What’s a Governor to Do?: A Framework for Understanding Governors’ Actions and Rhetoric in the Face of Unavoidable, Salient, and “Unsolvable” Issues

Abstract

What's a governor to do? Faced with crises that seem insurmountable, state leaders often turn to symbolic gestures rather than substantive solutions. This thesis probes that question by examining how governors manage unavoidable, high-salience, and structurally unsolvable issues—ranging from California's entrenched homelessness crisis to policy impasses in Texas and Florida. Employing a novel theoretical framework based on California that weaves together episodic framing, attribution, constraint framing, and agenda-setting theories, the study reveals how these executives use high-profile, symbolic actions to reassign blame, protect their political capital, and subtly shift public perceptions of accountability. Through a qualitative analysis of executive orders and media narratives, paired with a quantitative survey experiment conducted in California’s largest cities, the research demonstrates that while such measures elevate the public salience of urgent issues, they often obscure the deeper, systemic challenges at play. Ultimately, the thesis highlights the strategy behind governors’ responses to crises that defy easy solutions—offering fresh insights into the art of symbolic governance in modern American politics.