Showing posts with label Raul Labrador. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Raul Labrador. Show all posts

Friday, June 13, 2014

Kevin McCarthy to lobbyists, Chamber of Commerce: Don’t worry, it’ll be business as usual in the House

KevinMcCarthytolobbyists,ChamberofCommerce:Don’t

Kevin McCarthy to lobbyists, Chamber of Commerce: Don’t worry, it’ll be business as usual in the House

posted at 5:31 pm on June 13, 2014 by Allahpundit

So claims Bill Kristol, citing sources on the Hill.

Second look at Eric Cantor as a write-in candidate this fall?

The reaction [to Cantor's loss] in our nation’s capital, 90 miles away? Pretend it didn’t happen. Or if you had to acknowledge it happened, pretend it was of no significance. Or if you had to acknowledge it was of some significance, pretend it was merely a product of unique and local circumstances. Above all: Don’t draw any meaningful conclusions from what happened. And truly above all: Don’t change your behavior in any important way.

So the night after Eric Cantor’s defeat, the House Republican whip, the amiable Kevin McCarthy—the apparent frontrunner to succeed Cantor as leader because intelligent conservatives don’t want to compete for the privilege of serving as No. 2 to the amiable speaker, John Boehner—was telling a group of lobbyists pulled together by the Chamber of Commerce in a private room in a D.C. steakhouse: Don’t worry, nothing much will change, it will be business as usual in the House of Representatives.

But change was in the air. McCarthy spoke at the Capital Grille. Team Cantor had run up a campaign tab of $168,637—more than the total campaign spending of his challenger Dave Brat—at competing steakhouses Bobby Van’s and BLT Steak, a mile away. Who says politicians aren’t responsive to voters?

Translation: Amnesty’s still on the agenda, sooner or later. Raul Labrador’s decided to bite the bullet and jump into the race for majority leader as a conservative alternative to McCarthy, but like I said yesterday, I think that’s token opposition. It’s gratifying that the race won’t be a walkover and it’s smart of Labrador to seize an easy opportunity to build a reputation as a fighter among tea partiers (he’s already on the outs with Boehner so he has little to lose inside the House), but he’s going to get crushed. Having him on the ballot is useful mainly as an outlet for a few dozen House conservatives to register their dissent when the caucus chooses McCarthy, whose ACU and Heritage ratings are worse than Cantor’s.

Gabe Major asked a fair question this morning, though. Why should we expect the rest of the caucus to shift gears just because Cantor lost? It’s a shocking result, but it’s one race. The rest of them won their primaries, didn’t they?

True, but Cantor was no ordinary Republican and the reason he lost was no ordinary reason. I don’t mean immigration, either. The one common thread I’ve seen in every postmortem of the race, left or right, is that Brat succeeded brilliantly in framing Cantor as a creature of Washington’s cronyist K Street/Wall Street culture. Amnesty, a wishlist item for McCarthy’s friends in the Chamber of Commerce, is just one part of that larger problem. Seeing the House majority leader get crushed by an anti-cronyist message pushed by a no-name who spent next to nothing on the race has, I think, turned the outcome retroactively into a referendum on this question: Are congressional Republicans (not to mention congressional Democrats) too servile towards wealthy special interests? The answer: Of course they are. Of course they are. Of course they are, and everyone understands it. That perception is what should have made the caucus think twice about nominating Cantor’s right-hand man to succeed him. The backbenchers might have won their primaries (the inertia of incumbency is tremendous) but the perception that something’s deeply wrong with the Republican status quo remains. I thought the make-up of the new leadership would acknowledge that somehow. Nope.

Exit question via Phil Klein: If the establishment’s big problem is convincing House conservatives to go along on tough bills, why on earth would they want a guy like McCarthy who’s distrusted by grassroots righties to be their new salesman? Ideally they’d want someone who’s respected, however grudgingly, by the right but who plays well with the center to be the new leader. Which makes me wonder what have happened had Paul Ryan expressed interest in the job.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Can Raul Labrador capitalize on grassroots anti-establishment sentiment in GOP?

CanRaulLabradorcapitalizeongrassrootsanti-establishmentsentiment

Can Raul Labrador capitalize on grassroots anti-establishment sentiment in GOP?

posted at 10:31 am on June 13, 2014 by Noah Rothman

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) looks to have the votes for a bid to replace Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) as Republican House Majority Leader all sewn up. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), once McCarthy’s chief rival for the post, has already bowed out. But, as many commentators have already noted, McCarthy’s ascension to leadership in the House would be the ultimate expression by establishment Republicans that they do not understand the moment or the anxieties of average GOP voters.

HotAir’s Ed Morrissey noted on Friday that astute right-leaning political analysts like Philip Klein and Byron York have observed that the House GOP seems to have not internalized what Cantor’s primary loss means for the party.

