Essay On The Power Of Texas Governor

The Powers of the Texas Governor vs. the President
Power is a strange force, for some it is welded well, for others it consumes and surfaces the worst attributes common to man. When used correctly it has the ability to accomplish wonderful deeds, it is the responsibility of the powers that be to guard it, and the responsibility of the people under its authority to hold the leader accountable. This latter attribute is an inheritance of Americans, present from the very formation of our country, to our outcries for justice in situations such as the Watergate Scandal, the extramarital affairs of presidents John F. Kennedy and George Clinton, to current issues such as the Affordable Care Act that some Americans feel overstep personal freedoms, that

was set in place by the executive power of the president. One can see the powers of the President have become great.

Because of this, as well as other reasons I will cover, one can understand why Texans are fearful to give such power to their executive leader.
Like the president, the Texas governor has restrictions on his powers, only more so for the governor. The president must rely on the agreement and unity of various systems such as Congress, while the governor is part of a divided executive team including, but not limited to the lieutenant governor, attorney general, comptroller of public accounts, and commissioner of the General Land Office. Texas government is closer to what the Framers intended for government with its less efficient and diversified system of checks and balances on the executive. Continuing, this stemmed from the Founders fear of authority, a by product of their experience of government in England. In summary, they were

more interested in protection than in an effective, efficient government run by an unworthy or ill-educated leader. Just like our Founders were afraid of too powerful an executive, Texans feared too powerful a governor. I believe from my readings in Texas Politics Today, that one of the factors for a weak governor, is seen in the term of governor E.J Davis, his term is described as “the most corrupt and abusive in the states history” (Maxwell 58). Davis became governor after the more relaxed Texas Constitution of 1869 was created. Davis was a Republican, much different than the type prominent in Texas politics today. Davis was selfish, he funded his own personal interests such as the railroad and other public programs with tax money, so frivolously that taxes greatly increased. It is evident at present to understand that Texans do not like taxes since we are among the lowest investors in education and social programs such as Medicare. We want the programs but not the cost associated with implementation.
The 1869 Constitution increased the governor’s power more than had been before, it is my opinion that Davis’s actions put a bad taste in the mouth of citizens, creating fear, ultimately resulting in decreased power of the governor, as seen in the restrictive and conservative revision of the Texas Constitution of 1876. If Davis had governed more responsibly, I believe we would have a more powerful role of governor, closer to that of the president, although I have not considered the independent spirit of Texans.
In reading American Government, Chapter 13, “The Presidency”, and Texas Politics Today, the commonalties between the executive power of the president and the governor are many, one being their national security powers. The president is the commander and chief of the armed forces, while the governor’s title is commander and chief of state militia. For the president it is all spheres of the military, whereas the governor is in control of ordering the Texas National Guard into state crisis circumstances. Texas also has the Texas State Guard in place, if the Texas National Guard has already been called into action by the president.
In addition, the president has the power of making treaties with other nations, obviously the state of Texas would not make treaties with foreign powers since we are part of the nation the president presides over, but we do have relations with other states in terms of importing and exporting goods in and out of our state. Texas government must make agreements with other states in order for that to happen. Our governor is an ambassador of sorts amongst other states in discussing defense, economics, and law, and much more, they even meet with foreign officials at events. Although, this is on a much smaller scale than our president, it is still a similarity. Additionally, governors are afforded the privilege of advocating their stances on political issues such as foreign aid and policy that do not concern or affect those policies, but cause inhabitants to relate to their governor more so. Furthermore, the president presents information to Congress through the state of the union address, similarly it is the governor’s duty through message power to give the state-of-the-state message to the legislature on the direction he intends to lead the state as far as law and current issues are concerned, as well as drawing attention to specific bills he finds important.
The president has the legislative power to order Congress into session in times of need. In contrast the governor is also able to do this with our senators and representatives. An example of this is Wendy Davis’s filibuster over Texas’s desire to put restrictions on abortions. Her goal was to control the floor until the end of the special session so that legislation could not be passed in favor of said law. Although she succeeded, former Governor Rick Perry ordered a second special session giving the needed time for the proposed legislation to pass the House and Senate.
When considering the length of legislative sessions, the U.S.

Congress has no limit on its sessions, while the Texas Congress is limited to 140 days every two years. With this is in mind, the state Congress is so limited on time that it is not necessary for the governor to have the power to adjourn Congress if they are not reaching a decision, because they naturally want to move on to new legislation to accomplish as much as possiblel. Also, important to highlight is the veto power given to the governor as well as the president, allowing them to deny legislation they do not believe is in the best interest of the people or against their views. There is an exception to this rule, if two-thirds of Congress is in agreement to overrule the bill denied by the governor or president, it can be implemented against the executive’s

wish.
When it comes to administrative power, the president and governor differ. The president has power to execute the laws, while the governor must depend on the Texas Rangers and Highway Patrol for the state level and the police on the local level. Also similar are their appointive powers, they both are able to appoint various positions, the governor being able to appoint members of supervisory boards with the approval of the senate, and the president his own Cabinet, personal staff, and officials. This is an area our governor is weak. The president is able to surround himself with those likely to vote on legislation he deems important, while the governor cannot gain that same power as quickly, and most likely never. Additionally, both offices are able to fill vacancies as they occur in between elections, because it is common for judges to retire or resign before the end of their term. When it comes to judicial powers, the commander in chief is granted the power to grant pardons and reprieves for federal offenses, this is similar to the governor’s clemency powers. These powers used to be much more broad but when previous Texas governors abused the power, it resulted in the Board of Pardons and Paroles as a check to that power. Now, instead of the governor suggesting parole or other terms, the board wields that power. Important to remember is that the governor appoints those on the board, and is able to decrease terms of clemency, and retains limited authority through those rights. Furthermore, the board can also make suggestions as to whom they should grant clemency. Continuing the theme of judicial powers are those of judges, the president suggests appointments to the position, but the Senate must have a majority vote in favor of the nominee. The governor does not have such power, only the people of the state are able to elect their judges at the local level.
The office of the president is one of honor and prestige, it is the same for the governor. They must attend events and gatherings as a symbol of the state and promoting state pride. It is much like the queen of England. She is not very involved in decision making, but does command a presence and authority that is respected by all, through her position.
Both offices wrestle with power and wanting to stretch their muscles. In recent times the president has expanded in powers, through circumstances such McCulloch v. Maryland, and its result in the necessary and proper clause, while Texas government has remained nearly the same the last one hundred years, despite the vast amendments to its constitution. It is my opinion that this is in our best interest as a state. Although it would be wonderful to have a leader who can execute their vision more effectively, the risk is great due to the weakness of man. It is so easy for humanity to let power and pride go to their head. When this happens, they start believing they are above the law and accountable to none. Through our current structure, there is more accountability. It is difficult for our governor to become influential quickly, but he is given the ability to lead our state, unlimited by a term if continually elected. If they are a good leader, they will remain in office and build relationship and influence that will help them to accomplish their goals. With this being said, there is also great potential for bad politics such as granting of favors, bribes, and appointments that are not in the best interest of the people of the state. If the governor were given more power, these negative characteristics might not be as prevalent. Even with that being said, I still feel the current Texas government structure is just fine.