# Do all states have to have the same form of government? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 26, 2004, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257 "2004-10-26T16:43:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hadrian0117](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Hadrian0117](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hadrian0117)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/1 "2004-10-26T16:43:57Z")
In the US every state government is a scaled down version of the federal government. Elected governor, bicameral legislature (except Nebraska), and an independant judiciary. The big difference is how they pick judges and cabinet officers. Could a state decide to adopt a parliamentary system? Or replace the governor with an executive council? What if they wanted to give the legislature the power to overule court verdicts? Could they change the governor into a president? I know the consitution says they must have a republican form of gov’t, but doesn’t that just mean they can’t become a monarchy? Could a state give it’s governor a lifetime term? ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/2 "2004-10-26T16:48:48Z")
I asked the question and a state making itself a monarchy little while ago. While the consensus was that a state could not be a monarchy because that would be unconstitutional under the republican form or government clause, all of the other situations that you list would probably be Ok. I am from Louisiana and it has a fundamentally different system of law than other states. Its law is based on the Napoleanic code and that doesn’t seem to cause any problems outside of the ste. ---
**Author:** ![akennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@akennett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akennett)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/3 "2004-10-26T16:49:11Z")
There is no requirement for state governments to be any form other than republican in nature. The various state governments have changed over time, and there is nothing to stop them from changing again and again. Lengths of terms, number of houses in the legislature, the make-up of the judiciary, these are all up in the air. Ideas like an independent judiciary and limited term lengths for officials, though, are very much a part of the American poltical psyche and are not likely to be given up willingly by the people. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/4 "2004-10-26T19:17:44Z")
> [@Hadrian0117](#): > > Could a state decide to adopt a parliamentary system? I don’t see why not. You would have the practical problem that state elections would be out of synch with federal elections, but in some states (such as New Jersey) they already are. Of course the Head of State, who would appoint the premier and dismiss “Parliament”, would have to be an elected or appointed president (a la Germany and Italy) rather than a monarch. > [@](#): > > Or replace the governor with an executive council? Yes, New York had an Executive Council until 1822. > [@](#): > > What if they wanted to give the legislature the power to overule court verdicts? Certainly a state could empower its legislature to override _state_ court verdicts, but they would still be subject to federal court rulings. > [@](#): > > Could they change the governor into a president? I don’t know why not, but that by itself wouldn’t enhance his or her powers. > [@](#): > > I know the consitution says they must have a republican form of gov’t, but doesn’t that just mean they can’t become a monarchy? Could a state give it’s governor a lifetime term? The “guarantee clause” hasn’t been heavily litigated, so it’s impossible to say exactly what it allows or prevents. Common sense would indicate that the federal government would intervene long before a state became a North Korea-style “republic” under a dictator. A lifetime term for a governor, in the unlikely event that a state wished to adopt one, would be skating the outer edge of propriety. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/5 "2004-10-26T19:33:30Z")
> [@Freddy the Pig](#): > > I don’t see why not. You would have the practical problem that state elections would be out of synch with federal elections, but in some states (such as New Jersey) they already are. Of course the Head of State, who would appoint the premier and dismiss “Parliament”, would have to be an elected or appointed president (a la Germany and Italy) rather than a monarch. A parliamentary system could be done with fixed terms of office. The state of New South Wales, in Australia, now has fixed terms of office because the governing Labor Party did that in a deal with minor parties in order to form a government. It’s not in the N.S.W. Constitution, but that doesn’t mean much. (Most of the N.S.W. Constitutrion is just ordinary legislation, and not entrenched.) The problem that you might have with a parliamentary system combined with fixed terms is if the government lost control of the lower house mid-term. There would be a few options here: either the head of state tries to find a new government that can control the lower house for the balance of the fixed term, or you have a general election. If you have a general election, the new government might hold office for the balance of the term of the old government, or it might start a new fixed term (which in the US system, might be adjusted so it ends on an election day in the first week of November). However, N.S.W. has provided a model of fixed terms combined with a parliamentary system. ---
**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-all-states-have-to-have-the-same-form-of-government/271257/6 "2004-10-26T20:11:00Z")
> [@Hadrian0117](#): > > Or replace the governor with an executive council? As **Freddy the Pig** points out, New York formerly used an executive council. Massachusetts still does – certain appointments are vested in the Governor and Council, rather than in the Governor alone. Many states vest the power of clemency in a board, which usually includes the governor, rather than in the governor alone. > [@Hadrian0117](#): > > Could they change the governor into a president? Sure. The chief executives of New Hampshire and Pennsylvania were called the “president” in the 1780s and 1790s. Benjamin Franklin was the president of Pennsylvania.