A Lott to Answer For

A quick retrospective of Trent Lott’s political career reveals a man openly hostile to the politics of inclusion.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


1968 — Begins his political career as administrative assistant to US Rep. William M. Colmer, a one-time Dixiecrat and staunch segregationist.

1972 — Elected to the US House of Representatives, taking over Colmer’s seat–with his mentor’s blessing–as a Republican.

1978 — Introduces bill restoring Jefferson Davis’ U.S. citizenship.

1980 — At a rally for Ronald Reagan in Jackson, Miss., Lott praises Thurmond much as he will 22 years later.

“You know if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are today.”

1981 — Intervenes at the US Supreme Court to defend the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University in South Carolina, under review because the school openly discriminates against any student “engaged in an interracial marriage or known to advocate interracial marriage or dating.”

“Racial discrimination does not always violate public policy.”

1983 — Votes against making the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday a national holiday.

“Look at the cost involved in the Martin Luther King holiday and the fact that we have not done it for a lot of other people that were more deserving.”

1984 — In an interview with Southern Partisan magazine, Lott explains why he opposed expanding the Voting Rights Act.

“They are still trying to exact Reconstruction legislation that is just not fair.”

1984 — In a speech to the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Biloxi, Mississippi, Lott sells the Party of Lincoln.

“The spirit of Southern Civil War leader Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican platform.”

1988 — Elected to the US Senate.

1992 — Delivers a keynote address to the Council of Conservative Citizens, the successor to the segregationist White Citizens’ Councils of the 1960s.

“The people in this room stand for the right principles and the right philosophy. Let’s take it in the right direction, and our children will be the beneficiaries.”

1996 — Votes no on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would have prohibited job discrimination based on sexual orientation. He argues:

“Its goal is not fairness for individuals. Its goal is social revolution…. ENDA is part of a larger and more audacious effort to make the public accept behavior that most Americans consider dangerous, unhealthy, or just plain wrong.”

1997 — Chosen by Senate Republicans to be Majority Leader.

1997 — In an interview with Time, Lott acknowledges that he supported segregation while a student at the University of Mississippi.

“Yes, you could say that I favored segregation then. I don’t now… The main thing was, I felt the federal government had no business sending in troops to tell the state what to do.”

1997 — When asked why his name was included among informants and other “state actors” in the sealed files of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission — a state segregationist spy agency — Lott replies awkwardly:

“I don’t have the foggiest idea. I’ve never heard such a thing and never was involved in any way and don’t have any idea. I suspect that even if it is true, I mean that could involve, you know, preachers, newspaper reporters, whatever. I really don’t know anything about it.”

It is later revealed that Lott had written a letter to Sovereignty Commission director W. Webb Burke in 1969 on behalf of Colmers. Lott expressed his gratitude for a “resolution passed by your commission commending the Mississippi congressional delegation for their interest in requesting a full-scale investigation in the mysterious death” of a white marine in Vietnam. The marine had allegedly been shot by minority soldiers for wearing a Mississippi flag on his fatigues.

1998 — CCC spokesman Mark Cerr tells the Washington Times:

“Trent Lott is one of our members. He’s been a member for a long time.”

1998 — Asked whether homosexuality is a sin, Lott replies:

“Yes, it is.” He goes on to compare gays to alcoholics and kleptomaniacs, but says, “You should not try to mistreat them or treat them as outcasts.”

1999 — Lott refuses to allow a Senate hearing on the nomination of James Hormel, a gay man, to be Ambassador to Luxembourg.

1999 — When Lott’s longstanding ties to the CCC become a minor scandal, Lott spokesman John Czwartacki tells reporters:

“This group harbors views which Senator Lott firmly rejects. He has absolutely no involvement with them either now or in the future”

2000 — Lott Votes no on expanding hate crimes to include those based on sexual orientation. Czwartacki explains:

“Our point is that every crime is a hate crime.”

2001 — Lott is the only senator to vote against the confirmation of Judge Roger Gregory, who became the first ever black judge in the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Nov 8, 2002 — In an interview about immigration on FoxNews, Bill O’Reilly asks Lott:

O’REILLY: Why not back up the Border Patrol with the military, whether it’s National Guard or straight troops? Why not do it?
LOTT: Well, I think we should do it.
O’REILLY: Do you really?
LOTT: …Oh, absolutely.
O’REILLY: You’re the first politician I’ve heard…
LOTT: Look, most politicians run around worried about civil libertarians and being sued by the ACLU.

Nov 16, 2002 — The CCC unanimously passes the following resolution praising Lott:

WHEREAS Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi this month publicly and courageously called for placing U.S. troops on the border to protect our country against the invasion of illegal aliens
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of Conservative Citizens commends Sen. Lott for his statement and that The Council calls on President Bush to fulfill his constitutional duty and place U.S. troops on the border to halt the invasion of the United States by illegal immigrants.

Dec 7 2002 — At a party celebrating Thurmond’s 100th birthday, Lott notes that his home state of Mississippi supported Thurmond’s anti-integration candidacy.

“We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years, either.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate