Raul Labrador is quietly considering a campaign for House majority leader, according to a source familiar with the congressman’s thinking, potentially setting up a head-to-head contest with Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy to replace Eric Cantor.
“He’s getting a lot of encouragement from other members,” the source said.
Labrador was approached by several influential conservative members Thursday morning after Rep. Jeb Hensarling announced he would not challenge McCarthy for the No. 2 spot in leadership.
While Labrador enjoys strong support among the most conservative members of the House GOP, it’s unclear whether he would have the ability — with the special election less than a week away — to build a broader coalition capable of giving McCarthy a competitive race.
As Labrador contemplated their encouragement to enter the race, another Republican, Rep. Pete Sessions, dropped his bid.
Labrador is now carefully considering whether he wants to enter the fray — and whether he could possibly win.
An outspoken sophomore lawmaker from Idaho, he is one of the most popular tea-party-allied members of the GOP’s right flank.
Labrador has occasionally rubbed some Republicans the wrong way with his vocal criticism of the current leadership team. He has frequently attacked that team for being too passive and is one of 12 members who refused to support Speaker John Boehner’s reelection. He has consistently said the leadership team is not representative of the conference because it does not include a red-state Republican.
Labrador’s name has occasionally been mentioned as a dark-horse candidate for a leadership position. In fact, earlier this year, Labrador joked in an interview with National Journal that he might “do something crazy” like run for speaker of the House.
It’s unclear what his timetable is for making a decision. Many lawmakers have already left Washington and will not return until Monday.
This story was updated with the news that Rep. Sessions had dropped his bid for majority leader.
What We're Following See More »
In light of his recent confessions, the speakership of Dennis Hastert is being judged far more harshly. The New York Times' Carl Hulse notes that in hindsight, Hastert now "fares poorly" on a number of fronts, from his handling of the Mark Foley page scandal to "an explosion" of earmarks to the weakening of committee chairmen. "Even his namesake Hastert rule—the informal standard that no legislation should be brought to a vote without the support of a majority of the majority — has come to be seen as a structural barrier to compromise."
Even if "[t]he Republican presidential nomination may be in his sights ... Trump has so far ignored vital preparations needed for a quick and effective transition to the general election. The New York businessman has collected little information about tens of millions of voters he needs to turn out in the fall. He's sent few people to battleground states compared with likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, accumulated little if any research on her, and taken no steps to build a network capable of raising the roughly $1 billion needed to run a modern-day general election campaign."
Rep. Dave Young can't even refuse his own paycheck. The Iowa Republican is trying to make a point that if Congress can't pass a budget (it's already missed the April 15 deadline) then it shouldn't be paid. But, he's been informed, the 27th Amendment prohibits him from refusing his own pay. "Young’s efforts to dock his own pay, however, are duck soup compared to his larger goal: docking the pay of every lawmaker when Congress drops the budget ball." His bill to stiff his colleagues has only mustered the support of three of them. Another bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN), has about three dozen co-sponsors.
Sixty miles away, in Sandusky, Ohio. "We're pretty bitter about that," said Harmeet Dhillon, vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party. "It sucks to be California, we're like the ugly stepchild. They need us for our cash and our donors, they don't need us for anything else."
Anyone looking forward to seeing some boldfaced names on the client list of the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the "DC Madam," will have to wait a little longer. "The Supreme Court announced Monday it would not intervene to allow" the release of her phone records, "despite one of her former attorneys claiming the records are “very relevant” to the presidential election. Though he has repeatedly threatened to release the records if courts do not modify a 2007 restraining order, Montgomery Blair Sibley tells U.S. News he’s not quite sure what he now will do."