Governors limited in economic fight

As the impact of the national downturn has spread through Massachusetts, driving the state unemployment rate to its highest level since the early 1990s, Patrick has had few options but to slash programs, lay off workers, and consider tax increases to keep the state's budget in balance, a constitutional requirement. Contrast that to President Obama, who, through the nearly $800 billion stimulus package and deficit spending projected to top $1 trillion a year, is offering middle class tax cuts and public works projects to create jobs in a bid to revive the economy.

The limits of gubernatorial power are reflected in a recent Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll that found starkly different perceptions of Patrick's and Obama's handling of the economy. While two-thirds, or 65 percent, of Massachusetts residents approved of Obama's efforts to fix the national economy, nearly as many, 58 percent, disapproved of Patrick's stewardship of the state's economy.

Other governors are suffering similar drops in approval ratings, particularly in states hard hit by the recession. In both California and Michigan, for example, only about one in three residents give positive ratings to their governors, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm respectively, according to recent polls.

"The first lesson for any governor is to get yourself your own Federal Reserve Board," said Ralph Whitehead, a University of Massachusetts journalism professor who follows state politics. "The fiscal and monetary tools that a president has just dwarfs anything that a governor can do."

Some of Patrick's perception problems are of his own making. Residents surveyed in the recent poll cited political missteps as factors in their unfavorable view of Patrick's handling of the economy. Among them: the failed effort to appoint a political ally, state Senator Marian Walsh of West Roxbury, to a state job with a six-figure salary.

Where Obama is "giving the impression that he's battling the big CEOs," said Dana Schneider, 38, of Brookline, Patrick seems headed back "to the same old cronyism."

"It seems there's more waste and not really any change," said Schneider, an assistant retail manager. "It's still who you know."

Kyle Sullivan, Patrick's spokesman said, "The governor understands the significance of the recent issues and appreciates the concerns raised by citizens facing this difficult and uncertain economic environment."

Meanwhile, whatever tools Patrick may have to affect the economy tend to be unpopular. Three out of four surveyed in the Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll said they were concerned that state budget cuts to close the deficit would hurt local services, such as schools, police, and fire. Only 7 percent said they supported a gas tax increase of 19 cents a gallon, which Patrick recently proposed, compared to 41 percent who said they would only go as high as 5 cents a gallon and 28 percent who said they opposed any increase.

In many ways, analysts said, a governor's perceived economic performance depends on timing. In the 1990s, Republican governors William Weld and A. Paul Cellucci entered office in the midst of a US expansion, which helped carry both to reelection. In 1974, another Republican governor, Francis W. Sargent, sought reelection as the Arab oil embargo sent gasoline and other consumer prices soaring.

After his lost reelection bid to Michael S. Dukakis, Sargent blamed "the price of hamburg," said Michael Widmer, the president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a nonpartisan research group.

"When the economy is booming, governors get more credit than they deserve," Widmer said. "When it turns down, they get more blame than they deserve."

Even though the state is limited in how it can respond to the recession, Patrick is using state and federal resources, including stimulus money, to create jobs, help the unemployed, and position the state for growth once the recovery begins, said Sullivan. "The governor understands that he is governing during a time of international economic upheaval and that it is his job to help see the state through this crisis and position Massachusetts for growth when the inevitable recovery begins," he said. "He and his team are working nonstop coordinating our efforts with federal and local governments, to provide relief for struggling families in this difficult economy."

In many ways, analysts said, Obama has an advantage over Patrick in terms of timing. Because he's been in office for less than three months, citizens are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt as he tackles an economic mess he didn't create. Patrick, however, is in the third year of a four-year term, and Massachusetts residents are far less willing to cut him some slack, even though the state's economic woes are the result of the national recession. "Obama is still fresh," said Paul Guzzi, president of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, "but Patrick is no longer viewed as the new governor. The state's problems are his problems."

The perception of how political leaders handle the economy can encompass questions of character and leadership, said Richard Parker, a lecturer at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Patrick, like Obama, campaigned on the theme of change, Parker said, but now seems perceived as "enmeshed in the political system."

"Obama is going to get caught in the same vise if things don't improve," said Parker. "His moment of judgment will come in the late summer, early fall if we don't see some slowdown in unemployment and uptick in confidence."

Robert Gavin can be reached at rgavin@globe.com.