CHAPTER TWO STATE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
The Council of State Governments 23 THE GOVERNORS, 1986-87
By Thad L. Beyle
Considerable interest in gubernatorial elec Rhode lsland), and Madeleine Kunin (D.Ver. tions was expressed during 1986-87, a period mont). between presidential campaign& Fint, there Thirteen incumbent governors were constitu was considerable political activity in the form tionally ineligible to seek another term: Bob of campaigning as 39 governol"8hips were con Graham (D.Florida), George Ariyoshi (D·Ha· tested. Second, as the problema 8B8OCiated with waii), John Carlin (D.Kansas), Martha Layne the federal deficit and the ideoiogicalstance of Collins (D.Kentucky), Joseph Brennan (D the Reagan administration continued, gover Maine), Harry Hughes (D.Maryland), Thney non and other state leaders made difficult deci Anaya (D.New Mexico), George Nigh CD·Okla sions on the extent of their statal' commitment homa), Victor Atiyeh (R.Oregon), Dick Thorn· to a range ofpolicy concerns. Third was the con burgh (R.Pennsylvania), Richard Riley (D. tinuing role of the governorship in producing South Carolina), William Janklow (R.South serious presidential candidates aft.er a period Dakota), and Lamar Alexander (R.Thnne68e6). in which it was believed that governors could Seven incumbents opted to retire; George no longer be considered as potential candidates Wallace (D.Alabama), Bruce Babbitt CD-Arizo for president.) Fourth was the negative publi. na), Richard Lamm (D-Colorado), John Evans city fostered by the questionable actions of (D.Idaho). William Allain (D-Mississippi), several governors. which in one case lead to an Robert Kerry CD·Nebraska), and Ed Hershler impeachment and in two others contributed to CD ·Wyoming). the incumbent's inability to win another term. These 20 outgoing governors, 16 Democrats and four Republican&, had served a combined Gubernatorial Elections total of 165 years. M08t had been in office for two four-year terms, with only Allain, Anaya, Thirty-nine governorships were up for elec Collins and Kerry serving four years. Four had tion in 1986-87. In nineteen ofthese contests served more than eight years: Wallace (16 non· the incumbent stood for an additional term, consecutive years), AriY08hi (13 yean), Hersh· with 15 winning reelection. Of the four de ler and Lamm (12 years each). feated incumbents, Bill Sheffield of Alaska 100 There haa been a general trend in the 1980& in the Democratic party primary in 1986 and for fewer gubernatorial incumbents to seek re Democrat Edwin Edwards l08t in Louisiana's election. In the 1980-83 cycleofelections. 38 of primary in 1987. Two other Democratic in the 46 eligible incumbents ran for reelection cumbents, Mark White ofThxas and Anthony (83 percent), while in 1984-87, 26 of the 36 eligi Earl ofWisoonBin, lost in the 1986 general elec ble incumbenLs ran (72 percent). In 1986-87, 19 tions in their states. of the 26 eligible incumbents ran (73 percent). Of the 39 governorships up for election, 15 of Those incumbent.& seeking reelection in the the 19 incumbents were re-elected: Bill Clinton 1980s generally have fared weU, with 46 of 64 (D.ArkllD8ll8), George Deukmejian (R.Califor (72 percent) winning. These figures mirror the nia), William O'Neill (D·Connecticut), Joe SUcce&8 rate for incumbents seeking reelection Frank Harris (D.Georgia), James Thompson toother political offices, indicating an electoral (R.IIlinois), Terry Branstad (R.Iowa), Michael bias for the incumbent. I DukakiB (D.Massachusetts), James Blanchard Excluding the successful incumbents, a large (D-Michigan), Rudy Perpich CDFL-Minne80ta), proportion of the governors elected in 1986·87 John Sununu (R.New Hampshire), Richard Bryan 24 The Book of the States 1988-89 GOVERNORS .... ble "- COSTS OF GUBERNATORIAl. CAMPA IGNS, 198&-37 lblal campol", ""pendllu ..... (0 Win .... ', ,."'""", ..... S •• Year W All candld_. WI ..""r • pe...,.,nt,- Alaboo ..... "S. 9,990.177 .. • -8.10 Alao" HO. "D" • 8.311.219 •1.380.146 "'.... " 114.26 ANo"" M22,216 1,168,193 " " ,.. ATo."", .. """S. D' 2.252.907 1.597.163 n" "~ S." C.lifornia "" " 22.464,923 13.714.233 " " 3.16 ...... 00 "SS 6,2G1,938 1.797,109 5.91 Conneet.N:u\ '"D' 3.878,640 2.S60.437 .." " ,... ,"... .. 23.990.965 4.279,212 " ' .OS ,-Georyil '"0' .., ... 702,314 " "n ... Hawaii ".. 8.711.8&1 1.830.720 ".. " " " "'OS ,.... 1,8:M,373 ... "", .. 4.18 III;",,;. """ "0' 8.916.:U7 6,634.929 " 2.82 ,- ,,.... 2,990,623 1.792.324 " " ,." ~- .." 8.390.771 Ui76.269 '" " ' .00 Kenl""ky " ,oJ ,., W "".. " " " Louioi .... ,,.. 0" IS,14t.on 2.640.637 8.43 M. i"" "" .. 6,36U78 1.302.763 '"~ " -,~ "s. 4.949.163 3.689.M3 " ''''4.49 M_hUMIUl "0' (,(IM,SMI ,...... " " 2.41 M khipn " ".. 0' 9,362.420 2.98a,839 .." ,. .. Min_ ,,.. 0 ' 4.744.363 2.032.623 " 3.41 M... I .. ippi 8,702,199 2,\162,100 ,." .." 12.08 N..... '" "" .." 3,992.790 1.486.116 ' .OS N_dl 0' 1.833,735 1,478,5$3 ,... N_ n lmpahi", """ 1.369,82S 823.616 " " "".. " "00 .." U • N .... M... ico + 2.512.787 1,630,(100 ~ .. ..., . ~ New Y<>rk ,"... .. 0' 6,998,MO MM,~ 57 ~" Ohio ,... 0 ' 1,917,191 4.79'1,218 " '.OS OkLaho"", 3.856.218 1,Z34,1U Ullno'''''''- pri....,.;.. and renen.! .1«<10 .... '""(2) Dete r mined by di~idi"ll" total The Council of State Governments 25 GOVERNORS had previously held a state level office. Six had which the winner spent more than other can formerly held a statewide office with two mov· didates, 13 were incumbents fighting suc 2 ing up from the treasurer's office (Roy Romer cessfully to retain their offices. In fact, of the in Colorado and Kay OtT in Nebraska) and four 18 incumbent governors seeking re-election, 14 former governors returning home (John Waihsee were the largest apenders in the race, indicat of Hawaii, acting governor in 1973·74; Cecil ing that incumbenCJ breeds more funds for a Andrus of Idaho, 1971·77; Henry Bellmon of political campaign. Oklahoma, 1962·66; and Bill Clements of Tex· A recent report indicates that running for as, 1979·83). Other stepping·off positions for lieutenant governor also is becoming expen these new governors were the state legislature sive. A critical factor is whether the governor (Mike Hayden of Kansas, George Mickelson of and lieutenant governor run as a team. In the South Dakota, Ned McWherter of Tenneasee, 1982-84 election cycle where separate reports 'Ibmrny Thompson of Wisconsin); the U.S Con· were available for those lieutenant governor gress (Buddy Roemer of Louisiana, John Me· candidates runningjointly with a governor, the Kernan of Maine, Carroll Campbell of South expenditures ranged from a high of$60,OOO, for Carolina); mayor ofmE\i<>rcity (Donald Shaefer the successful candidate in Wisconsin, to a low from Baltimore and Bob Martinez from Tam· of$4,170 fora losing candidate in Connecticut. pal; a federal office (Guy Hunt of Alabama in When the elections for the two top offices were the U.s. Department of Agriculture, former held separately, the range was from $20,795 for Assistant Secretary of Interior Garrey Car· an unsuccessful candidate in Vermont to $2.5 ruthers of New Mexico, former Secretary of million for the winner in California. Losing Transportation Neil Goldschmidt of Oregon, candidates also spent considerable sums: $2.2 former U.s. Attorney Robert Casey ofPennsyl· million in California and nearly $2 million in vania). Evan Mecham of Arizona had served in 'Thxas. The range for most of the non-team elec the state legislature, but three of the new gover· tion states was between $40,000 and $350,000, nors had no previous experience in elected and in mostcaaes it was the winning candidat.e office. spending the most.4 The 1986 race in Texas, in which former Gov. Clements unseated incumbent Gov. Mark Gubernatorial Investigations White, was the most expensive gubernatorial race ever recorded at $33.5 million. The least Since 1985, three governors have been the expensive race of the biennium was the 1986 target of investigations in their states. In 1985, successful re-election bid by Georgia Gov. Har Gov. Bill Sheffield (D.Alaska) successfully de ris at $807,000. fended his handling of a $9.1 million lease by Four years earlier, in the 1982.83 elections for the state before a special session of the state governor in these 39 states, the total expen· legislature called to consider impeaching him. ditUTeS reported were about $222 million; $182 Although Sheffield survived, he subsequently million in 1982 and $40 million in 1983. made a poor showing in the 1986 Democratic There were at least 287 separate candidates Party primary, losing to Fairbanks lawyer in these 39 governors races in 1986-87 as mea Steve Cowper by a substantial 15 percent sured by those who filed campaign expenditure margin. His re..election bid was also wounded reports. Many candidates spent little or no deeply by the steep drop in oil prices in early money campaigning. Florida with 19 and Alas 1986. ka with 17 topped the states with crowded Gov. Edwin Edwards (D-Louisiana) suc· fields of candidates. The most expensive in cessfully fought a 51 count grand jury indict dividual campaigns were conducted by incum ment for fraud and racketeering in which he bent governors. White's unsuccessful bid in Thx was charged with influence peddling in obtain as cost $15.8 million; Deukmejian spent $13.7 ing state hospital permits. The fl1'8t trial end· million to win the California governor's race; ed with a hung jury, but in May 1986, the Be and Clement in Thxas spent $10.9 million in his condjury acquitted him. Edwards attempted to successful bid for office. bolster his battered image in the gubernatorial Spending the most money in a campaign did election campaign of 1987, but his popularity not necessarily correlate with winning because had clearly suffered from his legal ordeals. In in 13 of the 35 