Mulvaney Angling to Lead House Conservatives in Next Congress

The South Carolina lawmaker will be a front-runner for chairman of the Republican Study Committee in what could be a crowded field of candidates.

WASHINGTON - MAY 11: U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) (3rd L) speaks as (L-R) House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC), and Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) listen during a news conference May 11, 2011 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Cantor held a news conference to introduce the next phase of the You Cut program. 
National Journal
Tim Alberta
March 27, 2014, 4:20 p.m.

Rep. Mick Mul­vaney of South Car­o­lina will seek the chair­man­ship of the Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee in the 114th Con­gress, Na­tion­al Journ­al has learned, the first sig­ni­fic­ant meas­ure of in­tern­al cam­paign­ing amid a sea­son marked by quiet, cau­tious jost­ling for po­s­i­tions in the next ses­sion.

And, in a sep­ar­ate de­vel­op­ment with longer-last­ing rami­fic­a­tions for the 40-year-old con­ser­vat­ive caucus, the “founders” com­mit­tee — com­prised of all former RSC chair­men still serving in Con­gress — is con­tem­plat­ing sweep­ing changes to the sys­tem long used to elect the group’s lead­er.

Tra­di­tion­ally, all RSC hope­fuls in­ter­view with the founders, after which the group of­fers a col­lect­ive en­dorse­ment of one can­did­ate. If a rival ob­jects, they can chal­lenge the en­dorse­ment by col­lect­ing sig­na­tures from 25 per­cent of RSC’s mem­ber­ship, for­cing a run­off elec­tion. (This was done suc­cess­fully by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas in 2006, and by cur­rent Chair­man Steve Scal­ise of Louisi­ana in 2012.)

Mul­vaney, a sopho­more law­maker known for his sharp tongue and quick wit, has long been viewed as a fa­vor­ite to suc­ceed Scal­ise — partly be­cause of his re­la­tion­ship with some of the founders, in­clud­ing Hensarling and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio. Mul­vaney’s path to the chair­man­ship could be com­plic­ated, however, if the group’s bylaws are changed.

Ac­cord­ing to sev­er­al sources with dir­ect know­ledge of the de­lib­er­a­tions, the founders are con­sid­er­ing a new sys­tem un­der which they would vet can­did­ates and re­com­mend cer­tain people to be in­cluded in a caucus-wide vote — without en­dors­ing any­one. Noth­ing has been fi­nal­ized, sources cau­tioned, but the goal would be to avoid hav­ing the group’s lead­ers tak­ing sides in di­vis­ive run­off elec­tions.

In an in­ter­view, Mul­vaney paid little mind to the po­ten­tial rule changes, fo­cus­ing in­stead on the plans he’s mak­ing to lead the caucus of more than 175 mem­bers. Mul­vaney ac­know­ledged that pre­lim­in­ary con­ver­sa­tions are be­ing had with col­leagues about tim­ing and strategy, though he cau­tioned that it’s pre­ma­ture to be­gin cam­paign­ing in earn­est.

“It’s too early to start or­gan­iz­ing. It’s just not ap­pro­pri­ate to start do­ing that yet,” Mul­vaney said. “But all the guys know.”

By “all the guys,” Mul­vaney means his clique of House con­ser­vat­ives — mem­bers like Jordan, Rep. Raul Lab­rador of Idaho, and fel­low South Car­olini­an Trey Gowdy. Be­cause Mul­vaney has es­tab­lished tight per­son­al bonds with col­leagues span­ning the con­ser­vat­ive spec­trum, from former RSC chair­men to vet­er­an steer­ing-com­mit­tee mem­bers to up­start liber­tari­ans, his base of sup­port is ex­pec­ted to be deep and di­verse.

“I think he’d be a really good RSC chair­man,” said Lab­rador, one of Mul­vaney’s closest friends — and, not­ably, someone also men­tioned fre­quently as a po­ten­tial Scal­ise suc­cessor.

Lab­rador de­clined to com­ment on wheth­er Mul­vaney’s can­did­acy would de­ter him from pur­su­ing the RSC job, though those close to Lab­rador have said it’s un­likely he would com­pete with his friend for the same gig. At the same time, friend­ship seem­ingly won’t af­fect the cal­cu­la­tions of Rep. Marlin Stutz­man. The In­di­ana law­maker, who nearly ran in 2012, called Mul­vaney a “buddy” — but soun­ded pre­pared to chal­lenge him any­way.

“I’m strongly lean­ing to­ward it,” Stutz­man said of the RSC race. “I’ve been reach­ing out to folks to see what they want out of RSC lead­er­ship.”

