No abstract

The relationship between the governor and other elected executives is seldom explored in the field of state politics. This study focuses on that relationship, using survey responses and other data. The dependent variables include the frequency of meetings between the two officials, the number of gubernatorial assignments given to the lieutenant governor, the number of bills the lieutenant governor helps to develop for the chief executive’s program, and the frequency with which the lieutenant governor lobbies for the gubernatorial program proposals. Our findings indicate that lieutenant governors selected as a team with the governor have more joint meetings and help to develop more gubernatorial bills. The results also suggest that the gap in power between the two officials is positively related to the number of meetings and gubernatorial assignments. The various forms of cooperation between the two executives help the governor exercise leadership, encouraging more effective state policy making.

T h e executive branch is a center for both policymaking and management in state government. Research on both the top official--the governor--and on department heads (Abney and Lauth 1986) has progressed. The literature on the governorship consists of both general studies (Sabato 1983; k y l e 1990) and a proliferation of more specific studies. The state's attorney general is usually separately elected from the governor, which results in independence for this legal officer. Attorneys general can (in most states) take legal action in prosecutions and in the federal courts. The attorney general's duties force interaction with other elements of state government. The importance of advisory opinions is respected, and these opinions can be issued to both state executive officials and members of the legislature. In most states, the attorney general has the authority to review legislation (Council of State Governments 1986,45-73), and therefore he has opportunities to block policies of the governor and legislature. Despite the importance of this major state official, the literature on the attorney general tends to be focused on his or her function in specific areas or specific states and lacks a general tool for comparison across states. This paper will pursue a more general approach to studying the office of attorney general. There are three purposes for this study. First, our general understanding of the office of attorney general, and further research on the office should be enhanced by discussing and measuring the formal powers of the office. Important studies involving specific powers such as the advisory opinion (Morris 1987) and consumer protection in a specific state (Silky 1980-81) have been made. By developing a general measure of the attorney general's formal powers to use across the states (which will include his duties in six specific areas), our understanding of the scope and nature of his work will be enhanced. In studying the governorship, Schlesinger's (1965)

Using numerical indices, this study describes and analyzes the relationship between governors and attorneys general in regard to formal powers. An index of formal power for each office is presented and divided into high and low categories. In examining the relationship between the formal powers of the two offices, the fifty states fall into four patterns for the combinations of formal power. Each of the power combinations suggests either greater competition or cooperation between these two important constitutional officers. The relationship of the formal power of the two offices is one significant factor which has implications for the governor's leadership in the executive branch.

No abstract