According to this New York Times article, many of the governors who were swept into office in the 2010 election cycle have not been as extreme or as aggressive in their policies as they promised to be before they took office. Governors who sought to eliminate collective bargaining rights have become less aggressive and "confrontational" in their pursuits, the product of both the citizens' unhappiness with specific policies and of their re-election hopes in 2012.
Additionally, a handful of the governors have been undoing some of the policies they enacted. The Republican Governor of Georgia, Nathan Deal, has chosen to add back days he cut from a Pre-K classes, and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has urged the state to re-purchase the Capitol building complex. Some of these reversals can be credited to the economic improvements and increase in tax revenue, but I wonder if any of the decisions are driven by political reasons.
Do you guys this this trend could continue once the Republican nominee is selected, and if he eventually takes office? Will the Republicans running in the primaries right now actually enact the policies they promisee, or are they just trying to appeal to as many as they can, regardless of what they have to say to get elected?
2 comments:
I believe that part of this behavioral change has to do with what we learned about midterm elections and how many seats that were won two years ago are quickly lost (although this is more likely to occur in the 6th year, from what I remember). Governors are certainly perceived as a reflection of their party, although not to the same degree that presidents are, so their "becoming" more moderate serves both themselves and their felllow Republicans in the state legislature. Nevertheless, I'm sure many of these decisions are driven by policy reasons as well.
I think the Republicans in the primaries right now would enact the policies they promise, if they became president. If Obama lost, a major factor could be his failure to keep several campaign promises such as Guantanamo Bay. The Republicans would recognize that this failure brought about his demise, and they would be extra careful not to follow in Obama's footsteps. Not only would they lose re-election as well, but much of the American public might consequently brand Republicans as hypocrites.
Alyssa, have you discovered any information about a similar trend occurring among Democratic governors?
I think that our outlook on such political flip-flopping really depends on whether or not you are a glass-half-full or glass-half-empty person. The more optimistic among us will probably choose to believe that these governors truly intended to enact the changes they had proposed until made aware of previously unknown factors that changed their minds. The more pessimistic among us will choose to belief that it was all a ruse in order to get elected.
Like Jeremy said about Obama, a lot of people who are on the fence about him might look upon his failure to change the situation with Guantanamo as evidence of his lack of honesty and therefore not vote for his reelection.
Post a Comment