races, the winner spent less October 1987, Edwards lost the Louisiana pri. money than other candidates and only one of mary by about 5 percentage points to Demo the 13 was the incumbent. l In the 22 statea cratic Congressman Buddy Roemer. Although 26 The Book of the States 1988·89 GOVERNORS "" I MP~ACW'U! NTS ANO RE..MOVAlS OF GOVERNORS Namea.. d ".Ie Yur - --P_ III Irape..:hme.nI .IId o..t<: Char). Robl...... (KS) IIIIpM OTn~R R~M OVAlS OF INCUMBENT GOVl-:RNOR8 Jobn A. Quit.... n (MS) Reoi...... n... r.... l ai",l... llndlctme nt 4n.. J. P'ruier (NO) "" RooaIIN b)' _ durl"" third Ie ..... W"",,II To M The Cou nci l of State Governments 27 GOVERNORS 264 on the second. However, the Senate failed Some of these state statutes require gover to impose the so-called "Dracula penalty" in nors to initiate tbe a.ssignment or delegation which he would be barred from public office by of responsibilities to the lieutenant governor. failing to achieve the needed two-thirds vote by In effect, the governor defines tbe lieutenant 8 close 17-13 decision. governor's executive branc:b role.3 After his impeachment, Mecham was remov Compared to recent biennia, relationships be ed from office and Secretary of State Rose Mof tween governors and their lieutenant governors ford 888umed the position of acting governor remained relatively stable butoft.en confusing. under the dictates of the Arizona constitu· In Virginia, Gov. Gerald Balilies and Lt. Gov. tion,' Upon conviction, Mofford took the oath L. Douglas Wilder, botb Democrat, have clash of office as governor. On April 12th, the Arizo. ed over use olthe state's budget surplus. Wilder naSupremeCourtcanceled the May 17 recall, has seen the surplus as an opportunity to stating that Rose Mofford is not a "stop-gap repeal the state sales tax on non-prescription governor:' but is the new chief executive who medicine. Baliles wants the surplus held in should finish Mecham's four-year term. reserve.· These le88 than fine gubernatorial perform ances in aeveralstates has prompted one of the In one of the latest episodes on the question governorships' chief promoters to wonder irthe of whether a lieutenant governor is a legisla governors in some states have dcdined in tive or an executive officer, South Dakota voters caliber.7 rejected the proposed stripping of the Iieute· As can be seen from Thble B. "Impeachments nant governor's legislative duties. The South and Removals of Governors," Mecham was the Dakota legislature went one step further when 18th governor to be impeached and the eighth the voters by conferring on the lieutenant to be convicted. governor the official position as leader of the Other elected exeeutive branch officials also Senate, complete with a full·time salary of have bad problems in the past two years. At $50,000. From the executive side, the governor torney General Charlie Brown of West Virgin has worked to expand the tasks of the lieute. ia was acquitted of illegally soliciting cam· nant governor to indude, for example, c:hair paign contributions from his employees. He manship of acme important task forces. & argued that he simply provided his staffers In a suit brought by a state senator, a Missis with "anopporturuty to give." Two of his three sippi state court in 1986 struck down the prac: predecessors had been indicted and convicted tic:e ofthe lieutenant governor acting as legis· of felony charges.s lative leader. The dec:ision was based on separa· tion of powers. IJ Arizona now has no lieutenant governor. The Governors and Other Separately Elected Officials secretary of state is next in the line of succes sion, but that office is dearly executive in na· Lieutenant Governora For some lieutenant ture and does not have a working relationship governors, one of the most perplexing issues with t.he legislature. has been how to reconcile their executive and A total of eight states do not have a lieute legislative functioll8 and roles. Coll8titutional nant governor. Oregon, Arizona and Wyoming Iy, most states call on their lieutenant gover place the secretary of state next in the line of nors to serve as the presiding officer of the state succession. Maine, New Hampshire, New Jer· senate and to be the nextrin-the-line of succ:es sey, Thnnessee and West Virginia plac:e the sion to the governor's office. Other c:onstitu president. or speaker of the BeDate next in line. tional respoll8ibilities given some lieutenant New Jersey Gov. Kean pushed for the c:reation governors include chairing a variety ofboards, of a lieutenant governor's offic:e, but the pro committees and commissions. However, little posal did not receive 8trong support in the leg is said about the role of the lieutenant gover· islature whose leaders stand next in the line of 7 nor in the executive branch. I By statute, about suc:cession. Of the remaining 42 states, 20 two-thirds of the states have granted more elect tbeir lieutenant governors separately responsibility to lieutenant governors mainly from their governors, setting up the potential involving service on state boards and commis for inter- or intra.party conflicts between the sions. Alaska, Hawaii and Utah legislatures, two officials onc:e in office. s however, have assigned their lieutenant gover· A total of 22 states elect these officials as a nors duties normally performed by secretaries team in the general elections, but only eight of of state, thereby creating a dual role. 2 theBe states link the two candidates together 28 The Book oftbe States 19SB-89 GOVERNORS in the nomination process . ~ The need for a Republican Martin in a federal district court team approach beginning with the nomina against a suit filed by three Democrats fired by tion process was amply demonstrated in the the governor during his transition into office 1986 Democratic primary in Illinois when a in 1985. They allege their First Amendment disciple of Lyndon LaRouche captured the par_ right of association was abridged by their ty's lieutenant governor's nomination. " political firing." Thornburgh defended the Democratic gubernatorial nominee Adlai need for the governor to be able to place his pe0- Stevenson ill resigned his position rather ple into policy making positions upon assum than standing jointly with the lieutenant ing office. 16 governor nominee. Stevenson ran unsuc· Arizona's attorney general's role in the cessfully as an independent candidate. With Governor Mecham situation caused some prob a team approach in the primary, such a situa 1O lems as he was serving as prosecutor before a tion would not have happened. grand jury investigating the legality ora cam· In a March 1987 semi coup d'etat, opponents paign loan while putatively in an attorney of Arkansas Gov. Clinton imposed a constitu cl ient relationship with the governor. I? Mec tional prerogative entitling them to guber ham countered by initiating an investigation natorial duties, as both the governor and of the attorney genel'a)'s use of state resources lieutenant governor were out of state, Clinton to assist a private group. on his quest for the Democratic presidential The fuas attorney general has been in con nomination, They fired the governor'schief of fli ct with some of the state's powerful boards statT and appointed 20 people to various state and commissions. The attorney general, the boards. II legal representative of the state's regulatory Attorneys General. Several governors have agencies, has taken stands on behalf of con had difficulty with their attorneys general. In sumers before some of the major agencies. As Idaho, Democratic Gov. Andrus and Republi of 1987, the attorney general was barred from can Attorney General Jim Jones battled over continuing this consumer representation be limiting state timber exports. Andrus, in the fore the Railroad Commission, which regulates interest of protecting jobs, held that certain oil and gas, and the State Board of Insurance timber taken from state lands should not be and Public Utility Commission. 18 sold for processing across state lines. Jones Superintendents of Public Instruction. How argued that Andrus' position was not legally the states chief education are selected con tenable since the u.s. Supreme Court overrul tinues to be a problem. As of J an. 1, 1986, 16 ed a similar practice by Alaska. 12 In Georgia, were separately elected; 29 were selected by the Gov. Harris and Attorney General Mike Bow state's board of education -23 directly, four with ers differed over a suit Bowers brought against the approval orthe governor and two with the the state personnel board, as well as over a pro approval of the legislature; and five were ap motion issue. Although Harris lost the latter pointed by the governor -one directly and four battle, a county Superior Court ruled against with the approval of the legislature. Bowers in the former case, which is now under 13 In 1986-87, several states addressed the issue appeal in the state's courtS. of whether the state's chief educational officer In North Carolina, Republican Gov. J ames should be elected or appointed. In 1986, the Martin and Democratic Attorney General governor of Indiana called on the legislature to Lacey Thornburgh have found themselves on make the superintendent an appointed rather both sides of the bench in law suits. In one than elected post. The proposal followed the state court suit concerning the governor's forced resignation of the superintendent for right to decide state real estate transactions misusing the office for campaign purposes. The rather than have the 10 member Council of bill failed in the face of opposition from State do so, Thornburgh sued on behalf of all teachers, a C()alition of moral groups and par the separately elected state officials and ty leaders -all of whom feared loss of influence 14 won. The second suit, which the governor and patronage. 