Stutz­man, who said his friend Mul­vaney would make “a great RSC chair,” noted that he won’t make his own de­cision un­til sum­mer­time. And, if he does run against Mul­vaney, “I think it’s healthy to have com­pet­i­tion,” Stutz­man said with a smile.

There are, mean­while, oth­er law­makers rumored to be in­ter­ested in the po­s­i­tion. One is Rep. Tom Graves of Geor­gia, who was en­dorsed in 2012 by the RSC’s coun­cil of former chair­men only to later lose a run­off to Scal­ise. Graves be­came something of a con­ser­vat­ive mar­tyr after that 2012 race, which saw GOP lead­er­ship of­fi­cials whip votes on be­half of Scal­ise, whom they saw as a more con­flict-averse choice to lead the caucus.

Graves, then, re­mains an in­triguing op­tion for some con­ser­vat­ives. Un­for­tu­nately for them, Graves has “no in­terest” in run­ning an­oth­er RSC race, he said Wed­nes­day. “No in­terest what­so­ever,” he ad­ded.

An­oth­er pro­spect­ive can­did­ate is Rep. Bill Flores of Texas, who, per­haps by nature of his close friend­ship with Scal­ise, is seen as someone who could con­tin­ue the cur­rent chair­man’s strategy of “put­ting points on the board” without pick­ing fights with GOP lead­er­ship.

Flores, though, said he hasn’t giv­en much thought to the race. And while he ac­know­ledged that he could be in­ter­ested — es­pe­cially de­pend­ing on the oth­er can­did­ates — Flores said he wouldn’t start cam­paign­ing un­til Au­gust any­way. “Can­didly, I think it’s pre­ma­ture to be jock­ey­ing for dif­fer­ent po­s­i­tions,” he said.

Oth­er names, such as Rep. Ren­ee Ellmers of North Car­o­lina, are also tossed around. It’s still early, and oth­er can­did­ates could emerge. But at this point, even with the RSC elec­tion not slated un­til after the Novem­ber midterms, the con­test already seems to be nar­row­ing to two can­did­ates: Mul­vaney and Stutz­man.

And there isn’t a clear fa­vor­ite.

“It would be a whale of a race,” one seni­or Re­pub­lic­an ob­served.

Graves, a friend of both Stutz­man and Mul­vaney, said most con­ser­vat­ives would be happy with either one head­ing the RSC. “They’re both qual­ity guys, and they could both be great lead­ers.”

They would cer­tainly present a con­trast in style. Stutz­man is soft-spoken and rarely bom­bast­ic, where­as Mul­vaney is known to wear his emo­tions on his suit sleeve. Thursday morn­ing, after House GOP lead­er­ship sur­prised mem­bers by passing a con­tro­ver­sial bill by voice vote, Mul­vaney ex­claimed to mul­tiple re­port­ers: “Bull­shit!”

In­deed, Mul­vaney’s pas­sion — and his pen­chant for con­front­a­tion — could prove risky in the RSC race. He was one of 12 Re­pub­lic­ans who re­fused to vote for Boehner’s reelec­tion as speak­er in 2012 — a fact that some Boehner loy­al­ists, even with­in the RSC, nev­er will for­get. At the same time, Mul­vaney was cel­eb­rated in the con­fer­ence as per­haps the most vo­cal crit­ic of some con­ser­vat­ive out­side groups — Her­it­age Ac­tion chief among them — that were tak­ing “in­con­sist­ent” po­s­i­tions that splintered con­gres­sion­al Re­pub­lic­ans and dis­rup­ted con­ser­vat­ive policy goals.

Mul­vaney said these spats with con­ser­vat­ive groups have been healthy for the move­ment, and re­jec­ted spec­u­la­tion that he nur­tures a per­son­al rivalry with Her­it­age Ac­tion CEO Mi­chael Need­ham. “I ac­tu­ally like Mike Need­ham,” Mul­vaney said. “I go to Mike Need­ham’s house and drink beer. His wife beat me in Con­nect Four. So no, that re­la­tion­ship is very close.”

Still, it’s evid­ent the South Car­olini­an prides him­self on be­ing an in­de­pend­ent voice — someone cap­able of clash­ing with House lead­er­ship one day and tea-party groups the next. Mul­vaney won’t let him­self be defined by out­side forces — and that’s ex­actly the pitch he’s plan­ning to make to his col­leagues.

“It’s go­ing to be the RSC that defines what ‘con­ser­vat­ive’ means in this town,” Mul­vaney said. “Nobody else.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
12 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
13 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.

Source:
×