Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

What Lott's Resignation Says About America

4 years ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
It's a sad day in America. Not because Trent Lott is stepping down from the U.S. Senate -- if I offered up grief, it would be in the form of crocodile tears. The bad news isn't that the Minority Whip in the U.S. Senate is leaving, but when and why he is leaving.

Think about it. Put aside the political angling for a second (who will be appointed, who will line up to run, which cushy K Street job has Lott lined up) and let's think about what this man is doing. A single year into his current six year term in the U.S. Senate, he is resigning in order to pursue other opportunities, a euphemism already considered to be a polite way of saying he wants to avoid a law that would place a longer restriction on his ability to lobby Wall Street.
It's been a long time since most of us out here in America felt like we had too many people back in Washington, D.C., for whom we generally felt admiration. This decision by Trent Lott is a reminder of why that feeling is so widespread. Again, forget the ideological disagreements -- and I had plenty with Trent Lott -- who spends so many years angling for power inside Washington just to ultimately send a simple lesson: service and commitment matter, but only until a better paycheck comes along.

Are the voters in Mississippi, the ones who just recently re-upped Trent's contract, upset? I have no idea. Some probably are. Some probably aren't. And those feelings exist for every reason under the sun. But the fact of the matter is Lott's decision means they'll be represented for the next year by someone appointed by their Governor, leaving the citizens the meager choice in 2008 of rubber-stamping someone else's pick or giving up some seniority -- always a concern in cash-strapped states (I'd know, I'm from the equally poor Montana).

Enough rambling for now. I felt the need to write this, though, after a friend asked -- with all these mid-term resignations, when is anyone going to stop looking at the political implications and start asking about the ethical ones? It's a fair point -- and one that I hope goes a few steps further.
Filed Under: Senate

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

Follow Politics Daily

Waiting for McCain 4.0

The Unscary Unsuperdelegates

Clinton and Obama: The Central Question

A Real Win

Obama's Correct About Reagan

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>