An illuminating post. For the record, I don’t think that jobs can be created that well by a chief executive. But they can be destroyed, or prevented from being created, and the president has been doing that with a vengeance since he took office (before, in fact, with his campaign rhetoric).
13 thoughts on “Texas, Jobs And Rick Perry”
Comments are closed.
Being the governor of Texas is largely a figurehead position, somewhat analogous to being the Queen of England. The governor has no say in legislation save the veto power and the ability to call a special session. He cannot introduce legislation. The legislature meets but once every two years for sixty days.
All legislative power in Texas is centered around the lieutenant governor and to a lesser extent the speaker of the house. Legislative sessions focus primarily on the funding levels of the state agencies. The state itself is run by these separately chartered agencies. The agencies answer to none save their own agency heads and their charters.
The governor appoints the state agency heads. This is the only real power the governor enjoys in Texas. Whom the governor appoints to run a state agency will enjoy a high degree of discretion in running that agency. The agency heads effectively determine what is the law in Texas and how it shall be enforced.
I will add that for anyone who understands and follows Texas politics; Perry’s only real accomplishments are: 1. successfully switching parties, 2. getting elected more times and serving longer than any previous governor and 3. being the only governor to burn the Governor’s Mansion down, literally.
Jardinero1 wrote:
All legislative power in Texas is centered around the lieutenant governor and to a lesser extent the speaker of the house. Legislative sessions focus primarily on the funding levels of the state agencies. The state itself is run by these separately chartered agencies. The agencies answer to none save their own agency heads and their charters.
The governor appoints the state agency heads. This is the only real power the governor enjoys in Texas. Whom the governor appoints to run a state agency will enjoy a high degree of discretion in running that agency. The agency heads effectively determine what is the law in Texas and how it shall be enforced.
Let me get this straight. According to you:
1. The Gov has no power in the state.
2. The State is run by state agencies.
3. The state agencies answer only to agency heads.
4. The Gov appoints these agency heads.
So, while you say that the Governor has no power in the state, you completely contradict yourself with the above, especially the bolded part. The governor is in charge of giving jobs to the people who run the agencies. Do you really think this is having ‘no power’. He appoints the people who run the state, meaning that he puts people who he ‘lilkes’ in these positions and they run the state the way he wants it to be run.
I don’t care if you like him or not, but saying he has no power is simply not true.
So in Texas the Governor:
1) Vetos legislation
2) Calls special sessions
3) Appoints state agency heads
And that’s “somewhat analogous to being the Queen of England”? What is it about him you don’t like? His shirt collars? His lack of proper respect for coyotes?
The legislature meets but once every two years for sixty days.
I wonder if that might have something to do with it all.
The Texas legislature having limited time to mess with the law, then long periods with the law stable, the legislature having to live with the same law as any other Texas resident? Naw, couldn’t have anything to do with it. </sarc>
To Tom,
The purpose of my comment was to clarify to the reader what the limits of the governorship in Texas are and to establish the limited impact any governor of Texas has on the economy.
I wrote: “This is the only real power the governor enjoys in Texas…”
That would be an important clarification to the limits of his power. Perhaps in your haste to reply you overlooked that statement.
To Curt,
“Being the governor of Texas is largely a figurehead position, somewhat analogous to being the Queen of England.”
Largely and Analogous are the key words in the sentence. I placed those words in the sentence to assist the literal minded. Except when the governor appoints an agency head, which rarely happens, he performs no useful duties whatsoever.
I don’t care about Perry, one way or another. People who understand and follow Texas politics pay very little attention to the governor.
My own personal belief about why the Texas economy prospers while others flounder most closely mirrors the statement made by Peterh. The Texas Constitution prevents both the masses and the political class from having too much impact on the making of law or the administration of basic government functions.
Essentially I suspect a federal or state chief executive, and the rest of the apparatus that comes with them ,can get in the way, or stay out of the way on the jobs front.
Government can’t create net private sector jobs but it can sure destroy them. The best “jobs bill” you can have is to get government out of the way to the extent possible by reducing unnecessary regulations and taxation.
Which makes a NYT article asking for a Department Of Jobs to be created by Obama. Cuz you know when the problem is. Too much government, the solution is always, more of it.
Oops, meant to add, “all the more ridiculous”, to the first sentence. I got distracted by stuff….and things….
You know, I’m learning that trying to type into a smart phone is more like trying to teach a bird to speak.
I placed those words in the sentence to assist the literal minded.
The literal minded. I’ve heard they frequent here. They all think they’re the queen of eqypt.
…and make no apologies for it.
Is there denial?