Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

The Cantor Defeat In Virginia

41 Comments

it’s not obvious, but it’s potentially great news for space policy.

[Update a while later]

I elaborate at Ricochet.

[Wednesday-morning update]

OK, for those who aren’t Ricochet members, here’s what I posted there, under the title “What Does Cantor’s Loss Mean For Space Policy?”:

OK, I know that post title will excite almost no one, because no one (to first order) cares about space policy. It’s a prevailing theme of my (non-best-selling) book.

But for those few who care, Eric Cantor didn’t give a damn about it. Neither did/does John Boehner

But Cantor just got involuntarily retired, and Boehner has long displayed indifference to continuing as Speaker of the House.

So tonight’s electoral loss will set off a huge and unpredictable fight for House leadership. While I don’t want to predict the outcome, the most obvious beneficiary of tonight’s event is Kevin McCarthy, the Majority Whip (usually considered to be second in line behind Majority Leader, which Cantor was). If McCarthy takes over as leader as a result of Cantor’s not only loss, but humiliation, he will be next in line to take over as Speaker if (as seems likely) Boehner steps down next year.

Which means that the congressman from Kern County, California, will be in a position to select members and chairs of the committees that oversee the NASA, DoD and FAA budgets. Which means that he will be in a position to select Congresspeople who could decide to stop making insane decisions about human spaceflight based on their own parochial interests, and instead congresspeople who actually care whether or not we actually open up space. Because he will have a local constituency in Mojave that has a strong interest in commercial spaceflight, he may exercise his power to make the committee more friendly to it than it has been in the past.

Will this happen? Who knows?

There will be a potentially chaotic fight for leadership in the sudden vacuum, and McCarthy may not come out on top. But if he does, things may suddenly become very interesting for the future of productive human spaceflight, because he will be potentially a Speaker of the House whose willing ear commercial space advocates will have.

[Wednesday-morning update]

CNN (I know) is reporting that with Cantor’s defeat, Boehner’s interest in stepping down is somewhat, if not a lot diminished. Apparently Cantor was the heir apparent, and Boehner may not step aside for anyone else. Of course, there is no iron-clad law that he continue to be Speaker. Like Cantor, he himself may be susceptible to a challenge from one of the young turks.

One other point. The next shoe to fall will be Cantor’s replacement as Majority Leader, which will likely happen soon, because he’s lost a lot of clout as a lame duck. If it’s McCarthy, he will become the new heir apparent (since he had previously been favored by Boehner). And even as Majority Leader, he’ll have a lot more influence over the committee structure.

[Update a while later]

OK, according to this National Journal article, McCarthy may be a victim of a general revolt. We’ll see how he maneuvers. But actually, Ryan wouldn’t necessarily be bad for space policy either.

[Afternoon update]

OK, one thing I hadn’t factored in. McCarthy may have to buy votes with committee chairmanships, which complicates any efforts to clean up the policy mess.

41 thoughts on “The Cantor Defeat In Virginia”

  4. You’re behind a paywall over there, Rand. Can’t see your post without crossing their palms with 40 bucks. If I can’t even see a sample of what I’d be buying, I won’t be buying.

    1. Sorry. If it gets moved to the front, you’ll be able to see it. If not, I’ll fix later. Bottom line is that Kevin McCarthy is now second in line for Speakership. If he survives the coming scrum and gets there, he’ll have the ear of New Spacers will have his ear.

      1. If McCarthy is second in line, who are you thinking is first in line? (I don’t think it is obvious, unless you mean Boehner himself.)

          1. Thanks. I thought you, like many others, were referring to Paul Ryan (despite his declarations to the contrary). Tom Price is also frequently mentioned. I bet Boehner just stays on.

            Also, when you say “he’ll have the ear of New Spacers”, I think you meant New Spacers would have his ear. Surely New Spacers would listen to any Speaker!