19 In 1987, the North Carolina also lost, concerned the General Assembly's legislature refused. to place a proposed constitu designation of the chief justice of the state tional amendment on the general election bal Supreme Court to appoint the director ofthe lot which would have changed the selection of Office of Administrative Hearings. 15 In a the superintendent by popular election to ap third case, Democrat Thornburgh is defending pointment.2() The Kentucky legislature placed The Council of State Governments 29 GOVERNORS a constitutional amendment berore voters to Gubernatorial Veto shift the selection or the superintendent rrom an elected to an appointed post. The voters Currently, 43 states provide their governors defeated the measure in the 1986 general with a general veto power in which the gover election.21 nor must either accept or reject a bill in its totality, while 47 state constitutions provide the governor with a form of the line item ve~ usually limited to budget bills. Thn states pro Gubernatorial Powers vide for a more refined line item veto in which the governor can reduce amounts in the lines In a 1987 st.udy, the National Governors' of budget rather than having to veto the line Aseociation (NGA) analyzed "The Institu entirely. Seven states go even further by allow tionalized Powers of the Governorship, ing a partial veto in which the governor can 1965_85.") Based on previous studies by condition his or her approval of a bill with sug political scientists, the NGA study used a gested rewording or amendments to the bill.' numerical scoring system to measure the The line item veto and its variants has pro governors' tenure potential, appointive powers. ven to be the source or considerable controver hudget-making powers. veto powers. plus the sy. A recent survey suggests there are at least legislatures' budget-changing suthority and rour consequences which follow from the use of amountorparty control the governor has in the this veto: (1) It profoundly alters the relation legislature.. The results indicate that over a ship of the legislature to the governor, to the ad· 20-year period, the governor's power over the vantage of the latter; (2) It increases the num executive branch has increased while the ber or formal confrontations between the two powers over the legislative branch have declin branches; (3) It spawns procedures to neutraJize ed.' The governors gaining the most power ita impact; and (4) It precipitates litigation be were in the less populous states. This may in· tween the two branches, thereby introducing dicate the more populous states had already thejudiciary into the law-making ~rocess at an provided their governorships with greater 3 early stage in its role as umpire. powers. Now for what happened in the past The role of the courts in this conflict over the biennium. line item veto has grown in recent years. Since 1893 there have been more than 113 courtdeci sions on disputes between the branches over Gubernatorial Thnure this veto. 50 or them in the last 15 years alone as the conflicts between the two political The questions concerning gubernatorial ten branches have escalated. These cases included ure and succession still continue to be part of a U.S Supreme Court Decision and two rederal the political debate in the state&. appellate court decisions. 10 Length cfterms. All but three cL the 50 states Legislative leaders in Wisconsin have filed - New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont suit in the state's Supreme Court to invalidate . provide their governors with a four-year term. Gov. Thmm.y Thompson's use of the partial veto [n 1986, Arkansas elected its first four·year 290 times in approving the 1987-89 biennial governor. This is a reduction from 19 states in budget. The partial veto was adopted in 1930. 1956.' Thompson's creative use or the veto allowed Number ofterms sllowed. Only three states him to change legislative intent by excising continue to restrict their governors to a single isolated digits, letters and words even to the four-year term - Kentucky, New Mexico and point or creating new words. II Virginia - down from 17 states in 1956.5 But The "separation of powers" war in North the Virginia General Assembly refused the Carolina continues as the 1987 Democratic governor's request for a constitutional amend General Assembly again refused to approve a ment to be placed on the 1986 ballot, allowini proposed constitutional amendment to provide the governor to seek two consecutive terms. the governor with veto powers. 12 At the other end, 25 states now restrict their governors to no more than two, four-year terms, Gubernatorial Appointment and Removal up from six in 1956.1 Twenty-two states do not Powers place any restriction on the number of terms a governor may serve. Since 1945, states have been paying more SO The Book of the States 1988-89 GOVERNORS attention to the governor's power ofremoval as restriction of the removal pov.er by indicating they rewrite or amend their constitutions. Af that. "the First Amendment rights may be reo terall, to be able to appoint. a person to a posi quired to yield to the state's vital interest ... tion, a governor must be able to remove the cur ifan employee's private political beliefs ....'Quld rent. holder of the position. Fifteen states have interfere with the discharge of his public revised their organic documents or adopted duties:,ls In the 1983 case, Connick v. Myers, new constitutions since WWtJ and only t.hree, the court added another restriction by holding Connecticut. (196S), Georgia (1982) and North "the first Amendment does not protect from Carolina (1971), have no explicit mention of the dismissal public employees who complain governor's right to remove officials. Several about their working conditions or their super other states already had such a provision in visor.,,1 7 t.heir constitutions so that 22 states now pro. These three decisions have led to several law vide their governors with a constit utionally suits in the states in which fired employees based power of removal. 13 The Indiana gover charge they ".. ere terminaU!d for patronage or nor's broad power of removal was granted by a political reasons. state court decision. In two recent actions. Wyo ming voters rejected an amendment providing t.heir governor with t his power in 1984, but Gubernatorial Transitions adopted such an amendment. in 1986. One of the unique aspects of our govern Only eight. of these constitutional provisions mental systems, the peaceful transfer of ex grant their governors complete power of re ecutive power or transition between governors, moval. Restrictions placed on this power in appears to be occuring smoothly even in states volve: t he cause, (the reasons, or lack thereof, undergoing a change in party control. Fewer a governor must provide in removing someone horror swries are being told of empty files and from office); the scope, (which officers may or offices, fights over which governor has the right may not be removed); and the process, (hO'N does to appoint a major official, two armed camps the removal occur and who else must be involv not communicating and other similar ills, ed). The most frequent constitutional restric Some indicators of how t he states and the tions relate to cause, followed by the process governors involved are working for smoother and lastly scope. This does not. include the wide transitions are the increase in meetings be range of statutory provisions in the states, nor tween the outgoing and incoming governors, the array of state court cases addressing this power_14 lack of complaints by new governors about cooperation, preparation of manuals and brief Since 1976, governors have faced increas ing papers by the old administration for t he ingly difficult problems in t.heir abilit.y to staff new, a reduction of;'lame-duck" appointments their administration. Three U.S Supreme by the outgoing governors, newly elected gover Court decisions have constrained the flexibili nors being invited t.o become part of the bud ty of elected officials to fire government em getary process prior to their inauguration, and ployees from positions to which they want to ap more willingness by new governors to retain point their own supporters. In the 1976 case, professionally qualified individuals - even in Elrod v. Burns, the court ruled patronage fir positions to which political appointments can ing violates an individual's freedom to hold be mada l whatever political beliefs and to make what In a 1986 move to ease transition problems, ever political associations he or she wants Louisiana voters agreed to shorten the period under the First Amendment of the U.S Con between the election of state officials and the stit.ution; "political belief and association con date t hey take office. Effective in 1992, these stitute the core oft.hose activities protected by officials will take office in January, two months the First Amendment." Such dismissals were earlier than they do now. to be limited to policymaking positions only in order that "policies t.hat the electorate has sanctioned are fully implemented.,,1 5 The National Governors' Association In the 1980 case, Bl"8.nti v. Finkel, the court affirmed the earlier decision protecting a pub. The National Governors' Association has lic employee from patronage firing based on done much to assist new governors in their what the employee believes. However, the court. preparations to enter office by holding a New did provide BO rn e potential limitations on this Governors' Seminar within two weeks of the The Council of State Governments 3 1 GOVERNORS general election in the even numbered years. Introduction The incumbent governors serve 8.8 staff. The ISee Louis Harris, "Why the Odds Are subjects addre&&ed in these seminars are of Against a Governor's Becoming President:' direct concern to the newly elected governor: Public Opinion Quarterly 23:3 (Fall 1959). organizing the governor's office; press and pp. 361-70. public relations; management of the executive Gubernatorial Elections branch; executive-legislative relations; the gov 'See Gerald Benjamin, 'The Power of In ernorship as a partnership involving one's cumbency:' Empire State Report (April spouse; and the transition period. I In addition, 1987), pp. 33-37. printed materials and guidebooks have been prepared for the newly elected governorr and Gubernatorial Campajgn Costs transition assistance is made available upon 'They were: Hunt, Alabama; Cowper, Alaska; call. The transition assistance program has Mecham, Arizona; Romer, Colorado; Mar· been an on-going responsibility of NGA since tinez, Florida; Waihee, Hawaii; Hayden, the early 19708. Kan&88; Blanchard, Michigan; Bellmon, Oklahomaj DiPrete. Rhode Island; Mc Within the last few yean, NGA has taken ad Wherter. 'Thnnessee; Clement, Texas; and ditional steps to further governors' impact on Sullivan, Wyoming. DiPrete was the only in public policy. Under the guidance of NGA cumbent governor. Chairman Lamar Alexander (R..Thnnessee, 2rJ'hey were; Clinton, Arkansas; Deukmejian. 1979-87), NGA and the governors conducted a California; O'Neill. Connecticut; Harris, 50-state assessmenloftbe status of American Georgia; Thompson, llIinois; Branstad. education. Seven gubernatorial directed sub Iowa; Dukakis, M8888chuaettsj Perpich, committees a8lle88ed components of educa MinnellOta; Bryan, Nevada; Sununu. New tional policy and presented their report at the Harnpahirej Cuomo, New York; Celeste. NGA 1986 Annual Meeting, Time for Results: Ohio; and Kunin, Vermont. The Governors' 1991 Report on Education.3 3Jn addition to those listed in footnote 2 above: The report set an agenda for each governor to White ofThxas. Incumbents who were out- follow and, through 1991, they are to report at spent in the election were: Sheffield. Alas the annual meeting on the specific steps taken ka; Blanchard, Michigan; DiPrete, Rhode is to achieve educational reform in each state. land; and Earl. Wisconsin. Sheffield lost in the Democratic Party primary, Earl in the The next NGA chairman, Bill Clinton (0- general election. Arizona, 1979-1981, 1983-date),led a similar ·Gail a Manning and Edward F. Feigenbaum, ly focused effort on economic development and comp., The Lieutenant Governor: The Office job creation which culminated in the report, and Its fbwel'8 U-exington, Ky.: The Na· Miling America Work: Productive People, Pr0- tional Conference of Lieutenant Governors ductive AJlide6, at the 1987 NGA Annual by The Council of State Governments, 1987), Meeting.· The 1988 meeting will be focusing p. 10. on the cbanging balance in the federalsY8tem under the direction rLChairman John Sununu Gubernatorial lnvestigstions (R.New Hampshire. 1983-date). Three separate IFor a discussion of this saga see: Clive S concerns are involved: identifying changes in Thomas. "'The Thing' that Shook Alaska;' federal rules that would enable state govern· StateLegis/atw-es13:2(February 1987), pp. ments to operate more effectively; examining 22·25. the existing federal laws affecting states; and 280b Benenson, "The Edwards 'Hayride' developing a broad, direct, overall approach to Ends: Rep. Roemer to Be Governor;' Con restoring the balance of power.s STeBBinal Quarterly Weekly Report 45:44 (Oct. 31, 1987), pp. 2687-89. "'The Governor's Problems in Arizona;' State References fblicy Reports 6:3 (February 1988), pp. 23·26. Note: This chapter was prepared with the ~Dave Kaplan, "Arizona's Mecham: The a88istance of Joel Alan Boyette and Scott Troubles He's Seen," Congressional Mouw. graduate students in the Department of Quarterly Weekly Report46:1 (Jan. 2, 1988), Political Science, University of North Carolina P. 6. at Chapel Hill. &&bert Lindsey. "What in the World Is Going 32 The Book of the States 1988-89 GOVERNORS On in Arizona?;' New Thrk Times (Jan. 24, Newsletter 7:3 (June 1985), p. 13. 1988). 2OJoel Thompson, "The 1987 North Carolina 6"Mecham Trial Starts Feb. 22," Congres. General Assembly:' CompamtiveState Poli sional Quarterly Weekly Report 46:7 (Feb. tics Newsletter 8:5 (October 1987), p.. 3. 13, 1988), p. 291. 2l State Policy Reports 4:8 (April 1986), p.. 25. 7Larry Sabato query at the "Symposium on the State of the States," Eagleton Institute, Governors' Powers Rutgers University, Dec. 17, 1987. His book, 10ffice of State Services, State Management Good·bye to Goodtime CharUe published by Notes, "The Institutionalized PO\I.-ers of the Lexington Books in 1978 and CQ Press in Governship, 1965-1985," {Washington, DC: 1983, argued that not only was the governor· National Governors' Association, 1987). ship stronger in the states, but that many ~had L. Beyle, "The Institutionalized Powers very able governors have served in recent of the Governorship; 1965-1985," Com decades. parative State Politics Newsletter 9;1 sAP Wire story, "w. Va. attorney general ac (February 1988), pp. 26-27. quitted in campaign-law case," (Raleigh) 3Ibid., pp. 26-29. News and Observer (Nov. 20, 1986), p.. 2A. 4Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, The Question of State Govern Governors and Other Separately Elected ment Capability (Washington, DC: ACm, Officials 1985), p.. 129. lManning and Feigenbaum, pp. 3, 5. 6Ibid. 2Ibid., pp. 5-7. 6John J. McGlennon, "The 1986 Session ofthe 3Ibid., p. 6. Virginia General Assembly: ' Comparative 4"Some Governors Get No Respect;' Govern State Politics Newsletter 7:3 (June 1985), p. ing 1:2 (November 1987), p. 67. \9. 6State Policy Reports 5:10 (May 30, 1987), p. 1 Advisory Commission, p. 129. 10. 6Ronald C. Moe, " Prospects for the Item Veto 6" Lieutenant Governors as Legislative at the Federal Level: Lessons from the Leaders," State Policy Reports 4:23 (1986), States," (Washington, DC: National p. 27. Academy of Public Administration, 1988), 7 Alice Chasan Edelman, " Is There Room at pp.3.5. the Thp?," New Jersey Reporter (March s:Ibid., pp. 1·2. 1986), pp. 8·12. llThid. , pp. 17, 32. IIManning and Feigenbaum, p. 2. II"Wis. Court Asked to Veto Vetoes," Govern lIJ"bid. ing 1:4 (January 1988), p.. 58. IOJbid., p. 7. 121J'hompson, p.. 4. llDeborah Burroughs, "What Happens When lSorhose states changing their constitutions a Governor Wants to be President:' Com since 1945 are Missouri (1945), New Jersey parati ve State Politics Newsletter 8:3 (June (194 7), Hawaii (1950), Alaska (1956), Michi 1987), p. 25. gan (1963), Florida (1968), Pennsylvania 12"Some Governors Get No Respect." (1968), Illinois (1970), Virginia(1971), Mon· 13 Ibid. tana (1972) and Louisiana (1979). Other UMartin v; Thornburgh, (1987); see also Steve states with a constitutional provision are: Riley and Jane Ruffin, " State high court Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Mississippi, rules against Martin in territorial tangles," Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, South Raleigh News and Observer(Sept. 4, 1987), Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. pp. lA fT. l"Thad L. Beyle, "Report to the Attorney Lr'Martin v. Melott, (1987 ). General's Office of the State of North Caro 16Steve Riley, "Martin amasses bills for chal· lina re: Stott v. Martin;' unpublished paper, lenging laws," Raleigh News and Observer September 1987. (Jan. 3, 1988), pp. 23A, 26A. l6Elder Witt, "Patronage Firings:' Congres. l1"Attorneys General;' State Policy &ports sional Quarterly Weekly &port 34:27 (Ju 5:20 (Nov. 9, 1987), p. 26. ly 3, 1976), p. 1726. 16Ibid., pp.. 25-26. 16Elder Witt, "Supreme Court Deals Blow to l ~bert X. Browning, " 1986 Indiana Legisla Public Employee Firings for Political tive Report:' Comparative State Politics Reasons:' Congressional Quarterly Weekly The Council of State Governments 33 GOVERNORS Report 38:14 (April 5, 1980), pp. 899·890 Handbook for New GovemorsCWashington, I1 Elder Witt, "Employee Rigbts," Congres DC: NGA, 1978); Transition and the New sional Quarterly Report 41 :16 (April 6, Governors: A Critical Overview (Waahing. 1983), pp. 791-792. ton, DC: NGA, 1982); and, Office of State Gubernatorial Transitions Service, Management Note: "The Transi \''Transitions,'' State Policy Reports 4:23 (I)ec tion: A View from Academia:' (Wa.shington, 16, 1986), p. 25. DC: NGA, 1986). The National Governors' Association 3National Governors' Association, Time for urbad L. Beyle, "Gubernatorial 'Ihnsitiona: Results: The Governon ' 1991 &port on Le880RS From the 1982·1988 Experienc:e:' Education (Washington, DC: NGA, 1986). Publius 14:3 (Summer 1984), p. 13. 4Nationai Governors' Association, Makjng 'The National Governors' Conference, Th e America Work: Productive People, Produc· Critical Hundred Days: A Handbook for tive fblicies(Washington, DC: NGA, 1987). New Governors (Washington, DC: NGC. 5"Sununu Presents Agenda as New NGA 1975); NationaJ Governors' Association, The Chairman:' Governors' Weekly Bulletin Governor's Office (Washington, DC; NGA, 21:31 (August 7, 1987), pp. 1·2. 1976); Go~"eming the American States: A 34 The Book of the States 1988-89 GOVERNORS hi 133.99 99999 99939 999.9 99999 999 •• 99999 o h ~ • "'~"'N'" • ~ i IUm "" """ " " -" "" " " l~.il i~ __ ~ l "-• ~ ~-§: ------1 I! ~~~§§ §~~~~ ~§~~~ ~~~~~ §§~~~ ~§§§~ §§~~~ ~1 ~~~§~ ~~~~S ~SS~~ ~~$~~ S~~~~ ~S~~~ S~~~~ ...... :;: : .... . : : : : : : : : ::::: ::::: ::::: if ! ~I~ Jil!f 1III Jii!i IfIll til!! fiil~ The Council of State Governments 35 GOVERNORS U~~~!~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ it s§§~§ §§~~~ ~~!§§ ~§~s~ 36 The Book of the States 1988-89 GOVERNORS Table 2.2 THE GOVERNORS: QUALIFICATIONS FOR OFFICE U.S. rillDnJ "' I .~ . _...... ~ , '""" AI.... o .• •.•.••. ~ , A .... o ...... " • "...... ~" "• ~,- , ., " • _ " • ~ ... , ...... ~ • , eol-*'" ...... ~ .... • Deb.. · ...... ~ .1cHWa ...... ~ " , • GMotIo ...... ~ • " • 111-.11 ••..••.••• ~ • , • ,...... ~ • , 1111 ...... • , ,...... "~ , , 1-- ...... ~ • , .:._ ...... ,.._nl ... .., ...... •, • M ol ...... , • 104..,'...... " , "'_ h ooth '" , MktolpJo(ltl •••••• , •• 'it} ,- • , .M ...... "~ .. , "'-..t ...... " 104 ...... ) ...... • "• "~ , , .-.~ ...... , • ~ 1I_..wro ... . "~ Nf,o J....., ...... ~ New "'...... ~ • • N... " ...... ~ • NIKI' c-oII_ . .. . ~ , Non. 00 ...... ~ • • 01110(.) •• .. • • 0 1.11""" • , ••••••• , • Orq...... • " ' •• ••, 1. . ... • a_ I...... ) ...... • So • •• eo ...... , .... . • ", s.." 0 ...... , T.. _ ••..•..•••. Touo ••..•..••..•••. • , U...... • , ,...- ...... • • n ...... • , ""-"" ...... • • WOOl n.p ...... ~ , • • "'-....- ...... " • • "",~ .. . ~ • • " __ 500_ •..• , ("-- ...... "~ ." • No. M arla •• r• • ~ . " , ' .....0 IU The Council of State Governments 37 GOVERNORS Tllble 2.3 THE GOVERNORS: COMPENSATION --., AM'SI' 10 41ol~ 1_1~11ott ,,.., .~~ ;;;;;;~;.::'.• : . ~ tho)'nt. J ...... ~Cowr · ~.!!,:::.=:., - . 38 The Book of the States 1988.89 GOVERNORS :! ...... ,p ...... "' ... ., ..... _0 ...... ,p~ .... "':::: ::: :1.1 : :", 1.1",,,, :u uu"''''u ",. ·U •. ...... . .. .. : : : ...... ...... • ...... • ...... ::e: : • ...... 3 ••••• •• ••• • •••• ... .. • •••• ..... .1 ...... ~'I. t j I dId f! The Council of State Governments 39 GOVERNORS 40 The Book of the States 1988.89 Table 2.5 GUBERNATORIAL EXECUTIV E ORDERS:- AUTHORIZATION, PROVISIONS, PROCED--URES ' j ~ 1., ,if ·1 i ., i 1 II H ~ l h l, l~ f!1j !l' ., i l' A~IItoriUlI"", 1 t 11 ; " jl Sl~1I (W I(WU«II'~ ; Ii .'-, I#~ J~rildinHM jl '1 0 .1 ..... '!ino· 0 m ! :! w• r ~. d it All...... 5.1(1) , .. (~.d) AIub •••••••••••••• C .. • • • An.... • .. •••••. . •• ,., .,,, . (I) * t_) " (d A_ ••••••••••• 5.1(.) • • • • • • • • • CooIII...... , • • • • • • • • C...... , .,. • ~ ...... , • 00-10 ...... C • • • • • • • . 1t.1I.I • """'" ...... c. • • ." • • • • GrorP .. .. .••• ... .• 5.1(.) • • • • • • • • • "Sl 111.011 ••••••••••••• I ~) • . (h.i) ItblM> • . (0) '" nN_ ...... c • . (0) lO Ck) <;l IMII•• 0 loWi •••• • •••••• • ••• ,• fj; .., .:- ...... , • • • • • .. (1) . «.<1.111) ~ ....I ..I 'J ...... , * (11) lO {k.o.p.v • • • • " '<) • () ..-...... ,' • · U.• .1) . (011) • .'>.1 , 0 Mol...... , • " (Y.-) . (d) ,C M ..,I0"" ...... C. • • • • • • . (.) • • .,,, O. M _ .•.•••• c .• • • . (1 .•) • • • • . (011) M itWpo ...... C. • • • - (~ . (0) • , 0 M _ ...... , ., . \t."" .. .(.) ~ • • M....."...... , • • • • • (... •bII) 0<' • "' M '-'oli •••••••••••• C • • • • • • • . (1) .. t· ...." ~ • M o...... ,., • • • • • . (q) _ (t) s~ • ...... , • • S ..od • • .• • •••••••• • , • ,"~ s ... 1I ••,.w ...... , • - (I) • • • - (q) • , s ... J....,-...... , • • * (dd) * (bII) 3 Sootmos: M_I"... m. ~ R ~ Cowo ~ :3· ...... ::>... ·.. .. -...... _ r.:::'.: .~:::: :g.~·. . ..~. ..~...... ~:::...... =::::... ! _1 i. :!.s s. o .!! • '11) . ' ...... ~ . : :: .. ... " · . : :'" ;: ...... ...... t1H>FI "' ~~II''''-' ~J"'I~'" JO . :: fptl# 'JMllI1fI,fU/IOJ · .- ...... '~~Itw:) '. i 110/11»» ,:w~. ""_ l ~ ftI""'II •• • ....s: : ... :...... 42 The Book of the States 1988·89 GOVERNORS Table 2.6 STATE CABINET SYSTEMS ,~ l-f ! J -I M."'brr~ ,• • __u.s j I 1j! /iImHIi.., F~" .:i::. ••• ! c • --,.0-_) " " It n ,,!eM ••...... -- Twb_bb".) ... • • -• A ...... • • • , ArItoM ••••••.•.•... w... .. • • An._ ...... • • " C.MI ...... • • • " -Evuy- two wtdc. CeIonOo ...... " Twb_,,..,. MflIr•• .....•... • • --- • c• • • • " c.o. ,'. dixretion I)00I.,, ...... • I (C' " Coo:. dixretioG • t'lofkl • •..•...•. • • , Evuy two..m. • (;000"', ...... (dF · " II.,,·.W ...•.... . • • • • • eo,:. dilcre The Council of State Governments 43 GOVERNORS Table 2.1 THE GOVERNORS, PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES FOR TRANSITION ho""" fo!: A"'l""httilo6 ,.".-, $Iliff OtI~rs Sl.. ~ ~ Offlo,:c:.; with ofJkr lAtilllHiotI 00_'0 MIlo 1M n.../_ o/ c:::./c/pGritNt I~IN= iMd,.,../iM pnrlJl~1fII1O tiotu V>G/I. ".,~~ ItWSI~lo """* _-.il. l'lf",_"'" tl/1I# /0 I4JbI ntlUGblt" 1<, SI"~ Qr Ilbk /0 "'...... dwI~r .. ~ ..-,«, 1ft'" - -,~..... - ,",-"" IrosilitM --/t"",,_ "" ... - '"" .. - ...... -.... . Col ...... • • -• A ...... -- A.u...... • 6O,OQIXtI) • • CalIf...... • ZU,OOO(c) • • • • c-...... • 10.000 • • • • • ~ ...... • n." • • • I)0I0.- .. . .. (9.000(d) • n..w...... • n.ooo • • ~ .. .. . • • • • • • ~.d ~ • • • • • • 1_ ...... • ... • • • • • • Iii...... ~." • .o le) • • • • 1_...... • .,;000 • • • • • • I ...... · cn 10,000 • • .., ·0' ...... 100.000 • • • • ..1II:,,'Kk/ - . . . • UDq> ...... i',>111. i .:.0 :!ll' :' ;I0 ;' ....0 :'0.:1 :' .:;00 .... :" :...0 :' 00;J .:.r! :' 0.:. :' .:.0 ::" ::" 0'.... : r! 0)82. i(ii[ iHil i(j(j ,(, " ,i .li:qi Ii! B '~I a . ,;Ee lSI " ~h ';:';;:';;:';s ~i~it ssssi st£j~ ''~i .;;'- ;;• •~ '. ;; ::is ;; ;; ;; ~ " ~ili -s .. : ------' , j .. .d 'i II . ~.l . , ii , ! I : : • I; Ii. • jUl :1: . . Ii · : :: :i Hi : . ' ~ll 'S1 ' . a· SS · P " ' 1 ii- ;;U '1 ~ 'ii" ';" r=" _ 0 ; ...... ••••• ••••• ...... - ...... 11 { ":,,••. • . •~ hili The Council of State Governments 45 GOVERNORS 46 The Book of the Statell 1988-89 THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH: ORGANIZATION AND ISSUES, 1986-87 By Thad L. Beyle Executive Branch Reorganization virtual i.ndependence of more t han 200 agen cies, boards and commissions by creating a cen· In t he past few years, there has been a slight tralized, cabinet form of government; and sec reawakening orthe drive to reorganize the ex ond, a new governor must. by executive order ecutive branches of state governments· but not within 45 days of taking office, create his or her always with positive results. Over the course of own cabinet and appoint cabinet secretaries the Twentieth Century, there have been three subject toconfirmation by the state Senate. The different waves of reorganization, usually fol legislature al80created a Reorganization Coun· lowing similar efforts at the national level: cil to develop a statutory cabinet system; an 1910-1913, The Thft Commission; 1937, the Oklahoma Advisory Commission on Intergov Brownlow Committee; and 1947-49, The ernmental Relations; and abolished the Depart Hoover Commission.1 ment of Economic and Community Affairs by reo While the goals of executive branch reorgani. organizing it into a Department of Commerce. zation may vary from state to state, they gen Upon taking office in 1987. Governor Henry erally include: a four year term for the gover Bellmon implemented the process by issuing nor plus other chief executive powers; adopting executive orders creating an interim cabinet the short ballot by reducing the number of divided into 15 functional areas. ~ This step to also meant that seven statewide elected Demo. separately elected statewide officials three 6 . the governor, lieutenant governor, attorney cratic officials lost their jobs. However, many general and JKl88ibly the auditor (although that in the legislature felt the reorganization effort office can be seleded by the legislature); shift. was a costly mistake and tried to dismantle it the control of staLe departments from commis in the 1987 session. The bill passed the Okla sions to a single removable appointee except in homa House 63-33, but was tabled in the higher education and in t he regulatory func Senate. e tions; and grouping state departments and Iawa began an effort to downsize and restruc agencies by consolidation or elimination of ture its executive branch in 1986 by reducing agencies and other units into 5 to 25 depart the number of departments to 21 with five in ments which report to t he governor.2 ln a re dependent commissions. The governor was cent study of staLe government roorganizations. given the power of appointment over all depart. James Conant suggests that reorganization is ments except the Board of Regents. Fifty de· more "a political rather than an administrative partments and 42 boards and commissions were eliminated as the executive branch was tool:' and rather than reducing a large budget 7 deficit, these reorganizations can be effective consolidated under the governor's controL by slowing the growth of government by assist. However, afler an extended study. the 1986 ing in shift.ing budgetary and policy ~riorities, session of the Washington State legislature and by leading to some efficiencies. defeated a substantial executive branch reor ganization plan which would have enhanced The 1986 Oklahoma legislature adopted the powers of the governor. The plan was what may be the most far reaching state roor ganization plan seen in recent years, at least on paper. The general outlines of the plan in Thad L. Beyle is Proressor ofl\llitical Science at the cluded two major components: flJ"St. ending the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The Council of State Governments 47 EXECUTIVE BRANCH strongly supported by the governor and while tion with the commissioners appointed by the there was support in the legislature for the governor rather than being elected; the legis plan, it foundered in the state Senate by a nar lature did not approve the proposal in a bizarre row vote on the question of whether it should set of events. 