Governors and the Bureaucracy: Executive Resources as Sources of Administrative Influence

Abstract

Recent years have marked the advent of a variety of institutional mechanisms designed to enhance governors' capacity to oversee the bureaucracy. In many states, more traditional gubernatorial resources have also been bolstered. This study evaluates the effectiveness of these tools in influencing the policy activities of state agencies. We find that, in general, these resources significantly increase the amount of gubernatorial influence reported by state administrators. Our evidence suggests that institutional mechanisms specifically directed at bureaucratic influence may be taking the place of more general institutional powers as the primary mechanism for executive influence on state agencies.

Keywords:

• governors
• oversight
• state agencies
• political influence

Notes

9. Elling, 1999.

18. Brudney, & Hebert, 1987.

24. Beyle, 1999.

25. Hebert et al., 1983.

26. Brudney & Hebert, 1987.

27. Elling, 1992.

30. Bowling et al., 2002.

32. Hebert et al., 1988.

33. Dometrius, 1979.

34. Elling, 1992.

35. Dometrius, 2002.

36. Beyle, 1999.

37. Hebert & Brudney, 1988.

38. Elling, 1992.

39. Hebert & Brudney, 1988.

40. Hebert et al., 1983.

41. Elling, 1992.

43. Dometrius, 2002.

44. Factor analysis of each of the five indicators indicates that each of the indicators is positively related to the latent concept of gubernatorial influence (total budget .72, budgetary priorities .76, policy changes .76, rules and regulations .66, and day-to-day operations .66). Analysis of individual activity areas does not produce substantially different results from those reported below.

46. Beyle, 1999. Beyle's index also includes a component measuring party control of state government. Because we do not feel that it is an indicator of the governor's institutional powers, we have recalculated the index omitting this component. We separately account for party control with our divided government variable.

47. An alternative would be to use the governor's job approval rating, found in the U.S. Officials Job Approval Ratings (JAR) dataset (e.g., Dometrius 2002). The governors of two of our fifteen states are not included in the dataset, however, so the personal powers index was employed instead.

49. Agencies classified as staff include general administration, budget and finance, information systems, personnel, planning, and purchasing.

54. Beyle, 1995.

55. Elling, 1999.

57. Grady & Simon, 2002.

58. Potoski & Woods, 2001.

62. Bowling, et al., 2002.