          3. It is not a big deal at all – it is completely clear what you mean, and moreover, you’re making an interesting point about McCarthy, and that’s why people read your blog. But with that said, nope, nope, nope, scroll up and take a 2nd look yourself: you said “he’ll have the ear of New Spacers.” 🙂

  5. I have two that Rand hasn’t thought of.
    Dave Brat is a fan of Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand loved the Apollo program.
    Dave Brat has inveighed against crony capitalism, which means he might oppose commercial crew,

      1. Humor impaired as always, Rand, though my theories are more plausible than one that involves a new majority leader alienating his membership by a wholesale reorg of the Science Committee to favor his district.

        1. Apparently you don’t understand my theory. He would do it because he thinks it’s good policy, not because it would “favor his district.” That’s just stupid.

          1. By that logic Shelby is going what he is doing because he thinks it’s good policy,

          2. No. Shelby is doing it because it has huge effects on his state. Mojave would benefit very little from better federal policy (what it really needs is better policy from Sacramento). No one there is a big NASA contractor, or even competing for NASA funds, other than a few flight purchases from Masten, VG and XCOR. It will affect Hawthorne, Dulles, and many other places much more.

    3. More insane ramblings, the Space Launch System at 30 billion for block I and many more billions for the Block II which will never fly and 16.5 billion for a disposable 4 person capsule, the Orion, is the definition of crony capitalism. It has always fastinated me that you are willing to proudly illustrate both your ignorance and stupidy for the entire world to see.

    4. Mark,
      I have to say I find it amusing that when you say Brat is anti-crony-capitalism (good!), the first example you can think of is Commercial Crew. I would say SLS/Orion fit the bill much more strongly than Commercial Crew. In the case of SLS almost every element of the vehicle development has been awarded on a sole-source, uncompeted basis. The program was Congressionally mandated, not based on an urgent NASA need, but on the desire to protect jobs at politically connected contractors. Several Congresspeople are on record as saying they supported the 2010NAA “compromise” because they felt it would guarantee uncompeted work to important contractors in their districts. SLS/Orion regularly get political preference over commercial crew, in spite of not having a clear mission or need they’re filling. At least LM did actually win a fair and open competition for Orion back in the day, but anyone paying attention knows it was only continued in 2010 because it was being built in a political swing state.

      Commercial Crew, on the other hand, is trying to develop a service that NASA currently needs and which it can’t meet at a reasonable price using normal contracting methods. The work has been fairly and openly competed with a wide range of companies involved. Calling commercial crew crony capitalism uses that term so broadly that you could use it for just about anything.

      I could be wrong, but if Brat does have an opinion about commercial crew and SLS/Orion, my guess is he’d be far more likely to be pro-commercial crew and anti-SLS/Orion and not the other way around.

      ~Jon

      1. if Brat does have an opinion about commercial crew and SLS/Orion, my guess is he’d be far more likely to be pro-commercial crew and anti-SLS/Orion and not the other way around.

        That seems very likely, since (unlike Mark) Brat actually understands business and economics.

        1. Rand,

          Of course he does, since Dr. Brat teaches economics at Randolph-Macon College after his work with the World Bank, Arthur Andersen and the government.

          http://www.cnbc.com/id/101750440

          As a side note, his Democratic opponent also teaches at Randolph-Macon College, so this could be an interesting election to watch 🙂

          1. I am a little worried because he is a professor. Our educator class hasn’t exactly been doing a good job lately in politics or the classroom.

      2. Actually. doesn’t most of NASA budget end up being awarded as sole source, cost plus basis ?
        With a few notable exceptions like SBIR programs, CC, facilities upkeep etc, i’ll take a wild guess and say that about 50% of the 18B budget gets doled out every year to sole source awards.

        1. It isn’t sole source that’s the big issue. That happens all the time. It’s the awarding of contracts non-competitively. When Congress demanded the building of the SLS, they demanded it use (at least in the first iteration) legacy Shuttle hardware. Those parts, such as the SSMEs and SRBs, were sole source so Congress mandated NASA buy from a specified set of companies.

      3. As I have noted many times, SLS is not crony capitalism because it is no more capitalistic than an aircraft carrier.

        1. The usual drivel: Only “capitalism” is corrupt. SLS is not capitalism, so it cannot be corrupt, by definition.

          Of course, this is nonsense. Lockheed Martin is not a charitable nonprofit institution. The engineers working on SLS and Orion are not unpaid volunteers. Lockheed employees and shareholders are motivated by money as much as SpaceX’s.

