Dynamic rare decisions: gubernatorial vetoes and the death penalty, 1999–2018

Abstract

For the last two decades, the death penalty in the US has steadily declined. During this time, governors have at rare but crucial moments participated in shaping the death penalty in their respective states by issuing vetoes. Gubernatorial vetoes have in some cases been used not only to prevent abolition from occurring, but also to bar the state from enacting legislation to expand it. However, little is known about what factors influence the decision to veto these often very controversial bills. Analysis of a unique dataset of death penalty bills covering years 1999-2018 suggests that a governor's individual attributes, as well as institutional factors, have an effect on the likelihood of a veto in the legislative context of the death penalty, with different aspects of time in office, experience and partisanship being of particular relevance.

The Consequences of Legislative Professionalism in U.S. State Legislatures: A Review

“…Governors are better able to forge compromises with high-capacity legislatures (Dilger, Krause, and Moffett 1995). This includes improved odds of avoiding vetoes on highly salient issues such as the death penalty due to the legislature possessing the capacity to resolve differences earlier in the bill process (Ricknell 2021). That said, governors are also more likely to circumvent professional legislatures by engaging in unilateral activity such as executive orders (e.g., Bolton and Thrower 2022; Cockerham 2021).…”

The Electoral Dynamics of Capital Punishment Commutations

“…Governors' positions on capital punishment may become manifest in several ways, from the signing or vetoing of legislative bills (Ricknell 2021) to the issuing of executive orders. However, given that commutations are often unilateral and always irreversible, they are a unique form of gubernatorial power worth further study.…”

“…Our results contribute to the literature in at least two key areas. First, previous work has found suggestive evidence that governors weigh political factors in their approach to clemency generally (Gunderson 2022) and that elites in all three branches of state government consider political factors when adjudicating matters related to capital punishment (Brace and Hall 1997;Kubik and Moran 2003;Mooney and Lee 2000;Ricknell 2021). This note therefore contributes to growing research not only on how governors approach commutation decisions, but how elites in state government discharge their duties when it comes to capital punishment.…”