| Chapter 1: | Governors and the National Governors Association (NGA) |
|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
states, and it would make sense for governors to take a collective approach to such lobbying efforts. Obviously, the congressional delegation from Texas is unlikely to be swayed by the preferences of the governor of North Dakota, save for ideological or partisan reasons. In contrast, a united front by all governors—the most powerful policy actors within the states, and the central managers of federal funds flowing to the states—is more likely to gain the attention of all key federal policy actors.
However, the effort necessary to align the governors introduces a classic collective action problem (Olson 1965) that is somewhat distinct from those faced by other interest groups. Clearly, it is difficult to achieve unanimity among all governors on every issue that comes before them. Therefore, the NGA provides a place for governors to aggregate their policy preferences in a singularly stated policy position that, ideally, represents the interests of the governors and the states and provides the solution to the collective action problem that the governors face. Thus, the NGA is even more important to study because it provides the tools that governors use to organize their activities so that they can work together for maximum effectiveness.
Third, there is an institutional relationship between governors and the federal government that is fairly unique and does not exist among other state-level officials. It is not uncommon for governors to enter such federal offices as the Senate following their tenure as governors, and gubernatorial policy priorities are more likely to be represented when there is a strong presence of former governors in Congress. Furthermore, it is also common for former governors to occupy leadership positions in the executive branch of the federal government (Beyle 1988). Many former governors are appointed to cabinet-level positions so that presidents can take advantage of the policy expertise that they have to offer. Similarly, presidents and presidential candidates are