          The same goes for government employees as well. The idea that public employees don’t care about money and are motivated only by the good the State is fallacious. The collapse of Communism proved that, to anyone who was paying attention.

  7. Cantor Dusted.
    (reference to Cantor Dust, a set with infinite count but infinitesimal area)

  9. I’ll echo the kudos for your analysis. Here’s hoping your scenario comes to pass and the job of cleaning out the Augean Stables at NASA can begin.

  11. I didn’t think Brat (an economics professor with no political experience, no name recognition, outspent 14 – 1) had a chance against Cantor, but I’m absolutely delighted to be wrong on this!

    I predict he’ll have a fairly easy win in November, in large part because the Democrat won’t be on the ballot (missed the filing deadline, so will be a write-in).

    I don’t know much about Brat, but as an economics professor and a Tea Partier, I’d be willing to be he’s opposed to SLS (as are the majority of Tea Partiers).

    As for the house leadership issues… I wonder if the Republicans will be stupidly tone-deaf enough to put Paul Ryan up as Majority leader or speaker? Cantor, after all, lost over the immigration issue (he’s pro-amnesty, which he got rightfully hammered for in the campaign) so putting Paul Ryan in would be exactly the wrong move (and thus one likely to happen, the Party of Stupid being what it is – they have to do something in order to snatch defeat from the looming jaws of victory this November, right?).

    My takeaway from the Cantor defeat; it means the Tea Party is still a player, (And when it comes to Space Policy, that’s a good thing.)

    1. Actually this may be the work of “Cooter”. Don’t forget Virginia is one of those states that allows cross over voting and with not primary contest on the Democratic side there was every reason for Democrats and Independents to vote against Rep. Cantor in the election.

      http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/06/11/320964904/the-cooter-effect-did-ben-jones-help-unseat-eric-cantor

      The Cooter Effect: Did Ben Jones Help Unseat Eric Cantor?
      by Bill Chappell
      June 11, 201410:16 AM ET

      1. It it was a close election, I’d worry that that was the case – crossover voting. However, I’m seeing no evidence that there was enough of this to account for Cantor’s loss, though it might have helped increase the magnitude of said loss.

        Even though, in this case, I’m delighted by the outcome of the election, I bitterly oppose crossover voting. No good and much trouble comes from it, for both parties. I live in Arizona, where you need to be a registered member of a party to vote in its primary, and that system works just fine.

  12. “OK, one thing I hadn’t factored in. McCarthy may have to buy votes with committee chairmanships, which complicates any efforts to clean up the policy mess”

    Gee, you think? Happy to see Rand staggering into the truth.

    1. You seem to have “staggered into” it yourself, seeing as you found it here, and hadn’t previously mentioned it, instead continuing your incessant ignorant whining about “crony capitalism.”

      Tell us, Mark, was it “crony capitalism” when it was the Bush administration doing it as commercial cargo resupply, or did it only become that when Obama came into office?

  13. The position of Majority Leader requires an election and as Rep. Cantor’s understudy, Rep. McCarthy is in trouble, trouble likely made worst by Rep. Cantor’s endorsing him for the position. There is nothing like the fear of losing power that motivates Congressional behavior and when someone loses power as fast as Rep. Cantor has they become an instant pariah, which is why he is resigning as Majority Leader. So Rep. McCarthy already has two factors against his election as Majority Leader. being Rep. Cantor’s understudy and being endorsed by him.

    It should be noted that sensing blood, Rep. Pete Sessions has already announced he is running for the position, which would be a voice in favor of SLS/Orion if he wins. If you recall he was one of the Representatives who opposed the cancellation of Constellation. And has a strong following among the Republicans members of Congress.

    http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=33477

    So if Rep. Sessions wins it will be a win for Boeing and Lockeed-Martin.

    And if Rep. McCarthy loses bad enough in his bid to take Rep. Cantor’s position as majority leader it could well undermine his position as minority whip, if not in this Congress than the next one, so this has the potential to be a real setback for commercial crew and New Space, not a boom as you seem to believe.

Comments are closed.