Eric Cantor made it official Wednesday afternoon that he will step down as House Majority Leader at the end of July after his stunning loss to Tea Party challenger Dave Brat in Virginia’s 7th congressional GOP primary on Tuesday. Then he immediately offered his unalloyed endorsement of Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy of California to succeed him.
“I don’t know who it is that will actually be running,” Cantor told reporters on Capitol Hill. “I can tell you that if my dear friend and colleague Kevin McCarthy does decide to run, I think he’d make an outstanding Majority Leader and I will be backing him with my full support.”
Related: 5 Urgent Questions Following Cantor’s Loss
Whether the fallen leader’s endorsement is a political blessing or a curse is very much an open question.
Cantor’s loss to Brat, a college economics professor who pounded Cantor for abandoning conservative principles and favoring immigration reform “amnesty,” has energized the GOP’s right wing like few other events in recent times. Cantor, 51, until now was considered House Speaker John Boehner’s heir apparent after Boehner, 64, signaled that he might step aside in the next year or two.
In a total shocker of an election, Brat crushed Cantor by 11 percentage points, even after Cantor had vastly outspent him -- $5 million to little more than $200,000. The election results unleashed a torrent of conservative criticism about Cantor and Boehner’s leadership performance that many complained was heavy on accommodation to President Obama and light on commitment to conservative economic and social principles.
“We need someone with proven commitment to conservative principles,” Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KA), a conservative rebel who has frequently clashed with the House leadership, told MSNBC. “One thing as a leader, you’ve got to be willing to listen. Just because you’ve got the job doesn’t mean you know everything.”
Related: Why Cantor’s Loss Is Bad News for the U.S. Economy
Huelskamp and other House conservatives are demanding a sea change in leadership in which they will have a much bigger say in policy and the future direction of the party – and McCarthy may be viewed as too closely allied with the old order.
“The adrenaline needle has been plunged into the heart of the Tea Party and they feel very emboldened to put one of their own into the Republican leadership,” Ron Bonjean, a former House Republican spokesman and strategist, said in an interview. “There’s no question that Tea Party members as well as outside groups are going to ramp up the energy and intensity to try to put one of their own into the majority leader’s position.”
Stuart Rothenberg, a political analyst, told The Fiscal Times that McCarthy could be hurt by being “lumped in” with Cantor and Boehner in the eyes of the rank-and-file lawmakers. “If I were Kevin McCarthy I would be concerned,” said Rothenberg, editor of the Rothenberg Political Report. “The way pictures are painted these days with a very broad bush, it makes it very easy for Tea Party folks, libertarian folks, and anti-establishment folks to see him as part of the past, part of the problem.”
McCarthy, the third ranking House leader, began contacting members earlier in the day in search of support for Cantor’s job, according to The Washington Post.
Related: Meet David Brat, the New Tea Party Giant-Killer
House Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions of Texas also appeared poised to jump into the race, possibly followed by another popular conservative Texan, Rep. Jeb Hensarling, who is chair of the House Financial Services Committee. Last month, Hensarling downplayed any interest in challenging Boehner for the speakership, during an appearance before the Heritage Foundation.
“I’m flattered when people ask the question . . . [but] it’s not something I’m thinking about,” he said at the time. But with Cantor stepping down this summer, Hensarling is reassessing his next career move.
Despite the shock and embarrassment of his loss, Cantor appeared upbeat and gracious in his comments to the press. He said that while he had suffered a rough personal setback the night before, “I couldn’t be more optimistic about the future of this country.”
In his opening remarks, Cantor drew on his religious background in describing his response to adversity.
“You know, growing up in the Jewish faith – I grew up, went to Hebrew school, read a lot in the Old Testament, and you learn a lot about individual setbacks,” he said. “But you also read and learned that each setback is an opportunity. And that there’s always optimism for the future.”
Here is a summary of his response to reporters’ questions:
Why did he lose? “I’m going to leave the political analysis to you all. I know my team worked incredibly, incredibly hard. They did a tremendous amount of work. I’m proud of their work, I’m grateful for what they did. And in the end the voters chose another candidate.”
Did he spend too much time in Washington and not enough time tending to constituents back in Richmond? “I was in my district every week. There’s a balance between holding a leadership position and serving constituents at home. But never was there a day that I did not put constituents of the 7th District first, and I will continue to do so.”
What message does his defeat send to the future of immigration reform? “I will say that my position on immigration has not changed. . . . I have always said the system is broken and it needs reforms. I think it’s much more desirable and doable if we did it one step at a time, working towards where we have common ground and believe things in common. I don’t believe in the ‘my-way-or-the-highway’ approach that the President had laid out and I’ve continued to take that position.
Democrats said you were too extreme and conservatives said you were too compromising. “Maybe we had it right somewhere in the middle. Again, I think this town should be about trying to strike common ground. I’ve always said it’s better if we can agree to disagree but find areas where we can produce results. . . What we have in common as Republicans is a tremendous amount of commitment to a better and smaller government, and greater opportunity and growth for everybody. And the differences that we many have are slight and pale in comparison with the differences we have with the left and those expressing support for liberalism and more expansive government.”
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