7 be referred to the voters or not.8 Some minor changes were adopted from tbe plan in shifting Futures Commissions three functions into the Department of Com munity Development: historic preservation, There have been several "blue ribbon" com emergency management and fire protection. missions working in the states developing analyses and reports concerning the state's Partial Reorganizations future. In 1986, a Georgia 2000 committee ad· dressed. the disparity between urban and rural As in each biennium, there have been partial development, 1 which was followed by tbe crea reorganizations in the states. For the most part, tion of a Growth Strategies Commission in the changes were minor and even cosmetic 1987.2 The Kentucky Thmorrow Commission although there were some of import. Virginia issued its report in 1986 which unfortunately separated the position of Secretary of Com was characterized as being long on rhetoric and merce and Resources into a Secretary of Eca- short on specifics..s In 1986, Missouri's gover nomic Development and a Secretary of Natural nor established a Missouri Opportunity 2000 Resources. 1 Following this change, there are Commission chaired by the secretary of state. 4 now seven separate secretaries directing large A "Michigan Beyond 2000" study was pre "offices" or departments who report to the pared for that state's Senate in 1986,5 follow governor: administration, economic develop ed by another report from a private organiza ment, education, finance, human resources, tion on tbat state's economy.' A New Jersey transportation and public safety, and natural State and Local Expenditures and Revenue resources. 2 Policy Commission has begun to report on its The Maine legislature in 1986 split its [)e.. efforts by calling for a strong state role in partment of Finance and Administration into economic development and the consolidation of two departments, one to handle financial mat. some state agencies. 7 An Oklahoma Academy ters, the other to provide services to state agen for State Goals was established in 1987 follow cies,.s and in 1987, the legislature created a ing a report on constructing a strategic plan for new Department of Economic and Communi the state's future. 8 A "Competitive Wisconsin" ty Development.~ group reported in 1986 on how state spending The states were also active in establishing might be reduced to the u.s. average. 9 Finally, agencies and task forces to address current con· the flrst report of The Wyoming Futures Pr0- cerns such as AIDS, childrens' issues, the ject in 1986 addresses that state's economic economy and economic development, the en future. 10 There have been other commissions vironment, low income housing, the organiza looking at indigent health care, liability and in tion of higher education and teenage preg surance, and infrastructure. nancy. There is always a question of the effectiveness But not all partial reorganization attempts of such "blue ribbon" commission efforts succeed. In a unique setofsteps, the 1985 Min especially when few attempts are made to nesota state legislature passed legislation analyze them. One recent study has evaluated stripping the state treasurer of moot duties by such commissions in the higher education area transferring nearly all of these duties to the and found a series of factors that can lead to the finance department under the governor. How effectiveness of such commi88ions. Among ever, the state Supreme Court held that this these factors are: attainability of goals; time legislative attempt to abolish the treasurer's allotted to the study; frequency of commission office violated the separation ofpowers doctrine meetings; accessability of the staff; an open pro in the state's constitution.& In 1986, the gover cess ofcomment; professional not political staff; nor of Kansas attempted to reorganize the solid background research; consideration of Board of Agriculture by bringing it into the public comments at hearings; a positive media governor's cabinet; the legislature did not give reaction; use of experts in addition to staff and approval.' At the same time, the governor of commiasion members; recommendations that Mi88i88ippi BOugbt to reorganize the Highway are substantiated; active involvement of tbe Department into a Department ofTransporta- commi88ion members in tbe commiS8ion ac- 48 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH tivities; and consideration of those affected in tom Line," Public Mministration Review the implementation process. U 46:1 (JanuarylFebruary 1986), p. 55. Of course. tangible impacts may not be t he 4. Thomas H. Clapper, "Oklahoma Executive only reasons to have such commissions, they Government Reform;' Comparative State may be vehicles to "coopt" members of the Politics Newsletter 7:4 (August 1986), P. 13. state's business and other elites into develop 5. "People: GOP Gov. Bellmon Dumps Some ing a n understanding of particular problems Democratic Aides," Governing The States the state and its governments face and/or to and Localities 1:3 (December 1987), p. 66. gain support for certain proposed policies; they 6. Thomas H. Clapper and Thad L. Bayle, can be used to put problems off by studying " Organizing State Government to Be them for a while until the problem eases in the Managed:' in Beyle, ed., State Government: public mind, or an upcoming election is past; CQ's Guide to Cl.IJTent Issues and Activities, or t.hey can even be used to further a particular 1987-88(Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1987), actor's political ambitions. Then effectiveness p. 127. becomes eveD harder to measure. 7. James D. Carney, "Downsizing Government: Iawa's Challenge," TheJournaJ ofState Gov Ethics and Conflicts of Interest ernment 60:4 (July/August 1987), p. 189; "State Government Reorganization: ' pp. There was the normal array of questionable 17-18; and "State Reorganization;' State behavior in 90me of the states raising questions Policy Reports 4:8 (April 26, 1986), p. 25. about stricter laws t.o guide behavior. The prob 8. Hugh A. Bone, "Productive Session in Wash lems that certain governors faced were discl18lJ. ington State." Comparative State Politics ed in "The Governors, 198f).87" essay. Among Newsletter 7:3 (June 1986), p. 21. some of the questionable actions were: a bank 9. "State Reorganization: ' ibid. ingcommissioner accused ofusing inside infor mation to sell stock (Oklahoma);1 the chair Partial Reorganizations man of the pardons board a nd the speaker of the house indicted for selling pardons (Louisi l."Legislative Actions: Virginia raises gas tax;' ana);2 misuse of state funds in traveling State Government News 29:10 (October around the world The Council of State Governments 49 EXECUTIVE BRANCH 3. Kentucky Thmorrow Commission, Meeting 11. Janet Johnson and Laurence Marcus, Blue the Challenge: An Agenda 7bday for Ken Ribbon Commissions and Higher Educa tucky's 'lbmorrow(Lexington, KY: The Com tion: Changing Academe from the Outside mission, 1986) as reported in "Kentucky (Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study 'Ibmorrow:' State Policy Reports 4:22 (Nov. of Higher Education, 1987). 27, 1988), pp. 26-27. 4. "Missouri Development:' State Ft!Jjcy Ethica and Conflicts of Interest Reports 4:4 (Feb. 28, 1986), pp. 9. 5. "Michigan Development," State Policy 1. State Government News 80:5 (May 1987), p. Reports 4:4 (Feb. 28. 1986), pp. 7-9. 29. 6. "The Economic Future, Michigan Style," 2. "Selling Pardons in Louisiana?;' StatefbJicy State Polio/Reports 4:18(Sept. 26, 1986}. pp. Reports 4:18 (Sept. 26, 1986), p. 28. 12-13. 3. "Official Globetrotting by State Officials." 7. "Economic Development and Reforms: New State Policy Jkports 5:21 (Nov. 16, 1987), p- Jersey," State Policy Reports 5:21 (Nov. 16, 26. 1987), pp. 1O-} 1. 4. "Their Spousea' Businesses:' State Policy 8. "Economic Development and Reforms: Okla Reports 4:12 (June 30, 1986), pp. 22-23. homa's Problem:' Ibid., pp. 6-10. 5. "Corruption Commission Chartered," Na· 9. "The Economic Future, Wyoming Style" tional Civic Review 76:2 (February 1987), p. StatePolic:y Report84:18(Sept. 26, 1986), pp. 161. 11-12. 6. Joseph F. Zimmerman, "More New York;' 10. "Aspiring to be Average in Government Comparative State Politics Newsletter 8:5 Spending," St'ate Policy Reports 4:20 (Oct. (October 1987), pp. 4-5. 25, 1986), pp. 24-28. 50 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.9 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR LENGTH AND NUMBER OF TERMS OF ELECTED STATE OFFICIALS I ~• 1 , , ! • I , ~ • , s,." IN ! ! j• ~ 1, ,• j " ... 011 . . on B The Council of State Governments 51 EXECUTIVE BRANCH LENGTH AND NUMBER OF TERMS-Continued I J ,I j Now I>Inlte •.•••• . / 1(0) 4/1(0) 4/1(0) ~ II((» 4/1(0) 4'1«(» Con:um, of Public 1.andJ.-4I1(0); Rd. of Edoaooiooo--61·; Cor pOf&IiooI Commo.--6I· Now Vott ...... 1'1 .... CareIIu Nor!. Dalll.II ..... P~ bIic s.mc. Comma.-6.I·; To: Commr.-4/. 0W0 ..... ,m, Rd. (>f EdPCalloD-6I- 01Il00_ •• 4/. ec"ponllioft COImIUI. W· Drotoarn.., .. ...••.•••.. _ ...... , .... . SM'. CUeIIu "...... j~... 11 QoDrraI-4/. C_ . of SdIoooI .t '" P\lbIic lan 52 The Book of t.he States 1988·89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2. tO SELECTED STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS, METHODS OF SELECTION StOI~ M Linl'mDnt ~,~ AII_-" Adi~lant Ad",iwi$- AI ';' QlMr J~riNicti<>w OO ....~M of Slal~ ~~ ..al lIati<>tl &tdi/q ,."., ~- ..- """'- ",lIu" ... "'b...... G a ~ ... ,...... a. a. a. A A A A "''''0 •• ,.. , " " Ci" "co " a o. " a' a ... rk . . ... " co " a a ,.,• Aa Aa C.llfond•. • . " cr" " c. " a, G' a, a, C ...... o •. "cr " " a a, a, A a, CO~II«1I<. ! . co co co co a a' 0< G' A UoI ...... "co "a, " "co o. a, a, o. a, ,_. " " co o. a, A ('.... IlI'" . " " " " a G' " "o. G ... ..· 011 " " " "a, (0.9) o. a "a, Aa a, Id."", " " a a, G' o. G IIlb.oI •. " " "cr " " a a, a, o. a '~dl ••• •• '" " " " a a a a G 10 ... . . '"e' " "cr " " o. a " a • 11: . . ... co " G' a, a, ~ II: nl1 " ~ Y e, G G • a a La.IoI ...... "cr "co " cr" o. a "a a, !>hl ...... " " " " " a a G'-' G'-' Aa'" M·IlI ...... , .. " cr "a, " " a, a, a, Aa, M .....-.ot1 .. " "cr "cr a a a G Aa'" Mk ...... cr G' a, G' o. M I~_ •• " '" " cr a a, a,• Mlooioslppl . " cr" " cr '" G' a,• M_ rl .•. " " " " '"• "cr " co "co a, a, G'" A Moo •• n. .. . cr " " A a G' "A a N .....>I< . , •• cr co co co a,-, '" G' ,~) N.,. d. cr " " " G a >G '"A (0-6) N... H •• p",,. ., ... co " GC" " GC ""GC GC GC (0-6) 1'1 . ... J ....y. co " " G' "a, A >G A N. ..· Multo. co '"cr co '" a, '" G' N... · "<>rio: cr (ii) a G' a a N..... o CuoIl... " cr " '"a '"a '" '" AG e' " '" " (II) N ""'~ I",h,o co " cr " " a " '" 01110 ••. e, " " " a ..a, "a, '"A a' Ol.l.bo ... . . , cr "cr "a, " "cr G a, a, a Or<-J"" .. a a, Aa A ,. ...'" .. cr a, " '" a a, a R...... I. "" .. .. " " " "co a a, '"A G s.,u,' C..oN•• .. " " " '" '" ( .... ) , .., " '"" " " " c. • " ." s.,. , ~ l)o~ o!O cr a, a A A T ••...... , . cr a a '"a G A " " "a, "e, a, G T..... " " " " • a, a, U •• b .•. " a " " a ,..... "'" ... " " " " '" G' , '1,.1.1 •. • . " " " C." " a". '" G. '" a'". W..... ,...... ,. cr " G' e, " a,G' a, A• a, w... \"1,.1,/0 "co " '" a, cr W_II• .. . . cr CE" "co '"G G' '"a, '"A Wy".'" "cr "G' "cr a G • G a /llQI,: "Th< chid admlni. " ".. ,... ofrltial. responsil>l< 1M taCh fu ....io m -eo,,,",,,," ol CO SELECfED OFFICIALS, METHODS OF SELECTION-Continued c_ c__ _...... S/IIU Of c_ IfJM,uI, 0>mf"'1" c_ ....",. ~~~ <;;:;&; .., , l ..fiIM OI1ttr",MdktiIM ...."'" 0/1'" 54 The Book or the States 1988-89 EXECUTfVEBRANCH SELECTED OFFICIALS: MET...... H ODS OF SELECTION-Continued ~ -. Hjzlw< Ss.f~ '" """'. E-v ,,, "'-' I>I ~ .. jt " DIr«tor. ~ _ The Council of State Governments 55 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECTED OFFICIALS: METHODS OF SELECTION-Continued M_' HWorl< ...... Fwb' Siilltor N.,ur./ ~ ...,.,.. ,.,.. PIiM~"" ..,,, OIlwrio 56 The Book of the States 1988-89 The Council of State Governments 57 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.11 SELECTED STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS, ANNUAL SALARIES Silli. or ikrJltrwnrl ,.,.~ AII_", A4JwI.~' Admillh- DIM. ./I Sotua;. Tl>t C4>IuIdI of SlOi. Go¥munon,,' ... ~ of _. Pff)OfUId OeMrol~. SJ.I.Sj4, l'orQ"""" 1"CCfftIIioa. Sil.7(I2, P W~ qcnda. 19t7. $61,l(N, Solid ... ~ _"'. $41.906: St .... pOIjcc, SoW,l , ~.. Tl>t thief o.dmilIi$t..u.e offld.ll rarpofISIbk rOlf tadI n._ T'!"!f'!""OIIo 58 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECfED OFFICIALS, ANNUAL SALARI ES- Continued c__ ~ . s..~ '" Ciw c_ C_'''' c-- ... .,. OIMr ~iNkHr rir~lS "" "- ~~ .."' ... ~ ..... --, --,~- ".. _...... on- ... 112,141 ~,lIl(b) SoIO. II SCb) sn"''''.I16(b) U1.192- ..,.~ SRHO (.,..2) AI...... •69.17 6 n." n.'" 601 ,620 69,176 11,81(1 n.'" n.'" n.'" •66.11 6 A' h o ••...... n,.. 6$,97' (e-ll) ...". 67.m 76 .1~ MollJ (e- lI) ~ . ~ (.,..2) A '~ ...... 'Ull .1.'191 61.919 11,)61 61,1" 67,.70 Ie- I) C. II'...... 7S,lS' .. ~ 11.S06 ".'~ n.H6 8'.oIOl ",<102 1""1c·11 n.'" col) C...... '1,0l60i n . ~ 'MoIO ''.0l60i ".w...... ~ ..... ~.,., }.I,IU C... -..l ...... S7.OU7{b) 61.505(b) . '.176(b) ~ ..... H,611(b) 61.505(b) 66,llJ(b) (e- II) 7[.6n(b) .S,5 o.loware: Compl.oll The Council of State Governments 59 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECTED OFFICIALS: ANNUAL SALARIES- Continued _. E~.1frHt.-,., Sl.I~"" -, .-- H,,,, O1/ItF jurUdlNloII "". HNlIIt H/tlt_ - ""'" "- ""'if< ...... -1$2,'" IlUl2 (b) I m.us In.1oIa Ill.US 1:U.lID'l (10)$100,9'16 $ 74,7~ In.1oIa "1-...... (0' g.,," --(;9.276 A~ ...... 66.H2 - 66.7l2 -- - --'l.5IoI n.", &2.991 n.", n."" n."" -- l8,J9l (r·1l) 41.4/11 9M2J ""_ ...... ".(;9 SUlO M.9'1' ".000 76.12' 8),"1 ArII_ ...... 16,12' 6<1.631 4II.H6 ~.'" 51 .... ,0<) (;9.)'15 ~.'" 74,1l6 Calif ...... n.Js. 1'.402 81.6)' 91.0S4 f~ 'M02 ".402 .... 91._ 6 ,.,•• IIIIi 1Ii1'orit; 1ot 1>1" . of C .... J2.1lJ ".1)11 I.· I~I 47.197 69.H 6 (c.ll) (rr,) 69.SS6 69.S56 69.'$6 A_~ . So ..... 21.003 2!.000 2S,000 13.000 l S,OOO (00- 11) l$.ooo ~ 14.838 U.IlI (~I) 3-1.111 (c-7) (c·27) (c-6) 3-I.UI (c.') N. ..M.rl ...... U ... N.A. Ic· ll) 18.000 ~.~ l1.ooo ll." « · 19) (00-9) M." """'0 Kko ••• • • 4),llo1l ~ Il.W(..... )lO.)24(.n) (~ 21 ) ~ ... (.~) ~.~ (t-Ill ... (<-2L) n.171 \" '111. 10I01Ik • (c.21) "( ....c·l) « · 19) (t-IS) (t-lS) (0-21) 5!.000 SJ.OOO O klo""""": Communi', .ffai... SSJ.OOO: Com"",.. .."...icn. $Sl.1. $: ~1.)()7 ; Ilanki .... S6l.141: B~ , m.67S: c:M1 riJbto. 1-4ULO: Com· Solid ...... ml_n,. U6.114 mctOr. 159.67$: C""'!'I.aI.... ~9.67$: CompuI...... -ica. 1$9.671: Con· R ~ b.lltld: Adjutant ,m The Counci l of State Governments 61 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECTED OFFICIALS: ANNUAL SALARIES- Continued ~".",UI" -,""" Stll'. Of -. ~ .~ ~". ,~ .... T_ "'- II/Iw~ ..."'", "- .., .. -.. .-. -, .... ~.. - nt,ot.6(t» I (e-U) ~ >~ IM),1 Ll(b) 152.14$ ---Sll.1J6(b) m.14I S)7,llZ(b) -'-...... m ..... S 1~17) ~ ...... ",H6 .,... ".116 "P' (.,.~) 1I,1ID ...no ... .,. 66,116 t~1 An...., .•••..••. 61,2:11 1Il,71l ,,~ - 61.lS7 ... ,~ ...... "' IC-ll) n.'" JO.HO A.u- ...... )1,0116 47.m n,m "',.", 'J.m JO,I40 ,.", .,.21) ".1'01 (c-12) ~~ c.IIf...... '','16(1)) 1S,«l!.. 67,601 ,c-l1j '1,6)j tl,QS.I (e-Ill 11.63' ".«l! n".. ".~ c-- ...... (c. !)) '1.710 ..... n.~ n.~ ,.,.J1) n ...... ".610 CHMCIinIt •..••. Ie-H) )4,oUl(b) 61,4lO(b) "66,11l(b) .... n.617(bl n.617(b) 6 1,SIH(b) 4J.19@) .66,lll(b) lU29(b) 7L:,i7{lt) ~.- ...... ,e-U) 36.100 ,..,., ..... 41,XIO n.'" 5O,121(b) .. ... 17.265(b) ..... JleriU ...... H,JO(I ",760 1),100 41.00l(b) S7.HO 19.M? ".~ 41,OOOIbl n.'" ~. ." (0·26) ...... !<>lSl 6J,fJO ".900 69,'.n jI,ll' 6J,91(I (e-J7) n.!I9! ...on .. .., ,.", H._ ...... 17.lJ6 ..... 61,560 41.161(b) 11,(Il(b) ...... (<-21) M." 1_ ...... ~ ~ J6,m .., n c·1I ...... ,.. ..., ~."" ".m -M,I" I...... 1O.OJ n.lll ,.., 1I.llI ,.", ",U, t'l I~lll 1_ ...... t"l." u.rn ').142 ".415 ,.., "',292 "~_,(<-)7).. " '1.911 ,1.l61." ".M ...... ",JOO(b)." 4',1OO!b) )(,J6Z(b) :J9.5Il(bl ".7OO(b) (5."Ub)~"" ".')6(11) )(,)U(b) 49,7(1(1(11) "-...... (<-U) ".m 64,'" ".00 ~.- ,",.HII ~.." (e-lll ".m ('.Gn ~ , ,.'" 49.'12 n.'" ".m ... ,...... ".m ... .., 6O,Ul 64,1111 64.91' ...... I·' 4I,'1l 61,H6 4I,7U n,M' ... ." )1,000 .1 ....1 51.4" ...... (<-Il••l l ...U '9.1011 010,019 lU'Il ....., ".'" (<-21) 49,)9 J2,~7(11) (e·Uj "-M."...... lUI"") '2.ml(b) 6),7(1(1 n." lMII(II) (<- Ill l~!~ ..... ~.,., 61,JOO ., ... M __U •.•• ~.'" 6!,m 7'7,$017 56,OJ7 6Ul-l n.'" Jl,", ..... 6',21J ., ... M~ ...... l:m ..... ~.,.. 21,Ul(b) (e-,Jlk (wI) 64.100 27.'])(11) ,.", 47.606(b) J6,Ill(b) )9.m(lI) ".J2t(b) '::I 'I II) "mI>' ",)%1(11) 49,J)9(II) "-~ ...... (<-Ul ~ ... 4',000 ~~I ".~.~ (e-m ll,'IO(II) ~.~ J5,199 "... M_ ...... (e- Ul "~.~... " ..., "'.9JJ ".m n.>O> 66.7'" ,...,. 61,961 ",(12 l::l 101 _ ...... n.~ ~ n>n ,,"', 4).m lI,'7'7 ... (e-ll) )(,4U ".m(e-M 1'1-...... " ... 56,\)01 «1,1'2 "'61,000(jj) ... I·'".m '-,'56 N...... l~ a""'2,979 ".6lG( ..) (e-l-I) ".1901 ...... (e-111 ... .., ...m .... IOlll N... II~ .• """"J5,61J(b) ...... ,.. )1,1015(11) J7.l4!(b) ... ". ... ". lS,62S(bl JS,W(b) 29,lJJ(b) e- N ... ' ....,...... 15,000".., ".W ..... ".291 61.0160 ...... " 5Ul4 (<-Ill n.'" (<-U) N . .. M ...... 41.974 1I.J71 'l.MO 41.116 41,U6 ''''14 42,216 (<-11) ",62' (',714 n,ll( N .... Yoo1l ...... ((.4) (c-I7) v.n. Il,nl ,0<> (~~) '{"J7l (c-lI) l7,n' f).I19 (e-U) N lM1 b ~ ... (<-U) )9,01l(b) 6'.0112 ... .., ...... ", 5 .OJ1 JS.S" 61.'56 '1.2101 ,",,091 N . ... DM_ .... J7,m ...." 66,116 ... ." ...... 42,1" 'l,lIlO (1,900 ow...... (<-lS ".296(11) JJ.J6J(b) ....1lIl(b) (",)7) l7.1J6(b) «I,5dO(b) 29,099(11) (",U) '·n ~"'" "'.l92(b) ".'" ~ ...... ,., ...... ~ ... (e-)7) ...... (e-ll) ,.", ~ ...... ",!lOt "'1..., 1" "'."1I,Ia ...... n.w 74,JI6 n",. n." '1,11' ..".. (<-101) (e-ll) """" ~ ..... (~:'i ",712 n.sl' ~ ... , 42.1115 'I,m -M,(ll)j(bl 49.015(111 5I,IU(I» 61,6I!1(b)... ,.'" ..... 1'.646(11) '',111(1)1 ,tJJ1 ,.", (e-Il) ,.'" )9,051(11)'A. 66,M7(b)n.'" )9,05I(b) (c·16) ....SO'I!~ C-- ... 41.910 SJ.JloI n .... ""ZIl(b) n.'" (e-m s...1b Deli ...... 36,067 4'.964 61,,,,", ,.", ....,lL1 T .._ ...... ».93' ..... ~." n .... }MOO '1,'"46 .• '6 }l,JOO ' 2.JOoI ".m ",m (",U) ~."" (c_IJ) 4.'" ".'" T ...... (e- Il) ".-..... 10 ",620 ~.'" (<-101) (<-J7) 45,9010 66.641 ...... (<-U) UUob ...... 1",1)1 )1.6S6(II) )4,"" 62 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECTED OFFICIALS: ANNUAL SALARIES-Continued (c·l' ) pw,oin. Oi ..bili ..... Oivi",,". Social and Rehabiti, ••1oD Snvi-)6) Public: utility ,qull.lon (jj) AlIO IIU IiI>&nD< rapOnsibililles. (c·l7) Publlc ... The Council of State Governments 63 EXECUTIVE BRANCH SELECTED ANNUAL SALARIES-Continued ,0. 64 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.12 LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS: QUALIFICATIONS AND TERMS U.S. dl/uro '~J , AI.b••• • . , , , ",...... _ (a) __ . A""'.. .. . " c:. MIIa_ • , . calli" ..... , , . Color04o ..• . ..•..••. . . . , Co._I' .. • • 0eI...... • • ,_. " ,• • • ",-. • • • u ....n " , , ' d.1oo • , • • 1111 ...... • J • ' _dl . .. •, , • '0... • , • ...... -..k , IAllJi••• ••• . ,• •, • • Mal ...... ------;::---.,-".,--.,-----;----- M",·I11 ... ,<, M..... ~I ...... , Mi<~- The Council of State Governments 65 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.13 LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS: POWERS AND DUTIES / ",,,u., tt»- A MfltMlJ'lM ...... ",_'S $I.U « """'" ..... "':L~ ,0...... 10 ""'"' ~ -.""- ...... - NJIJ~II" "'"dMl_ ....., - -D.".... t¢otm- AID ...... (.) • • , .u.n...... • ...( ~) "'- -- (0) • • "rltou ...... -" ...... • • • • .-Cali-' ...... • • • • ~ ...... • C-_, .. .. . • • ...... • • • • • • ,""'~...... • GMttII · •.•••..••..••..• • , (0) • • 11_""" ...... • ,.... • • • • 011_ ...... • • • ...... • • • , ~. • ...... • , (0) (., • (0" ~ , ( ,..., ...... '(i,) • .• .• ... • • ~ ...... • ...... (0, • M_M' • ...... • • • M-"_b • • • MIe...... • • • • • MI._ ...... • M_ ...... • 1 (1) • • M'-"" ...... ".. • • • • , "'" ...... · ;'(0 • • .. . m • • N...... H.. __...... N_ • • • -New (0, J....,...... New MnIN ...... • • • • N_ V...... • • • NM _ CatoIIu ...... • "' ( . • • • • N_ ~ ...... • • ...... • • • (.,• • (.•, ...... • • • • • ...... -...... (0' 51_~- ...... • ' W • • • ,...._ CuoII_ • • • • • ...... • (., • " T...... , ""- .. .. : ::· · .. · ·· · • • • • ., ""T..... "...... • .(. • • (" Ub' ...... • • V..-I . .. .. • ' (. • • • • VIral ...... · .. ·· .. · . · .. · • • • • W...w¢ ...... ,. ' W • W.. \· ...... • (0, • • ...... • • w,- ...... (0, " ...... • .Goo_...... • • • No. M"-'" • • • -' ... .111<-01.- ...... (0, • • 66 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS, POWERS AND DUTIES-Continued K~!,: (f:) eo. The Council of State Governments 67 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2. 14 SECRETARIES OF STATE: QUALIFICATIONS FOR OFFICE v.< SI,,/~ SI",~ ~_,...,...Loui- 68 The Book of the States 1988-89 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.15 SECRET ARIES OF STATE: ELECTION AND REGISTRATION DUTIES ",,,,- ., I 1 ! •• ..0- J ,,1aII ...... • • • • • • • • • • "laMIo(ltl •. • • • • • • ,,"-...... • • • • • • • • • • "...... • • • • • CoII_'_ ...... • • • • • • • • • • • • • • C__ ...... " • • • • • • • C-*'tl ...... " • • • • • • • • • l)fta... ~ ...... • • • • f lorid...... " • • • • • • • • • • • (''"''11...... " • • • • • • • • • • 11 ....11(1) ) ...... " • • • • I ...... " • • • • • • • • • 1111_.•...• • • .. ·Cl .. " • • • • • • • ".. _.,...... " • • • . (hi • • • \ ...... • • w...... , .. .. . • • • • • • • • W... \· ...... • • • • • • • • • • \\1ocoto>I • ••••••••••• • • • W,'._...... • • • • • • • • • • • • ,,_.SO ..... ") .. 101" lOl A P ..... ~ .. . ." • ."• ' ·...... -.(bl . • . (J) • • • ,icIII __• (d) Sccrrt.ory.f SIal,', olrl«'~", buI ao..:._ .. Wit • • (.1 _ ....._ ,._ '_01 auooIidoI ...... ,.. (f) Slat< EI«Uon CoonmIoo;on """'-' 01 ...... -. -=-1 01_ ."" .., .....,...... 01. W Se The Councilor State Governments 69 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.16 SECRETARIES OF STATE: CUSTODIAL, PUBLICATION AND LEGISLATIVE DUTIES liJIfItJl1w AIMo_ .• •. • • • • • • • AIuII":<) ...... • • • • • ArUoa ...••..••..•. • • • • • • • • • At1uo ...... • • • iIi ... • • CalIf...... • • • • • "" • • ~ ...... eo •.n!n, ...... • • • • • •s • • Oofo"",,, ...... •... • • • • • • • ,,. ,,.• • fIorioI ...... • • • • • • • • '"• ~ ... . • • • • • • • • • • " • ...!II,,) ...... ,.) ,...... • • • • • • • • 1111 ...... • • • • • • • • ,...... • • • • • "H • I ...... m • • • • • • ""'- ...... I ...... , .. . • • • • • • • • • ...... • ,,.• • • • • • Mol• •..••••.••.••• • • • • lit..,...... •., • • • • M_~..c ...... M It~ .... • • • • • • • • • • Iollo_ ., • • • • H • • M_ • • • • • • • • • M~ ...... • • • • • • • • • • 1>1 ...... '0) • • • • • • • Nnr..u ...... • • • • • • • • • • • 1'1 ...., • •.•. • • • "H • N.... II ••,...... • • • • " • • • 1'1.... J....,...... • • • • • • N_MnIn ••...•..• • • • • • • H • • 1'1.... YIMI< . " ...... • • • • • • Nottlo CMOll .. .. . • . m • • • • • • • N"" ~ Doh,• ...... • • • • • • • • 01110 ...... • • • • • • • • • • ()I,.I . ..._ ...... • • • Onto_ ...... • • • '_,1 ...... • • • • • • • • R...... • • • • • • • • • So.n~ ClroIIl • ••. • • • • !!Milo 0aI<0u ••••••• H T.. _ ..•...... • • • • • • • • To_ ..... • • • • • • • • • Ula~ <) .•••.••...•.. • • • • • • • V...- ...... ''l • • • • • • • • • • • • H{k) • • \'lrJIm .••..••..•••. • • • W.... IIIt!6 · ...... • • • • W ... V ....."'" ••••••• • • • W--.. •...... • • • • • • • Wyo.l.. • • • • • H • Pooono Ilko ...... • • • VIfJI. I...... ~) .... . UI A .. • ... "" • EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.17 ATTORNEVS GENERAL: QUALIFICATIONS FOR OFFICE _... ~ u.< ,III'.. p_ Mu,u""", till_ .....••• , o. ..." AIo_. .. II -, , AIaM • •••••••••••••••••• A A ...o .. . . -II • - , Ark...... • , Call' ...... ' 1'1' "• • ,., ,., , CoIofMCI ...... II , , c-•...... • • , '-...... • • • , ...... 'i4J"' , • T" T" , II • , , , """"II." ...... "• , A ...... • , • • , .....••...... II" • ., , .I .....""" ...... • , 1(,0 ...... • • • , .w. .... J ...... , b) , , 1-'tII...... II , ·(t • ,• , , M"'- ...... " ,,' M..,...... (d) '0(>' • lOCo, , M_ .. . , " • , M /doItH(f') •.••• • , 1>1. __ ••..•• JO~. • , 1>1 ....._"...,...... •••••• . "~ .. , , 10101 •••0(1) ••••••••••••• • , , • , Ntbn. ...( h) ..•...•• ••••• "ll(~) ,., ,., , 1'0" ...... • .-, • , N.... II ••",*,", . ..•..•.. • • A N... J....,. ••.••.•••..•.. "11(c) • • • A N... Man ..••..••..••. • • • , -"...... • ,,' , N_CNoIIu ••.••..••. " • • ,., , N_ DIIl_ II" • • • , 0M00 ...... • • • , 01.1. _ . " • , 0..-,- ... . • , ...... ,It' ...... " • " " • • , Ilk_I...... • • • , Sooo", c ...... " • • , ...... o..a...... • • • • , T.. _ ••..••.•••..•.. ~, T.-...... • • lI," ...... • • • , V..- ...... , n •.,- ...... • > The Council of State Governments 71 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.18 ATTORNEYS GENERAL: PROSECUTORlAL AND ADVISORY DUTIES i ij <~ AIak.J ••..••.. A A.' A.' A • • • • • • AJuU ...... ,., ,., ,., ,., • • • • • • Arhou .••..••.• .... I.C. D.I' BOO • • • • • • ArkI_ ...... 'D.' • • • • • • • • c.IIfOt1lll ••••••• A.' .... D.E .... B,O A • • • • • • • Colo ...... , D,PeD) • • • • • • • c..-I .... . • • • • • • • OtIo.WlW ••..••. • • • • • • llorido •.••..••. , , D • • • • • • GtofaIa ········ . A, B,P .... 8.0.0 ....8,0• ., • • • • • • • II...... , .... 0 .0 A.' A.D • • • • • • • ,_. A.D,I' A A.' A, • • • • • • ~ ...... A.D.E,F,O A,D,I! '\,O,E,F • • • • • ,., ,., ...... D,E,p D • • • • • 10 ...... ',.,0' , , • • • • • • • x...... B,e,D.p , , • • • • • • • Jo:nl..tl3' .. ".,' 8 B.D,P "ct • • • • • • LHbIaaa ..•..•• "0 'a.' , a • • • • • • • Pol ...... A A A A • • • • • • M."._ ..••.•• B.C.I' I .CoO I .C.D '.C • • • • • • • M_ U ... "',a,e.D.E.F,G A.B.C.D.E,G A.R,C.D.E "'.B,C,I! • • • • • • tot IcIoIpII ••••••• A A , A • • • • • • • MJ._ ...... 8 B,D,O A,B.D • • • ·, 1'01-...,...... B.E.I' .. , • • • • • • ,., I., MlIoooIrI •• .. •• .. F • • • • • • • Mo...... C., ",R.C,D A,R.C,D,P A.C • .,. • • • N.-...... A A A.D A • • • • • Neo ...... 0.1',01.0) ~., t.,O D.' • • N_H•• """ ,. A A A A • • • • • H_ J....,...... A ....B.D.O A.' "'.B.D.O • • • • • • • N_M_.... . A,B.E.F,O B.D.O , • • • • N..,. y"" ...... , • • • • • • Nort_ CaroIIu •• '.' ,• , • • • • • • • N_ o.uta .. . A.a A.' A.' A • • • ,., ow...... B.C.P .., , '.C • ' W • • 0Ic1allo ...... ' .C '.C ' .C '.C • • • • • • 0ftt0II ...... , .. , •. , • • • • • ,., ,., ,.. ~ ...... "'.0 .0 ,.a D a• • • • • RloocIo 1_ ... . A , D • • SCHute-d . A A.D A.D A • • • • • • • Soootll 000l0: ...... A A A • • • • • • T.. _ ••..••. D.'",I',OO» D.OO» , , • • • • • ,., T...... , , • • • • UWI .••..••.••. ....a,o,E.F.Ci E:ci ,., 'f: • • • • ,., ,.,'"• V..-.I ...... A A A A • • • • • • • "'.B.D,P B.D.P • B.D,O'.' B.D,O , • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • B.C,P a.C,D , 8.CiD • • • • • m 8,0(.) •. , •. , • • • • • "• A.' A.' A.' A.' • • • A • • • • • • "'.B.II A. B.E A.' A,B.E • • • • • • A • • • • • • EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2. 19 ATTORNEYS GENERAL: CONSUMER PROTECfION ACfIVITlES, SUBPOENA POWERS, AND ANTITRUST DUTIES R~II Mil' M., 1M 1I1l/~ Ad",iIIiPtn -.~ HIlIidIes Sill" '" --~civil m.~ pro/tt:lkm "' ...... Anllll'llSl ()I/wr jtuisdk liolt "'- ~- ",.-~ proutdi",. "1"'.''''' --,....- romp/lli~1I (0) d~/k! -~ AI. b ...... • • -- A_• • • • ...•. C Arim...... • • • • • • • • • • A. B, 0 AtIc . . ... • • • • • B, C, 0 COU, ...... • • • B.C. O CoIo The Council of State Governments 73 EXECUTIVE BRANCH Table 2.20 ATIORNEVS GENERAL, DUTIES TO ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES A ..h_ ...... B. C · c·) • • • • • OJ • AIaob ...... B. C • • • • • • • • Arbo...... A. B. C • • • • • • • Art_ ...... 8. C "..,fI (a' • • • • • • • CIIIIf-...... A.8.C .,. • • • • • CoIotHo ...... 8. C fI(a) • • • • • • • .... B. C • • • • • • ""-,Doll ...... A.8.C . (a, • • • • • • • • n""...... 8. C .(a) • • • • • • • GootaIa ..••...•...••.• A.8.C (b ••) • • • • • • • A. , O'J • • • • • • • • 1_~- ...... A.8.C fI (,) • • • • • • • till...... A.8'.C (b~.e) • • • • • • h ...I ...... A.8.C .,. • • • • • • I ...... A. 8.C fI('1 • • • • • • ~ ...... A. 8. C .,. • • • • • ..... _, ...... A. B' .C • • • • • • • t.o.IoIa ...... A. 8. C ,,' • • • • • • M ...... A. B. C 0., • • • • M..,. ....s ...... A. 8. C • • • • • • • • M~_I:o. .... 8. C (b.... dl • • • • • • • • MIdIi&M ...... A. 8. C (b .... d) • • • • • • MI._ . .... B. C «J • • • • • • • M lMllllppI. A. B. C • • • • • • • M'--I ... A.8.C • • • • • • • M ...... B. C • • • • • • • N ...... D. C • • • • • • • N,"""" ...... ",,8. C fI (d) • • • • • • • New II."""", ...... A.D.C . (a, • • • , • • • • New J....,...... , D.C fI (d) • • • • • • • /'i_ M.,...... •..... A. D.C fI ('1 • • • • • • • • Sew Vork ...... A. D.C OJ • • N~C • • • ___ ...... A. I.e • • • • • • OJ • • Son, DaIIo...... A. I.e OJ • • • • • • otIlo ...... I.e • • • • • • • 0111 ..... _ ...... A. B. C 0) Onto··· ··· ...... B. C • • • • • • • • "....."...... D.e • • • • • • • B_ 1...... B. C • • • • • • • COfOII ...... '"' 1') • • • • • • • Soot' A.8.C •• • • • • • • 500.' o.k..u...... D.C fI (O) • • • • • • T_ ...... A. D.C . (a) • • • • • • T.,...... A. I.e "~I • • • • • • • tllall ...... A.I.C .,. • • • • • • • • v __...... A.I.C OJ • • • • • OJ • v ...... I.e · C·) • • • • • • • • W_ ...... I.C «.t) • • • • • • • WOOl ~.\ttI ...... I.e fI (O) • • • (0 • • • • w...... _ ...... I. C OJ • • • • • OJ • wr ...... A. I. C ·t·, • • • • • • A_Sa-M ...... I. C .(.) • • • • • • N•• M...... B. C • • • • • • • "-',, RItoo ...... A. I. C • • • • • • • \·/rPII...... "',8.CU) • • • • • • • (0' .....""'""..,...... Iw aclusM juriodi.ilon. (b) In amaln CUOI 0DIy. (e) WbftI...u.u...... 1'1"_'" bt ,be IIPIJO*I. d) C... __ "" ""'" diocrecioG . I• , In amala COIlrl. DOlly. (t) If o",borIlD;! br ,be ~. W EuecM bt ..... '" whkb ,ho< U.S. Ai,,,",",, h ~btc ,lie CiovemmtnI of 1M Viraia 1_.