Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:12:37.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gubernatorial use of executive orders: unilateral action and policy adoption

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

Mitchell Dylan Sellers
Mitchell Dylan Sellers*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Temple University, USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I examine gubernatorial use of executive orders, and assess how executive action influences statute adoption. I argue that strong governors use executive orders to pursue policy objectives when they perceive legislation as unlikely to pass. Multilevel Event History Analysis of executive orders and the adoption of statutes that protect the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community from 1975 to 2013 reveals that partisan control of government and intrastate factors influence both forms of policy adoption. My findings support the strategic model that argues that executives turn to executive orders when confronting unfavourable legislative conditions, and that governors issue protections more when entering office. Legislatures respond to partisan control of the legislature and social characteristics. Further, states that have pro-LGBT executive orders in place are more likely to adopt similar statutes. My results suggest that stronger governors are more likely to issue executive orders, but it is states with weaker governors that are more likely to adopt legislation.

Keywords

executive ordersgovernorsLesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Policystate politicsstrategic model
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 315 - 339
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arizona Memory Project (2014) Arizona Executive Orders, http://azmemory.azlibrary.gov/cdm/search/collection/execorders (accessed 14 October 2014).Google Scholar
Barclay, S. and Fisher, S. (2003) The States and the Differing Impetus for Divergent Paths on Same-Sex Marriage, 1990-2001. Policy Studies Journal 31: 331–352.Google Scholar
Berry, F. S. and Berry, W. D. (1990) State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis. American Political Science Review 84(2): 395–415.Google Scholar
Berry, F. S. and Berry, W. D. (1999) Innovation and Diffusion Models in Policy Research. In Sabatier P. A. and Weible C. M. (eds.), Theories of the Policy Process. Berry and Berry- Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 307–360.Google Scholar
Berry, W. D., Ringquist, E. J., Fording, R. C. and Hanson, R. L. (1998) Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science 42(1): 327–348.Google Scholar
Boehmke, F. J. (2009) Approaches to Modeling the Adoption and Diffusion of Policies With Multiple Components. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 9(2): 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, A. and Thrower, S. (2015) Legislative Capacity and Executive Unilateralism. American Journal of Political Science 60(3): 649–663.Google Scholar
Brewer, P. R. (2007) Value War: Public Opinion and the Politics of Gay Rights. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Burke, J. P. (1992) The Institutional Presidency. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Council of State Governments (2014) The Book of States 2014. Council of State Governments http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/category/content-type/bos-2014 (accessed 10 October 2014).Google Scholar
Deering, C. J. and Maltzman, F. (1999) The Politics of Executive Orders: Legislative Constraints on Presidential Power. Political Research Quarterly 52(4): 767–783.Google Scholar
Ferguson, M. R. and Bowling, C. J. (2008) Executive Orders and Administrative Control. Public Administration Review 68(suppl. 1): S20–S28.Google Scholar
Fine, J. A. and Warber, A. L. (2012) Circumventing Adversity: Executive Orders and Divided Government. Presidential Studies Quarterly 42(2): 256–274.Google Scholar
Godwin, M. L. and Schroedel, J. R. (2000) Policy Diffusion and Strategies for Promoting Policy Change: Evidence from California Local Gun Control Ordinances. Policy Studies Journal 28(4): 760–776.Google Scholar
Haider-Markel, D. P. (2000) Lesbian and Gay Politics in the States: Interest Groups, Electoral Politics, and Public Policy. In Rimmerman C., Wald K. and Wilcox C. (eds.), The Politics of Gay Rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 290–346.Google Scholar
Haider-Markel, D. P. (2001) Policy Diffusion as a Geographical Expansion of the Scope of Political Conflict: Same-Sex Marriage Bans in the 1990s. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 1(1): 5–26.Google Scholar
