Governors, just like presidents, take more credit and get more blame than they deserve.

That’s especially true in Texas, which has a weak governor’s office. Yet the Republican gubernatorial debate showed Texans how Gov. Rick Perry sought to gather up all the credit for creating jobs and how his challengers, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Debra Medina, sought to blame him for all that has gone wrong.

The next debate — which should include Medina, who many Republicans see as a spoiler — needs to hone in on the realities of the office all three people are seeking. How does the next governor plan to act within his or her power to make things right? What specifically can the governor do — without legislative authority — to put people back to work?

My sense is that there isn’t anything the governor can do. So why does Perry keep touting his “record” as a job creator and a tax reducer? For that matter, why do his challengers keep pounding him for things over which he has next to zero authority or control?

Remember when Gov. Perry issued an executive order requiring middle school-age girls to receive a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer? The Legislature quite promptly overrode the governor’s order. So much for executive authority, correct?

Texas’ founders had this idea that the governor shouldn’t have too much power. The governor is empowered, however, to make appointments to boards and commissions. The first governor’s debate didn’t touch on any of that. Perhaps the second one will zero in on the type of people the governor will appoint to Texas regulatory agencies.

If so, then we actually might get some relevant discussion going.