative approaches to policy problems. State governors are frequently in the forefront of domestic policymaking, especially in areas of health, education and welfare.

A governor’s legislative agenda is generally outlined in the “state of the state” address given at the beginning of each legislative session. The message is then followed with the specific proposals of the plan, having been drafted by the governor’s staff, and introduced in the legislature by one of the governor’s supporters. Oftentimes this is the Speaker of the House or the leader of the governor’s party in the legislature. Governors usually maintain regular contact with these legislative leaders throughout the legislative session to chart the progress of their initiatives. As we discussed earlier in this chapter, much of this liaison work is done by the governor’s staff, most of whom have had previous legislative experience or contact.

Traditionally we are taught that under the separation of powers principles the governor and the executive branch have the job of implementing the policies determined by the state legislature. However, in reality, the job of the governor has evolved into the central state institution for the initiation of many legislative policies. Governors and their staff put together legislative proposals and attempt to secure enough votes for their adoption in the legislature. Today, governors find themselves constantly involved in proposing, explaining and justifying their policies and programs. In most states, governors spend a good deal of their time meeting with legislators, interest groups and administrators and communicating with the public on matters of public policy.

Obviously governors are deeply involved in the formulation of public policy because they are elected officials who have promises to keep. They often promise to cut taxes, reform welfare, struggle against entrenched interest groups, combat crime, protect the environment and improve educational quality. As a statewide elected official, governors have a large number of diverse constituents they must please. Moreover, when compared to the governor, state legislatures lack the time, expertise and resources to deal with many of the complex problems facing states. Thus, in many states, legislatures have become dependent upon the recommendations of governors and their more professional staff and administrators.

Of course, no governor has the time or the inclination to devote a great amount of attention to every aspect of state policy. Many state policies are formulated and implemented by administrative agencies. As far as these administrative agencies are concerned many operate more or less the same in terms of basic programs no matter who is governor. Agencies to which the governor pays the closest attention are those concerned with major state functions, those which are currently of political importance and those whose activities are of personal concern to the governor. Thus, governors pay much attention to agencies concerned with highways, education, and welfare. State agencies concerned with economic development are also an important concern to governors. Governors are commonly interested in attracting industries to their state or increasing tourism. Therefore they may pay particular attention to economic development commissions or agencies. Also, it is not uncommon, today, for states to have a commission or department focused on film and television to increase production of movies and TV shows in their states.

Sometimes a governor may take a personal interest in a less important state agency. For example, a governor may be an avid outdoor enthusiast and may take an interest in the activities of the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation. We will discuss administrative agencies and state bureaucracies in greater detail in Chapter 7.

Unified or partisan control of state government

In today’s political environment, it is common for a governor from one party to find himself or herself having to face a legislature controlled by members of the opposite party. That is, a Republican governor must pass his or her legislative agenda through a legislature controlled by Democrats. This occurrence is known as a “divided government.” It has become particularly common in the south where Republicans have made inroads and it is also quite common across other parts of the U.S. where citizens are less and less frequently voting a straight party ticket.

When one party controls both the governorship and the legislature, this is known as “unified government.” Obviously, unified government would be a great advantage for a governor and the party in control. We would imagine that under unified government, the party in power would be able to pass more of the policies they want since consensus could be more easily reached between the governor and the legislature. However, when the governor and the legislature are under the control of the same party, there can be immense pressure for them to produce results.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.8]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |43) UNIFCONT94 |

|> View: |Map |

|> Display |Legend |

This map shows, in 1994, the states with unified partisan control in dark red and the states with divided government in the light yellow. As you can see, 19 states had unified party control in 1994 while 31 were divided governments. As we discussed, we find many of the states with divided government are in the south and Sunbelt regions where Republicans have begun to win more elected offices.

Gubernatorial elections

Gubernatorial elections are becoming separate from the issues and personalities of national elections. To a certain extent, this is happening because many gubernatorial elections are being held when there is no presidential election. Having “off-year” elections reduces the likelihood that voters’ evaluations of presidential candidates will affect their evaluation of gubernatorial candidates. Several states, though, do elect their governors in the same years that a president is elected.

An important factor when voters are deciding on who should be their next governor is state economic conditions. It is quite common for state economic conditions to affect the reelection success of incumbent governors. This is called Retrospective Voting. If voters think their state’s economy is performing poorly, then they tend to blame the person sitting in the governor’s office. If the economy is doing well, voters give credit to the governor. We used to think that economic conditions were solely affected by national policies. Now, it seems that governors, by working to attract businesses to their state through tax incentives and other economic development policies are being viewed by voters as managers of the health of the economy in their state.

Gubernatorial campaigns are becoming more and more expensive. Gubernatorial races are the most expensive political races at the state and local level.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.9]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |118) $VOTE/GUB |

|> View: |Map |

|> Display |Legend |

The campaign costs per vote in the 2000gubernatorial election are reflected in this map. Essentially, this map shows us how much each candidate for governor spent for each vote they received in the general election. That is, how much did it cost to “buy” each vote? The states that appear to have the most expensive costs appear to be located along the east and west coasts of the country. But there also appears to be a few surprises. Let’s take a look at the individual states.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.10]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|Variable 1: |118) $VOTE/GUB |

|View: |List: Rank |

Nevada had the highest gubernatorial election campaign costs per vote at with $24.89. This means that the candidate essentially spent $25 for each vote he or she received. Georgia had the second highest campaign costs at $21.51 per vote followed by Hawaii where each vote received cost $19.27. Kentucky had the lowest per vote campaign costs at $2.49. A pretty good bargain! Maine ($2.59) and Washington ($2.71) followed Kentucky.

In the 2002 general election for governor of California, Gray Davis (D) spent $46.9 million to defeat Bill Simon (R), who spent $46.3 million. The expenditures by these two candidates set a new record for spending in a general election race for governor.

Other Statewide Elected Executives

In most states the governor must also share their executive power with a number of other statewide elected officials. Unlike the national level, where the President and Vice President are the only popularly elected executives, many states fill several of their executive branch positions through election. As of 2000, there were 305 statewide elected executives including governor and lieutenant governor.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.11]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |112) #STELEC |

|> View: |List: Rank |

The federal pattern of holding elections for only the chief executive and running mate (i.e. president and vice president) is not followed by the states. States commonly elect the lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, controller, treasurer and auditor separately. However, some states elected agency heads and other executive branch officials as well. Here we see the number of statewide elected officials in 2000. North Dakota elected 12 statewide officials. Next is North Carolina (10) and Florida (10). About 80 percent of the states elect 5 or more statewide officials. In contrast, 11 states elected four or fewer state officials and Maine, New Hampshire and New Jersey only elect 1 statewide official.

Let’s briefly discuss the most common statewide elected officials.

Lieutenant Governor

The job of the lieutenant governor is comparable to that of the vice president. Essentially, the lieutenant governor is first in line to succeed the governor in the event of the governor’s death or some other early departure from office. In about one-fourth of the states, the lieutenant governor presides over the state senate when it is in session. However, not every state has a lieutenant governor.

Attorney General

The attorney general serves as the legal adviser to the state government. A state’s attorney general is responsible for providing legal advice to the many state agencies, boards and commission as well as the legislature. In many states, the attorney general’s office has several hundred lawyers. For example, the attorney’s general office in the state of Washington has more than 400 lawyers. The attorney general also represents the state in lawsuits and aids county prosecutors in highly visible and complex cases. However, in about half of the states, the attorney general does not have to be a licensed attorney. In the vast majority of the states, the attorney general is popularly elected (separate from the governor). Several attorneys general have gone on to become governors and some have become well-known national political figures. For example, Bill Clinton was the attorney general of Arkansas before becoming the state’s governor and eventually president.

Secretary of State

The duties of the secretary of state are to keep the state records. In just over a third of the states, the secretary of state is elected. The secretary of state also supervises the preparation of election ballots and certifies election results. Several secretaries of state have become governors. Jerry Brown of California is probably one of the best known examples.

Treasurer, auditor and controller

Most states have an elected treasurer who is usually responsible for tax collection, the safekeeping of state funds and the actual spending of the state’s money. A state treasurer may also be responsible for investing public funds in order to maximize the state’s financial resources. If the treasurer is not elected, the position is chosen by the governor or in some cases the legislature.

The principle job of the state auditor is to make sure the legislature properly spends state money. This function is known as a “post-audit.” The state auditor is also responsible for auditing all public offices, including cities; schools; universities; counties; townships; and state agencies, boards, and commissions. The auditor makes sure that public funds are spent according to legislative intent and without corruption.

A “pre-audit” is the approval of spending before it is actually spent on a state program or policy. This is typically done by the state controller. The controller is usually in charge of administering the state accounting system and the state's debt collection program. Unlike the state treasurer and auditor, the controller is only elected in a handful of states. Usually, the controller is appointed by an agency head, such as the head of the department of finance.

