Nov 27, 2007
Lott's Departure
Yesterday, former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott announced that he will resign from the Senate by the end of the year.
Lott’s decision to resign is significant in three respects. First, it brings to a close an era of Southern politics. Lott was essentially the last of the first generation of Southern Republican officeholders—people who started in politics either working for segregationist Democrats or in opposing the 1960s Southern Democratic Party from the right.
Lott’s first campaign came when segregationist congressman John Bell Williams ran for Mississippi governor in 1967. (Williams had actively supported Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign, causing the Democratic caucus to strip him of his seniority.) Lott then went on to work for longtime Representative William Colmer, Judge Smith’s right-hand man in House Rules Committee efforts to obstruct civil rights legislation. When Colmer retired in 1972, Lott ran on his predecessor’s platform but not his party.
Second, the Lott resignation will put to the test whether a Democrat has any chance of winning a Senate race in Mississippi. No Democrat has done so since 1982, when John Stennis captured his final term—besting a then up-and-comer in Mississippi politics, current governor Haley Barbour. Since 1982, however, the only Democrat to run even a mildly competitive Senate race was former congressman Wayne Dowdy, who opposed Lott in an open-seat race when Stennis retired in 1988. Dowdy ran a close-to-perfect campaign and still attracted only 45 percent of the vote.
For the special election to secure Lott’s seat, the Democrats likely will nominate former Attorney General Mike Moore—a pioneer in the state lawsuits against the tobacco industry and the strongest candidate the party possibly could offer. If Moore can’t win (and I suspect he can’t), then no Democrat can win at the Senate level.
Finally, though Lott is denying it, there seems to be little doubt as to the peculiar timing of his resignation. The Times: “James A. Thurber, director of the Center for Presidential and Congressional Studies at American University, said there was no question in his mind that Mr. Lott’s decision had been influenced by the new ethics and lobbying rules. Senators who retire this year have to wait only one year before lobbying their former colleagues, instead of the two years that go into effect in 2008.” The Post article makes a similar point.
Shouldn’t it generate outrage that a sitting senator, just reelected in 2006, would resign a seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body to pursue a lobbying career—much less time his resignation to allow him to make money more quickly?
Lott’s decision to resign is significant in three respects. First, it brings to a close an era of Southern politics. Lott was essentially the last of the first generation of Southern Republican officeholders—people who started in politics either working for segregationist Democrats or in opposing the 1960s Southern Democratic Party from the right.
Lott’s first campaign came when segregationist congressman John Bell Williams ran for Mississippi governor in 1967. (Williams had actively supported Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign, causing the Democratic caucus to strip him of his seniority.) Lott then went on to work for longtime Representative William Colmer, Judge Smith’s right-hand man in House Rules Committee efforts to obstruct civil rights legislation. When Colmer retired in 1972, Lott ran on his predecessor’s platform but not his party.
Second, the Lott resignation will put to the test whether a Democrat has any chance of winning a Senate race in Mississippi. No Democrat has done so since 1982, when John Stennis captured his final term—besting a then up-and-comer in Mississippi politics, current governor Haley Barbour. Since 1982, however, the only Democrat to run even a mildly competitive Senate race was former congressman Wayne Dowdy, who opposed Lott in an open-seat race when Stennis retired in 1988. Dowdy ran a close-to-perfect campaign and still attracted only 45 percent of the vote.
For the special election to secure Lott’s seat, the Democrats likely will nominate former Attorney General Mike Moore—a pioneer in the state lawsuits against the tobacco industry and the strongest candidate the party possibly could offer. If Moore can’t win (and I suspect he can’t), then no Democrat can win at the Senate level.
Finally, though Lott is denying it, there seems to be little doubt as to the peculiar timing of his resignation. The Times: “James A. Thurber, director of the Center for Presidential and Congressional Studies at American University, said there was no question in his mind that Mr. Lott’s decision had been influenced by the new ethics and lobbying rules. Senators who retire this year have to wait only one year before lobbying their former colleagues, instead of the two years that go into effect in 2008.” The Post article makes a similar point.
Shouldn’t it generate outrage that a sitting senator, just reelected in 2006, would resign a seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body to pursue a lobbying career—much less time his resignation to allow him to make money more quickly?