So this means Bustamante is still Lt Gov? What's the power dynamic?

[jobycom]

In Texas the governor has only as much power as he earns. A strong, influential governor can run the state, but usually governors just make speeches and take pictures. Like W. Ann Richards was the first kind of governor. She used her title to actively recruit businesses to Texas, and to take on the insurance companies, and influence public opinion. Bush just sort of sat there.

A lot of people think the Lt Gov in Texas has all the power. He does have a lot as leader of the Senate and part of the administration, but a weak LT Gov doesn't really have much power. The Texas government is rather clever. It has so many checks and balances that a person's power and influence has more to do with the individual's abilities than with the office. It's often said the state governor is figurehead, but that's not right. He or she has as much power as he or she can earn.

How is California set up? If Arnold is weak, does Bustamante have more power, or the governor strong regardless? How about the legislature?

I'm kind of curious how this will all play out. I'm also curious whether any of the allegations against Arnold will carry over past the election. Davis was stupid to harp on them and threaten an investigation-- I think that alone killed any momentum he might have gotten from Arnold's scandals. But if Arnold gets in trouble, does Bustamante take over his duties, or is California just left leaderless? By trouble, I don't mean Arnold is removed, I mean he is so busy defending himself he can't do his job.

[papau]

1. I believe in CA only has real power if Gov is out of state

:-)