We had another knotty question come up before the editorial board this morning that we just couldn’t settle, so we had to move on. It was this:
We don’t have a clue. Of course, next time I see Darrell I’ll ask him (I did see Andre today, but I don’t think he’s the right one to ask). And if this were a column instead of a blog tidbit, I’d bother to call him. But just sitting around wondering, we couldn’t figure it out. The reasons he gives in his op-ed piece don’t answer the question; they are insufficient to explain a phenomenon as unusual as this.
(Some who don’t understand how we work might ask, How come you ran it if you don’t know what motivated it? My answer would be, Duh. It was interesting. And it disagreed with something we had written, and pieces like that — when interesting — have a certain priority. What’s odd here is that the motivation is usually obvious to us, and this time I’m mystified.)
I mean, set aside the party differences. Senators don’t go out of their way to praise lieutenant governors — Andre or anybody else. When they take notice of them at all, it’s usually to take away one or more of the few powers the rather useless office possesses. A lot of people don’t understand this, but to South Carolina state senators, there is no office above them. Not the governor, and certainly not the gov lite. One of the shocks of recent years has been the deference Glenn McConnell — who in the past has seemed affronted any time a governor presumed to exert any kind of influence on the governing process — has shown toward Mark Sanford.
Anyway, if you have a workable theory about it, share it with me. And if it makes sense, when I next see Sen. Jackson, I’ll ask him whether you’re right.