The treasurer, auditor and controller are not found in every state but the functions they perform are done by some executive branch administrator in every state government.

Women in executive branch

We learned in Chapter 5 that women have made great strides in getting elected to state legislatures. The same is true for women getting elected to state-wide executive offices. In recent years, women have had great success in being elected governors, lieutenant governors, attorneys general, treasurers, controllers, secretaries of state, secretaries of education, labor and other executive branch agencies.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.12]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |119) WOM_EXEC |

|> View: |List: Rank |

This table shows the number of women holding state-wide elective executive office in 2001. The number of women elected to executive office differs among the states. In Arizona, there are 5 women holding an executive office, leading the nation. This is followed by several states that had 4 women in executive office. These include Minnesota, South Dakota, Connecticut, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Indiana and Washington. By comparison seven states did not have a single woman holding a state wide elective executive office. These states are West Virginia, Maine, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Kentucky, Virginia, and Oregon.

Let’s compare women elected to state wide office with the number of state wide positions in each state.

[insert MicroCase graphic 6.13]

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|Variable 1: |119) WOM EXEC |

|> Variable 2: |112) #STELEC |

|> Views: |List: Rank |

As you recall, Arizona had 5 women holding a state-wide elected executive office. When you compare that to the number of state-wide elected offices available, you find that Arizona has 6 state-wide offices. Thus, 5 of their 6 executive offices were held by women in 2001. On the other hand, Oregon has 6 state-wide offices but they had no women serving in these positions.

Now it’s your turn to examine governors and their impact on states and state policy.

WORKSHEET: CHAPTER 6: Governors

REVIEW QUESTIONS

Based on the first part of this chapter, answer True or False to the following items:

A. Throughout U.S. history, governors have been an important part of state politics and policy. T F

B. In terms of a career pattern, it is typical for most governors to have started out as outsiders who have not worked their way up the political ladder. T F

C. During the pre Civil War period, the majority of presidents were not governors before they were elected president. T F

D. Dealing with the national government has increasingly become an important job for governors. T F

E. It has become quite common in the states, especially in the south, to find instances of divided government. T F

F. Retrospective Voting refers to the idea that voters are influenced by the past personal actions of gubernatorial candidates. T F

G. In most states the governor is the sole statewide elected executive official. T F

EXPLORIT QUESTIONS

As was discussed in the first part of this chapter, governors are often seriously considered for the office of the president. Let’s see how many of our past presidents have been governors.

|> Data File: |USPRES |

|> Task: |Univariate |

|> Primary Variable: |21) GOV? |

|> View: |Pie |

1. Let’s examine the distribution of GOV? What percentage of past presidents have been governors?

2. Can you name 4 past presidents who were governors?

1.

2.

3.

4.

The power to veto legislation is an important tool for governors. While we don’t have data on the number of vetoes cast by state governors, we do have data on the number of vetoes cast by presidents. Recent presidents and some members of Congress have argued the president should be given the same veto powers as state governors. Presidents who served as governors may be less acquainted with the ways of Washington and be inclined to cast more vetoes in order to get their policy objectives adopted. Let’s see if this is true.

Note: Since the veto power was not used frequently by presidents prior to the Civil War, you will use the subsetting facility of MicroCase to look only at post-Civil War presidents. Once you select 35) ERA as the subset variable, a menu will appear with categories to select. Use your mouse to check off the category for post-Civil War presidents. Make sure that the option of “Include Selected Categories” has a black dot in the circle. If this option is not selected, click on it with your mouse.

|Data File: |USPRES |

|> Task: |Cross-tabulation |

|> Row Variable: |18) VETOES |

|> Column Variable: |21) GOV? |

|> Subset Variable: |35) ERA |

|> Subset Categories: |Include: 1) Post CW |

|> View: |Table |

|> Display: |Column % |

. Copy the first row of the percentaged table:

3. What is the value of Cramer’s V for this table? v = ____.

4. Is V statistically significant? Yes No.

5. We can be certain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that presidents who previously served as governors will cast more vetoes. True False.

Governors, as we discussed in the beginning of this chapter, are very concerned about their state’s economic conditions. A state’s economy can greatly impact the reelection chances of incumbent governors. One measure of economic development is personal income. Let’s see if there is a relationship between a governor’s formal powers and the income level of citizen voters.

|> Data File: |STATES |

|> Task: |Scatterplot |

|> Dependent Variable: |68) PC_INC_01 |

|> Independent Variable: |111) GOVPWRRAT |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

6. What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

7. Is the relationship positive or negative?

8. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

9. Do these results support the hypothesis? Yes No

10. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

Governors also work hard to attract businesses to their states through tax incentives and other devices. Let’s see if the formal powers of a governor make him or her better able to attract Fortune 500 companies to their state.

