[ad_1]
State governors have no official role in the federal legislative process, but can influence their state’s senators and representatives. They have more power at the state level. State governments must comply with federal laws and mandates, but can unite on issues of mutual concern to send a message to Congress. Historical conflicts over states’ rights have occurred, including the Civil War and the desegregation of government-funded institutions.
The relationship between state governors and the US Congress can be a little confusing at times. In the sense of having a direct role in the federal legislative process, state governors may be able to exert some political influence over their state’s senators and representatives, but have no official role in the voting process. State governors have much more power and influence at the state government level.
The United States Congress has an established pecking order, starting with freshman or first-year House Representatives and ending with long-serving Senators and the President-nominee, usually a respected Senator from the majority political party. State governors are not included in that hierarchy of power, although they are not without their usefulness to federal lawmakers.
More often than not, state governors find themselves ungrateful to receive new federal laws, Supreme Court rulings, and unfunded mandates mandated by Congress. Because these edicts are often tied to much-needed federal funding, state governments are generally obligated to comply with any federal law and in many cases are strongly urged to create similar state laws, such as mandatory wearing of motorcycle helmets or highway speed restrictions . While some state governors find federal laws too restrictive or too lax, they are rarely able to override federal law with a new state law.
This is not to say that state governors are completely powerless when dealing with the US Congress. Individual state governments can unite on an issue of mutual concern and use that collective power to send a unified message to Congress. State governments have historically chafed at the idea of being controlled by a strong central federal government, which in turn has led to several skirmishes over states’ rights. The Civil War, for example, was partially triggered by a disagreement between state governors and Congress over the right to decide whether future states could decide to allow slavery or not.
Another infamous confrontation between a state governor and the federal government occurred in 1962, when Alabama Governor George Wallace physically stood in the doorway of the University of Alabama to prevent several black students from enrolling at a traditionally white college. While the federal government had mandated the desegregation of government-funded institutions, Governor Wallace believed that individual states should have the right to form their own segregation or desegregation laws. Eventually, Wallace stepped aside and allowed students onto campus, but the incident showed how fragile the relationship between state governors and Congress can be.
[ad_2]