The powers of the Office of the Governors may differ from state to state, and the governors’ impact on the federal decisions might be different as well. However, in some cases, the level of power possessed depends on the person on board, mostly on governors themselves. The individuality of such people plays a great role in the question of power, therefore such facts as a governor’s position in his party or the political personality are taken into consideration (Ledbetter, 1978). Additionally, all states are different, hence the state’s customs and traditions and the level of its interest-group activities are essential as well for the appropriate estimation of the office’s functioning.
A governor practically plays the role of a chief legislator in their state, therefore, some amount of power is present in this position. The position of the state governor is currently taken by Asa Hutchinson. His opinions seem to have a greater value on the governmental level in comparison to several other states. For example, during the Trump administration period while the discussions of Medicaid the representative of Arkansas played a huge role in the final decision.
Asa Hutchison aimed to shift costs to the federal government and heighten access to healthcare for certain communities (Thompson et al., 2018). Due to Hutchinson’s connection to Donald Trump, the state and its government can make a bigger impact on the decision-making process, which gives Arkansas an undoubted advantage in comparison to other regions. However, an effective policy of one governor does not prove the state’s stable leading positions in regulation effectiveness.
However, the overall analysis of the Office of the Governor of Arkansas would lead to a certain conclusion. Although people in those regulating positions can influence various areas of states’ development, their resources and means are limited. In comparison with other states, Arkansas’s governor has a maximum of two periods in office, and after them, this position is no longer available to the person. However, in the majority of the US states, the previous governors are allowed to be elected one more time after a gap period.
The absence of such right in Arkansas means that its citizens do not want to present an even larger amount of power to their state’s representative in office. On the opposite, the governor’s opinion is essential in Arkansas regarding the line-item veto as only the supermajority can overweigh this rule. Therefore, in comparison to other states, a person in this position has more power concerning important decision-making processes.
In most states, governors have their vice-governors, and Arkansas is not an exception. However, here politicians for those positions are elected separately, which means that they can be members of different political parties, and in such situations, some difficulties may occur. Although this is a common feature for America, the fact of diverse parties’ representatives in the leading positions restricts the governor’s power in Arkansas in comparison to other states without this confrontation.
In conclusion, the Office of the Governor in Arkansas, in most situations, possesses equal power with other states’ representatives. However, subject to governors’ personal and political characteristics, their relationships with the president and their party members the amount of power and influence varies from person to person. Additionally, Arkansas has some rules and regulations that restrict the power of people in leading positions; and the state actively participates in federal decision-making processes. Therefore, the Office’s power is rather average in comparison with other states.
Ledbetter, C. Jr. (1978). The Arkansas historical quarterly. Arkansas Historical Association, 37(1), 44-73. Web.
Thompson, F. J., Gusmano, M. K., & Shinohara, S. (2018). Trump and the Affordable Care Act: congressional repeal efforts, executive federalism, and program durability. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 48(3), 396-424. Web.