Before considering these questions, read Chapter 4 in your textbook (Chapter 5 of the Fifth Edition), with a particular focus on pp. 139-148 (pp. 155-168 in the Fifth Edition) in which the formal and informal powers of the governor are discussed, in addition to Chapter 5’s discussion (Chapter 6 of the Fifth Edition) of the “plural executive” on pp. 156 & 157 (pp. 173 & 174 in the Fifth Edition).
Texas creates a plural executive- one in which a governor serves alongside other major executive branch officials (lieutenant governor, attorney general, land commissioner, etc.), each independently elected by voters and who, thus, may not be political allies or even members of the same political party. This contrasts with the unitary executive model that exists in other states (and, with some variation, at the U. S. presidential level), in which the governor has the power to appoint major executive branch officials, such as the attorney general, comptroller, etc., toward ensuring that he or she is better able to accomplish his or her priorities through working with like-minded officials and that the executive branch operates more cohesively, at least in theory. In a plural executive system, there is a stronger possibility that the governor may have to work with major executive branch officials who are not his or her allies and may even be his or her political enemies. (How this actually plays out can vary; for example, Republican Governor George W. Bush and Democratic Lt. Governor Bob Bullock were noted for their ability to work together in the mid-1990s, while Governor Rick Perry and Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, despite both being Republicans, often found themselves at odds with one another, to the extent that Strayhorn actually ran for Governor against Perry in the 2006 election cycle!)
Texas is traditionally recognized for its “weak” governorship, in which the powers of the governor are substantially limited by the constitution; our plural executive system, with its limitations on the ability of a governor to appoint a “Cabinet” of like-minded officials to work with is generally seen as contributing to the weakness of the position. At the same time, due to a combination of additional powers being granted to governors by the legislature over the years and the effective (if, occasionally, controversial) exercise of the formal and informal powers of the office, particularly by recent governors Perry and Abbott, the Texas governorship has, in recent years, been noted for having become a more powerful position than a straightforward reading of the powers granted to it by the Texas Constitution might suggest.
1) What do you think? Do you support Texas’s plural executive system, in which all major executive branch officials run for office independently? Do you believe that this type of system effectively accomplishes its goal of limiting the powers of the governor? Would you favor a change to the unitary executive system favored by other states? Do you think a shift to a unitary system would permit the Texas governor to exercise his/her powers more effectively? Why or why not?
2) On a related note, much of Governor Perry’s clout as governor was a product of his unprecedented fourteen-year tenure in office. Texas does not limit the number of terms to which our governors (or state representatives/state senators) can be elected to serve. (Whether or not elected officials are “term-limited” is a matter of state and federal constitutional law: for example, the U. S. president has been limited to serving only two terms since the 1950s, and various states limit the number of terms that their governors, state representatives, and state senators can serve; your textbook features a brief discussion of the issue of term limits, in the state legislative context, on pp. 88 & 89.) Some reformers advocate for expanding the number of offices that are term-limited; they favor term limits as a way to prevent elected officials from becoming “career politicians,” entrenched in office and becoming less in touch with and less representative of the views of their constituents. Others argue that term-limits are essentially nondemocratic; basically, they argue that if the voters support an elected official strongly enough to continue returning him or her to office, it makes little sense to arbitrarily bar them from this choice. What do you think? Would you favor limiting the number of terms that an individual can be elected to/serve as Governor of Texas? Why or why not?