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Scatterplot |

|> Dependent Variable: |26) #FOR500COS |

|> Independent Variable: |111) GOVPWRRAT |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

11. What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

12. Is the relationship positive or negative?

13. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

14. Do these results support the hypothesis? Yes No

15. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

Another way to examine the connection between state policy and a governor’s power to respond to the problem is to check the connection between the governor’s power rating and spending on several key issues. One of the key issues in state politics is education and education spending. We could hypothesize that governors with more formal powers would have more ability to increase education spending.

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Scatterplot |

|> Dependent Variable: |91) EDUC$/CP97 |

|> Independent Variable: |111) GOVPWRRAT |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

16. What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

17. Is the relationship positive or negative?

8. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

19. Which state spends the most, per capita, on education? _________

20. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

21. These results support the hypothesis True False YES NO

In the preliminary part of this exercise we discussed how the agencies concerned with highways are often a major concern for governors. Perhaps the strong formal powers of a governor allow him or her to focus more attention and money on highway spending. Let’s take a look.

| Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Scatterplot |

|> Dependent Variable: |121) HGHWY$/C97 |

|> Independent Variable: |111) GOVPWRRAT |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

22 What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

23. Is the relationship positive or negative?

24. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

25. Which state spends the most, per capita, on highways? _________

26. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

27. These results support the hypothesis. True False YES NO

As we learned in the first part of this chapter, the campaign costs for gubernatorial elections has increased dramatically over the years. What is behind these escalating costs? Perhaps gubernatorial campaign costs are influenced by the urban population of a state? We could hypothesize that states with higher percentages of urban residents would have higher per vote campaign costs.

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Scatterplot |

|> Dependent Variable: |118) $VOTE/GUB |

|> Independent Variable: |93) URBAN USA |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

28. What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

29. Is the relationship positive or negative?

30. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

31. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

32. These results support the hypothesis. True False YES NO

Maybe campaign costs are related to political competition. Candidates running for governor have to spend more, per vote, on their campaigns in states where there is significant competition between the two parties. Let’s take a look.

| Data File: |STATE |

| Task: |Scatterplot |

|Dependent Variable: |118) $VOTE/GUB |

|> Independent Variable: |8) POLCOMP |

|> View: |Reg.Line |

32. What is the correlation coefficient for these results? r = _____

33. Is the relationship positive or negative?

34. Are these results statistically significant? Yes No

35. Based on the above results, how would you summarize the relationship between these variables?

36. These results support the hypothesis. True False YES NO

In the preliminary part of this exercise we discussed how voter turnout in gubernatorial elections is higher during presidential elections years. But many states have their elections for governor in off-years. Let’s examine the variables 41) TURNOUT00, which is the percent of eligible voters casting ballots in races for the U.S. house of representatives in 2000, and 42) TURNOUT98 which is the percent of eligible voters casting ballots in races for the U.S. house of representatives in 1998. Thus you will be examining both presidential election year and an off-year election. Since we do not have the turnout for the gubernatorial elections for those years, these variables will work as proxies.

First, examine the variable 41) TURNOUT00.

|Data File: |STATES |

|> Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |41) TURNOUT00 |

|> View: |List: Rank |

38 List the top 5 states on this variable.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

39. List the bottom 5 states on this variable.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

40. Do you see any regional patterns on this table? Briefly describe the patterns you see.

Next, examine the variable 42) TURNOUT98.

|Data File: |STATES |

|Task: |Mapping |

|> Variable 1: |42) TURNOUT98 |

|> View: |List: Rank |

41. List the top 5 states on this variable.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

42. List the bottom 5 states on this variable.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

43. Do you see any regional patterns on this table? Briefly describe the patterns you see.

On Your Own

1. As we just discussed, voter turnout in gubernatorial elections is higher during presidential elections years. The interest and media attention of the presidential elections brings voters to the polls. What other factors might impact election turnouts?

Using the STATES file, examine the variables 41) TURNOUT00 (a presidential election year) and 42) TURNOUT98 (an off-year election). Let’s see if political competition, (8 POLCOMP, impacts voter turnout in these elections.

What do you find? Be sure to support your generalizations with evidence from your analysis.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download