“Cantor became part of the institutions rather than someone who could represent his district’s interests in contrast to them,” Morrissey wrote. “Cantor missed the populist swing in his district, and the House GOP seems to be missing it in general.”

A rather unflattering piece in Politico published on Thursday details how well-connected McCarthy is. And while that Beltway insider status makes for an effective Majority Leader – indeed, it is what made Cantor effective in that position – it also demonstrates why he is not the man for this populist moment.

Politico promoted this piece with one particularly devastating tweet:

Enter Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID). The sophomore Republican representative, first elected in the 2010 tea party wave, began to float the notion on Thursday that he might step up and incur the wrath of House leadership by making a bid for Majority Leader.

Labrador speaks to both conservative and libertarian wings of the party. He is conservative on social issues and sufficiently populist on budgetary matters (he supported a problematic but popular balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, for example). While Labrador, as a former member of the “Group of Eight,” is pro-immigration reform, he is not rigidly so. After Cantor’s loss, he told reporters that even minor reforms to the country’s immigration system will not pass this year.

Moreover, he counters a media narrative about the Republican Party which McCarthy merely advances. A Puerto Rican by birth, Labrador speaks with a mild accent. An unfortunately prolific talking point about the GOP’s unfriendliness toward minorities, furthered by GOP primary voters jettisoning their only Jewish member in Congress, would be blunted by Labrador’s ascension to Majority Leader.

It is somewhat vexing that leadership votes in the body of government most responsive to the will of the people are not at all responsive to public sentiment. Labrador may not be able to overcome the House GOP’s unwillingness to comprehend the depth of apprehension Republican voters have toward Washington elites. If, however, Labrador can create a groundswell in his favor, that calculation might change.

The prospect of losing elections usually has a sobering effect on the political class. Many in Washington appear to have convinced themselves that Cantor’s defenestration was a fluke. Even if Labrador is unsuccessful in a potential bid for House leadership, the scare he would put into otherwise unresponsive GOP leaders would go a long way toward driving the lessons of Cantor’s loss home.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Thursday, June 12, 2014

Oh my: Raul Labrador thinking of challenging Kevin McCarthy for majority leader?

Ohmy:RaulLabradorthinkingofchallengingKevin

Oh my: Raul Labrador thinking of challenging Kevin McCarthy for majority leader?

posted at 7:31 pm on June 12, 2014 by Allahpundit

Looks like House conservatives are trying to scrape together a threat to McCarthy at the eleventh hour, if only to show grassroots righties that they’re resisting the ascension of Cantor’s right-hand man to the throne. Business Insider hears that Labrador’s thinking of jumping in:

“He’s getting a lot of encouragement from other members,” the person told Business Insider.

Labrador’s possible last-minute entry into the race would make him a longshot candidate against the prohibitive favorite, House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-California). McCarthy, the establishment-preferred candidate, is squaring off against Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who is a favorite of the more conservative types among the House Republican conference.

Labrador refused to cast a vote for Boehner in last year’s Speaker election, so pairing them as numbers one and two in the House would be … interesting. Also interesting would be having Labrador as the caucus’s spokesman when the GOP establishment starts hyperventilating about another amnesty push next year. A Latino Republican leading the “security first” resistance would be a powerful counter. Obvious problem with Labrador, though: He’s only been in Congress for three years and has doubtless made lots of enemies among Boehner allies. Even if he gets 40-50 votes from House conservatives, where do the rest come from?

They need a conservative with more experience. Enter … Jim Jordan?

Fellow conservative lawmakers are now turning up the heat on Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the former chairman of the Republican Study Committee, to throw his hat into the ring for House majority leader…

“I don’t know that there is a better available candidate than Jim Jordan,” [Rep. Steve] King said. “He is a full spectrum, constitutional conservative, fiscal and social.”

Laying out the pro-Jordan argument, King said: “He commands the respect of the whole conference; he’d be an ideal candidate for majority leader; he’s never advocated for amnesty.”

Jordan’s another guy who’s had issues with Boehner in the past, but he’s been touted repeatedly in the past 48 hours as an alternative for conservatives if Hensarling decided he wouldn’t do it. In fact, with McCarthy and Pete Sessions in the race, I wonder if the strategy here from House conservatives is simply to try to deadlock the race somehow in hopes of luring Hensarling, who seems to be the consensus right-wing choice, back in. If they can somehow split the caucus three ways among McCarthy, Sessions, and Jordan or Labrador or someone else, maybe that clears the way for Hensarling to enter as a compromise choice for the Sessions/Jordan fans.

Or maybe this all just pageantry designed to show that House conservatives are half-heartedly trying to put up a fight even though the outcome isn’t in doubt. Exit quotation via Robert Costa:


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair