A Controversial Possibility

In normal circumstances, Gov. Brian Kemp’s legislative career should be over now that this 2026 session and bill-signing period has come to an end. If Georgians elect a Republican to succeed him, we can assume he’s signed his last piece of legislation. But if we have a Democratic governor-elect in November, Kemp might get called into action one more time.

Under the state constitution, Georgia has a strong governor system – arguably one of the most powerful in the nation.

The governor sets how much the General Assembly can spend in the budget each year and puts forth the first draft of a budget that contains a governor’s priorities, appoints thousands to state boards including powerful ones that run our university system and Ports Authority, wields line-item veto authority and has the sole discretion to call a special session. All state agencies not headed by a constitutional officer elected by the people report to the governor, and commissioners are at-will employees. Even though judgeships are technically elected positions, most judges resign before the end of their terms, giving the governor the ability to appoint a successor who then later goes before voters with the advantages of incumbency.

This is all perfectly normal to us who follow Georgia politics, but those powers exceed those of most governors. In neighboring Alabama and South Carolina, constitutions allow the legislatures to dominate. The governors enjoy the mansion and title but less influence than lesser-known legislative leaders.

A decade ago, North Carolina acted to decrease the powers of the governor and set a course that Georgia Republicans might look to emulate. When Democrat Roy Cooper won the governorship in 2016, the Republican majorities in the legislature held a lame duck session to pass bills that shifted some authorities from the governor to legislators. This included appointments to boards, oversight of the State Election Board, limits on the governor’s powers over judicial appointments and legislative approval of cabinet appointments.

Georgia Republicans would strongly consider a similar move if a Democrat won the governorship this fall, particularly if Democrats pick up new state House seats.

Such speculation isn’t a prediction of Democratic victory. Georgians by and large believe the state is going in the right direction and give high marks to the conservative leadership of Kemp. Even as Georgia Republicans face headwinds – which is nearly always the case in a midterm when your party controls the White House – they benefit from the fact that voters largely think they’ve run the state well, even if they don’t agree with every social policy.

A move to change the laws post-election would undoubtedly fuel controversy and attract national media attention. The timing would render it impossible to deny nakedly partisan motivations.

That’s not to say, however, that politically driven decisions always result in bad policy, and efforts to rein in gubernatorial powers do have precedent. When Gov. E.D. Rivers faced accusations of selling pardons, the General Assembly in 1942 stripped the governor’s pardon powers and created the Pardons and Paroles Board that still exists today (but whose members are all appointed by the governor).

A true turning point came in 1966. That year, Republican Bo Calloway won a plurality in the race for governor, but because no one received a majority the decision went to the Democratic-controlled General Assembly, which elected Lester Maddox. Legislators used the leverage over Maddox to end the practice of letting governors appoint the speaker of the House and all committee chairs – a system that meant the General Assembly was nothing but a rubber stamp for governors.

It’s not crazy to suggest that another look at ways to rebalance powers between the legislative and executive branches is due. Sensible reforms could include giving legislators an “advise and consent” role in appointments and the hiring of department heads or the creation of an annual “veto session” after the bill signing period to give legislators a say over whether vetoes stand.

Reforms, though, should not ruin what works about our current system. A powerful governorship allows for efficiency, flexibility and quick action, and checks on that power will no doubt bog down decision-making. No one wants our state government to become more like Washington, where political games keep anything from getting done.

The best-case scenario for Republicans involves Kemp handing over the keys to the Governor’s Mansion to another Republican. The worst case involves putting Kemp back to work one more time. 

Brian Robinson owns communications consulting firm Robinson Republic.