B. Explaining the Governor's Influence
IV. THE NORMATIVE DIMENSIONS OF THE INDEPENDENT POLITICAL EXECUTIVES
The philosophical roots of elected independent political state executives can be traced to back to the Articles of Conferdation's emphasis on republicanism pro- tected through limited governmental jurisdictions (Beyle, 1993; Lockard, 1969).
This political model stressed popular sovereignty. Elections afforded the opportu- nity for the people to translate their will into public action. Direct election of a number of major officials to govern a state not only ensured that state government remained responsive to its citizens but also prevented the development of a more formalized central authority in the form of the governor. In other words, while this construction may seem contrary to traditional theories of direct line control
734 Robinson
of large bureaucracies, a number of separately elected cabinet positions in state government were expressly intended to dilute gubernatorial direction and control and provide for a pluralist response from the state executive branch
T Mitau (1996 2) summarizes the structure of state constitutions with nu- merous elected officials when he writes "The political ethos of American State constitutions is frankly antagonistic to social engineering State constitutions em- phasize minimal government highly decentralized executive diffusion of political power''
While numerous elected state officials reflect America's early constitutional debates, appointed independent positions were frequently created in a different era and reflect a different set of American values These new values emerged after the Civil War in response to growing negative public sentiment toward the spoils system of appointment Early public administration theorists such as Woodrow Wilson (1887) emphasized neutral competency and separation of poli- tics and administration in the design of governmental agencies These theories were further institutionalized into governmental design with the publication of Goodnow's Politics and Administration (1900) National efforts at designing governmental systems which separated politics from administration can be seen in the Pendleton Act of 1883 and the recommendations of the Bronlow commis- sion (1937)
Appointed boards acting as regulatory bodies with quasi-judicial responsi- bilities and independent commissions to administer a vanety of programs were created by the thousands during this period (Lockard, 1969) These boards and commissions were given statutory appointment authority to select career profes- sionals who would be neutrally competent in managing large bureaucracies The establishment of various commissions throughout state government essentially diluted gubernatorial authority in general in order to block patronage and favor- itism
As noted in the introduction between 1955 and the 1990s, there have been a number of reform efforts in state government to strengthen the role of the governor Over this time penod, however, the number of separately elected exec- utive officials has changed very little Beyle notes that in 1955 there were 514 officials, and in both 1981 and 1994 there were 511 separately elected officials (Beyle, 1995) The tenacity of these positions leads Beyle to conclude that there is an irreducible minimum of state elected officials (p 21) The retention of these positions in the face of reform demonstrates that
The ultimate aim of our political structure (referring to state government) is not orderliness and etficiency, and it is not simply to break bottlenecks or avoid blockage by state action Instead the citizens of the United States need diversified political strengthens Diverse political strength develops varied answers to assorted problems (Stanford, 1967 7)
Independent Political Executive 135
V. HOW THE INDEPENDENT POLITICAL EXECUTIVE IMPACTS THE STRUCTURE OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT POLITICAL PROCESS
The second theme in this chapter is that state government is better understood as a "web" than as a single hierarchical structure Thompson describes state governance like "a kaleidoscope—very complex and shitting" (1993 1) The dispersion of authority at the state level suggests that'' our thinking about execu- tive leadership in state government also needs to deepen No governor can single-handedly 'lead' his or her state" (Roberts, 1993 63) In fact, Beyle's re- search has indicated that governors often face some of their greatest conflicts within the executive branch (Beyle, 1993)
Governor Booth Gardner, former Governor of Washington (as quoted by Governor Norman Bangerter, former Governor of Utah), captured the reality ver- sus the public impression when he said "Governing a state is simply different from running a company The public is genuinely confused about how state government functions and who is accountable for its operations" (Kunde, 1987 vu)
Using Thompson's (1993) metaphor of state government as a kaleidoscope, governmental processes can best be understood as a myriad of fluid, conflicting forces buffeting each other (p 1) Carolyn Lukensmeyer (1990), chief of staff to former Ohio Governor Richard F Celeste, notes that the dispersion of authority in state government means that many of the most important issues a state faces extend beyond the jurisdiction of a single agency or even the authority of the governor (p 82) Thus, state government is better understood as a web of inter connecting public authority, institutions, and formal and informal relationships (Robinson, 1998) As a web, focusing on the pieces does not necessarily lead to an understanding of the whole As one independent executive wrote for a speech on economic development, economic development policy m government does not exist in neat packages
We do ourselves a disservice if we focus just on the Department of Com merce "programs " We have layer upon layer of tax credits, tax exemptions, spending programs (water, highways), and miscellaneous government activi ties which have been historically justified on economic development argu ments It is difficult to get these bundles back up on the table for policy analysis (N Freudenthal, personal communication, June 24, 1994)
When state government is understood as a web, points on the web are demarcated by institutional boundaries and public authority Public authority attached to political roles gives occupants of the roles (political executives) unique and enormously valuable property rights by virtue of holding a public
736 Robinson
office (Moe, 1990) Moe argues that state government can best be understood as a two-tier system in which politicians and interest groups interact, on one tier deciding the manner in which political authority will be exercised Governmental managers operate in another tier carrying out the everyday activities of the bu- reaucracy In this two-tier model, understanding the role of the state political executives in the governance process is essential to understanding political strug- gles Deborah Roberts (1993) captures this dispersion of authority when she writes ' 'The executive leadership system (of states) sits atop the operating levels of state government and cuts across the institutional boundaries of agencies that focus more narrowly on their function and policy areas" (p 63)
Once state governance is understood as a complex web in which public authority is shared, analysis of political executives shifts from focusing on inter- nal management of organizations to junctures where the public authority of vari- ous players meets or overlaps These junctures occur at the boundaries of agen- cies, the areas where public authority leads to complex interrelationships and shared responsibility (Kettl, 1994)
Kettl argues that the boundaries between government organizations are where the balance of power is set and mutual influence is exerted He sees that a key role of a political executive is maintaining and reaching across boundaries He contends that' 'coping at the boundaries of government thus imposes substan- tial and novel burdens on top officials" (Kettl, 1994 194) Kettl writes that politi- cal executives act as "gatekeepers" stationed at organizational boundaries The skill of the political executive influences the balance of power between organiza- tions As Kirlm (1994) notes
Governments with all their attendant constitutions, institutions, policies, pro- grams, regulations and more are social constructions They were created by human action and can be recreated in endless variety by human action Gov- ernments are not static, nor immutable, but rather changing and changeable As a consequence, "design" of government and all their parts is a critical, on-going activity (pp 5-6)
Through participation in the ongoing political dynamics of the state, each inde- pendent political executive plays a unique role in the design of their state govern- mental process
VI. INDEPENDENT STATE POLITICAL EXECUTIVES ARE