By Cianan Sheekey
A frail McConnell looks on during a press conference in 2024. Photograph: Piroschka Van De Wouw/Reuters
It is highly unusual to write that headline. Framing Mitch McConnell, the longest-serving
Senate party leader in U.S. history, and retirement as ‘too soon’ feels, almost paradoxical. An avid obstructionist, McConnell has, within recent years, become eerily masterful at bending the US’ political institutions to his whim. Those who prefer their political institutions distinctly unbent, or in other words, functioning and overtly democratic, will therefore celebrate McConnell’s recent announcement of retirement from the Senate. Yet, frustratingly, McConnell’s exit comes just as he appears to be turning a corner - emerging as an interrogative voice of reason in a Republican Senate desperately in need of one.
Everyone has seen McConnell’s occasional ‘freezes’. They have become an unwanted trademark of the Kentucky Senator - moments where he is unable to speak or even emote when addressing the press, all whilst holding a hauntingly gaumless expression. The incidents circulated online ferociously, amplified considering McConnell’s fearsome political reputation. There is no doubt that Democrats relished every instance of it. It made him appear incompetent, unable to hold office - a moment of weakness from Congress’ ‘Grim Reaper’, which no doubt mounted internal and external pressure for McConnell to step away from Republican leadership, and politics altogether. This very scenario has since played out, saving the Democrats from his unwavering political force.
"Unlike the large majority of the Republican Party, McConnell is standing up for pragmatism"
Yet, Democrats ought to have been careful about what they wished for considering McConnell’s sudden rebellious turn. McConnell has recently made several stands against Trump’s cabinet nominations. As per its constitutional power, the Senate has to approve the President’s executive nominations, a process which is typically straightforward under a united government. The confirmations of Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Peter Hegseth, and Tulsi Gabbard were anything but. Republican stalwart McConnell dissented against all three. The rebellion mounted against Defence Secretary Peter Hesgeth was particularly problematic, resulting in the need for Vice-President Vance to break the stalemate in favour of confirming the appointment.
McConnell is treating these confirmations as a Senator ought to: not as a party loyalty test, but as a chance to assess the worthiness of cabinet nominees. Explaining his reasoning behind his opposition to Hesgeth, McConnell spoke of the magnitude of the Defence Secretary role, suggesting he would be unable to meet its “daily-test[s]”. Reflecting on his own health struggles as a result of not having access to a Polio
vaccine, McConnell similarly opposed Robert F. Kennedy Jr., suggesting it unsuitable for an avid vaccine sceptic to be running the US Department of
Health.
Unlike the large majority of the Republican Party, McConnell is standing up for pragmatism, questioning the shortcomings of cabinet nominees, and voting against their confirmation when he feels these shortcomings have not been adequately addressed. Unsurprisingly, this logical, democratic endeavour has been met with Republican condemnation, especially from President Trump, who remarked that “McConnell never really had it [mentally]”, claiming “If I didn’t come along, the Republican Party wouldn’t even exist right now”. Donald Trump’s vitriol is unsurprising. Despite being arguably the most important Republican lawmakers of the past decade, the current Republican Party sees no benefit in McConnell’s measured appraisals. Trump’s rhetoric that the Republican Party would not exist without him is telling - it raises the question of whether what we once interpreted the Republicans to be no longer exists.
"A maestro in the very chamber in which he now holds little revere"
The days in which US Republicanism meant dogmatic fiscal conservatism, limited government, and considered caution, are gone in this era of erratic trade wars, corporatised efficiency, and hail-mary politics. McConnell’s sudden rebellious streak reflects the dearth of the true Republican Party. McConnell led the charge for financial freedom, spearheading a successful campaign to liberalise campaign finance laws. He masterminded the suppression of Obama’s nominations to the Supreme Court. He carried much of the legislative output of the first Trump administration, ensuring his Supreme Court appointments. If he had bowed out quietly, sticking to the Party line, he would he been hailed a Republican hero forevermore. Yet, he has decided now is the time to express his industry, likely tarnishing his legacy within the Party forever. Perhaps, even as an architect of the neo-Republican madness, McConnell has seen
the light - realising the potency and scale of the lunacy festering in the Party he has for so long championed.
The aforementioned McConnell ‘freezes’ present the political powerhouse’s waning acumen. He probably ought to have retired long before now, but we can be glad his extended age has brought out a pragmatic vim and vigour we may well have never seen from the Kentucky Senator. A maestro in the very chamber in which he now holds little revere, McConnell does not deserve sympathy - yet, there is regret his career is closing now his agency and nuance appear to be finally manifesting. The curtain is closing on McConnell’s illustrious career just as he began to transcend his own villainy.
Comments