Support for stimulus high among GOP governors

As President Obama put his signature on the economic stimulus bill, resent still exists among the GOP in Congress. However, it is a different story among Republican governors. As congressional Republicans continue their fight, their gubernatorial counterparts already have projects lined up, and state budget deficits in the billions ready to retire.

Charlie Crist, the Republican governor of Florida, campaigned in his state alongside President Obama, trumpeting the benefits that will be felt by the economic recovery plan. Other states, such as California, are facing such massive budget deficits that many government functions will close, and possible widespread state employee layoffs may occur. Many of these very states operate with a state constitutional law requiring a balanced budget, so keeping such jobs and functions operational is nearly out of the question. As pointed out in this very article, it may be easier for congressional GOP to shoot down the measure because they do not have to balance a budget and execute state functions. In the House of Representatives, they are merely legislators with a smaller constituency. The pressure surmounts on GOP governors to come through and stop the crisis that is plaguing each state on an individual basis.

Citing the New York Times, Utah's Republican governor, Jon Huntsman Jr. sought up to $14.4 billion for roads, rail and sewer projects and for construction of a prison, courthouses and veterans' nursing homes. Partisanship seems to be put on hold when it comes to the National Governors Association. Current Vermont Governor Douglas even stated the stimulus "might be a little different" if he had written it, but "the essence of a recovery package is essential to get our nation's economy moving."

1. With minimal national leadership, and most Americans viewing congressional GOP as the face of the party, is it time for Republican governors to make their positions more prominent (for the good of the GOP)?
2. What do you feel is the reason for the differential between congressional and gubernatorial GOP leaders? Is it more than just the mere difference in legislative/executive power?
3. Does having GOP governors support the measures make their congressional counterparts look bad in the eyes of the voters, or have no effect at all?