Hicks, W. D., McKee, S. C., Sellers, M. D. and Smith, D. A. (2015) A Principle or a Strategy? Voter Identification Laws and Partisan Competition in the American States. Political Research Quarterly 68(1): 18–33.Google Scholar
Howell, W. G. (2003) Power Without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Howell, W. G. (2005) Unilateral Powers: A Brief Overview. Presidential Studies Quarterly 35(3): 417–439.Google Scholar
Human Rights Campaign (2014) Home page. http://www.hrc.org/ (accessed 12 November 2014).Google Scholar
Karch, A. (2007) Democratic Laboratories: Policy Diffusion Among the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Klarner, C. (2012) Data sets. http://klarnerpolitics.com/kp-dataset-page.html (accessed 22 December 2012).Google Scholar
Kousser, T. and Phillips, J. H. (2012) The Power of American Governors: Winning on Budgets and Losing on Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krause, G. A. and Cohen, D. B. (1997) Presidential Use of Executive Orders, 1953-1994. American Politics Research 25(4): 458–481.Google Scholar
Lax, J. R. and Phillips, J. H. (2009) Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness. American Political Science Review 103(3): 367–386.Google Scholar
Mayer, K. R. (1999) Executive Orders and Presidential Power. Journal of Politics 61(2): 445–466.Google Scholar
Mayer, K. R. (2009) Going Alone: The Presidential Power of Unilateral Action. In Edwards G. C. III and Howell W. G. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook and the American Presidency. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 427–454.Google Scholar
Mayer, K. R. and Price, K. (2002) Unilateral Presidential Powers: Significant Executive Orders, 1949-99. Presidential Studies Quarterly 32(2): 367–386.Google Scholar
Mills, M. (2011) Introducing Survival and Event History Analysis. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Mooney, C. Z. and Lee, M. H. (1995) Legislative Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform. American Journal of Political Science 39(3): 599–627.Google Scholar
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (2013) Home Page, http://www.thetaskforce.org/ (accessed 6 November 2013).Google Scholar
Oklahoma Secretary of State (2014) Executive Orders, https://www.sos.ok.gov/gov/execorders.aspx (accessed 8 November 2014).Google Scholar
Partin, R. W. (2001) Campaign Intensity and Voter Information: A Look at Gubernatorial Contests. American Politics Research 29(2): 115–140.Google Scholar
Rabe-Hesketh, S. and Skrondal, A. (2008) Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata. College Station: Stata Press.Google Scholar
Sellers, M. D. (2014a) Executive Expansion of Transgender Rights: Electoral Incentives to Issue or Revoke Executive Orders. In Taylor J. K. and Haider-Markel D. P. (eds.), Transgender Rights and Politics: Groups, Issue Framing, and Policy Adoption. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 189–207.Google Scholar
Sellers, M. D. (2014b) Discrimination and the Transgender Population: Analysis of the Functionality of Local Government Policies That Protect Gender Identity. Administration & Society 46: 70–86.Google Scholar
Sharp, E. B. (2005) Morality Politics in American Cities. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Shipan, C. R. and Volden, C. (2008) The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion. American Journal of Political Science 52(4): 840–857.Google Scholar
Soule, S. A. and Earl, J. (2001) The Enactment of State-Level Hate Crime Law in the United States: Intrastate and Interstate Factors. Sociological Perspectives 44(3): 281–305.Google Scholar
Spill, R. L., Licari, M. J. and Ray, L. (2001) Taking on Tobacco: Policy Entrepreneurship and the Tobacco Litigation. Political Research Quarterly 54(3): 605–622.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. K., Lewis, D. C., Jacobsmeier, M. L. and DiSarro, B. (2012) Content and Complexity in Policy Reinvention and Diffusion Gay and Transgender-Inclusive Laws Against Discrimination. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 12(1): 75–98.Google Scholar
Transgender Law Center (2010) Litigation: Case law, http://www.transgenderlaw.org/cases/ (accessed 18 May 2014).Google Scholar
Walker, J. L. (1969) The Diffusion of Innovations Among the American States. American Political Science Review 63(3): 880–899.Google Scholar
Wigton, R. C. (1996) Recent Presidential Experience with Executive Orders. Presidential Studies Quarterly 26(2): 473–484.Google Scholar
Wilcox, C. and Robinson, C. (2010) Onward Christian Soldiers?: The Religious Right in American Politics. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar