Kentucky's McConnell not seeking reelection to U.S. Senate in 2026
Senator Mitch McConnell waves to the crowd during the 143rd Fancy Farm Picnic on Saturday, Aug. 5, 2023. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Austin Anthony)
Kentucky's longtime Republican U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell will announce Thursday that he does not plan to seek reelection in 2026, according to media reports.
McConnell, who turns 83 on Thursday, is expected to make the announcement in a noontime floor speech, Politico reports.
McConnell was the longest serving Senate leader in U.S. history after stepping down from his leadership role last November, leading the GOP caucus for nearly two decades. According to the Associated Press, which initially reported the senator's decision, McConnell said in prepared remarks that he has been 'humbled by the trust' of Kentuckians in electing him to the Senate for seven terms.
His announcement further fuels speculation about who will run for Kentucky's now open Senate seat in 2025.
'Representing our commonwealth has been the honor of a lifetime,' McConnell said. 'I will not seek this honor an eighth time. My current term in the Senate will be my last.'
In recent years, his legacy has become shaping the federal judiciary by allowing Senate floor votes for three key Supreme Court appointments from President Donald Trump while blocking nominations from Democratic presidents. Overall, McConnell led the Senate confirmation of 234 lifetime appointments to the federal bench.
Concerns for the senator's health have risen within the last year after falls and freezing mid-speech. Earlier this month, McConnell fell in the U.S. Senate but was reported to be 'fine.'
Throughout his political career, McConnell has had a strong influence on both American and Kentucky politics. He was first elected to the Senate in 1984 at a time when Kentucky Republicans were a small minority in contrast to the long-dominant state Democratic Party. When Kentucky's five Republican constitutional officers were sworn in at the state Capitol in January 2024, McConnell told the crowd he was 'thrilled to have an opportunity to be here today in this most improbable thing, which is a crowd in Frankfort that is not at least 100% Democratic.'
McConnell's rise to the Senate came after he was Jefferson County judge-executive in Louisville. Since then, he's repeatedly supported Republican candidates in Kentucky, leading to their rise across decades. In the 2024 election cycle, McConnell's PAC gave 95 Republican candidates $2,100 each, the maximum allowed under state law.
Last September when the Republican Party of Kentucky dedicated an expansion of their state headquarters in Frankfort, top GOP leaders in the state heralded 'the house that Mitch built.' The building is also named after McConnell.
'We've come a long way, and the people here today had a lot to do with it,' McConnell said at the time. 'Thanks for all the praise for me, but it's a team sport, and many of you have contributed a lot of years and a lot of dollars over the years to bring us where we are today.'
Robert Benvenuti, the chairman of the state party, said in a statement that Kentucky Republicans offered the 'deepest gratitude to Sen. Mitch McConnell for his extraordinary and steadfast service to our state and nation.'
'Without his vision and tireless efforts, we would not be the majority party in Kentucky, with strong voter registration, supermajorities in our legislature, and seven of Kentucky's eight seats in Washington,' Benvenuti said. 'His principled, conservative leadership has shaped policies that have strengthened both our state and our country.'
McConnell's term ends in 2027. With his announcement to not seek reelection, the stage is set for a swath of Republican and Democratic candidates to announce their bids for Kentucky's Senate seat. Candidates cannot officially file for the election until Nov. 5.
Former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, a Republican, quickly announced his plans to run for the seat after McConnell concluded his remarks. During his unsuccessful 2023 gubernatorial bid, Cameron was often heralded as a McConnell protegé.
'Kentucky, it's time for a new generation of leadership in the U.S. Senate,' Cameron said on X. 'Let's do this.'
Kentucky Congressman Andy Barr, of Lexington, recently told Fox News he was mulling a run for the seat regardless of McConnell's decision.
After the news Thursday, Barr said on X he was still considering running 'because Kentucky deserves a Senator who will fight for President Trump and the America First Agenda.'
'I've done that every day in the House and would do so in the Senate,' Barr said. 'I'm encouraged by the outpouring of support and my family and I will be making a decision about our future soon.'
Barr's initial comments on running for the seat came after Lexington-based businessman and GOP political donor Nate Morris took to X to criticize McConnell for not confirming some of Republican President Donald Trump's recent nominations in the Senate. Morris said in the video he was considering running for the Senate seat or governor.
The state's top Democrat, Gov. Andy Beshear, 'will not be running for Senate in 2026,' said his political strategist, Eric Hyers, in an email to the Kentucky Lantern.
House Democratic Floor Leader Rep. Pamela Stevenson, of Louisville, recently filed her paperwork to raise money for a Senate campaign. In 2023, she was the Democratic nominee for attorney general but lost to Republican Russell Coleman.
This story was originally published by the Kentucky Lantern which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network, including the Daily Montanan, supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk feud shows what happens when unregulated money floods politics
Elon Musk said, very loudly and very publicly, what is usually the quiet part of the role of money in US politics. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude,' he wrote on his X social media platform amid an ongoing feud with Donald Trump. When rightwing commentator Laura Loomer wrote that Republicans on Capitol Hill had been discussing whom to side with in the inter-party feud, Musk replied with a nod toward the long tail of his influence. 'Oh and some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years … ,' Musk wrote on X. Billionaires in the US often seek to influence politics in big and small ways, throwing their money and influence around to extract what they want from the government. But few are as explicit and influential as Musk has proven in the past year – and it's showing just how transactional and broken US governance has become. The Trump-Musk battle exemplifies the post-Citizens United picture of US politics: the world's richest person paid handsomely to elect his favored candidate, then took a formal, if temporary, role with a new governmental initiative created for him that focused on dismantling parts of the government he didn't like. We're sitting ringside to a fight between the mega-rich president and the far richer Republican donor to see who can cut more services from the poor. As one satirical website put it: 'Aw! These Billionaires Are Fighting Over How Much Money to Steal From Poor People.' Fifteen years ago, the US supreme court ruled that corporations and outside groups could spend as much as they wanted on elections. In that ruling, conservative justice Anthony Kennedy said: 'The appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.' In the years since, it's become clear that these infusions of wealth have eroded democracy, with Musk's ostentatious example accelerating an already out-of-control level of money in politics. Musk spent nearly $300m to elect Trump in 2024. It's the billionaire's government now. 'Fifteen years after that decision, we're seeing the full culmination of living under a Citizens United world – where it's not just elections that are for sale, but it's that our entire government, and the apparatus of our government, is up for sale,' Tiffany Muller, the president of End Citizens United, told the Bulwark earlier this year. Musk isn't alone here: in races up and down the ballot, ultra-rich donors are throwing around their cash to get their favored candidates elected. This is the standard state of play for politics in the US now, in both political parties. Bernie Sanders confronted Democrats at their convention last year to say: 'Billionaires in both parties should not be able to buy elections, including primary elections.' Earlier this year, Musk poured big money into a Wisconsin judicial election, but lost to the Democratic candidate. And he's sent small-dollar donations to Republicans who wanted to go after judges who ruled against the Trump administration. The threat of his money, even if it is uneven and has an inconsistent success record, looms large for both political parties. But, by virtue of his unelected role, Musk couldn't do as much as he wanted to stop Trump's signature spending bill – or so it seems so far. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' didn't cut enough spending or favor Musk enough or otherwise meet his litmus test for a budget. And when the administration stopped working for him, he turned on it, blazing out the door in a chaotic fashion. It's a fitting coda to the uneasy alliance between Trump and Musk that started with a warm embrace and front-row status for the ultra-wealthy when Trump took office. The fact that Musk holds such sway over the budget process is in itself corruption. Trump has said Musk knew what was in the bill, the undertone being that the administration sought his approval before the public explosion. Musk embraced a brawling style of political spending that is rare among the uber-wealthy, who tend to let their money speak louder than their public words. One expert in philanthropy previously told the Guardian Musk stood out because of his 'complete eschewal of discretion as a mode of political engagement'. Musk is now rallying his followers on X to reach out to their members of Congress and kill the bill, a quest that could be successful, depending on how Republican lawmakers shake out when they're forced to decide between their ideologue president and a megadonor known for his vindictiveness. In rightwing media, the feud has created a chasm. On Breitbart, one commentator noted how Trump was 'sticking his finger in the eye of his biggest donor and that never happens'. In the American Spectator, one writer opined that Musk did not elect Trump: 'the American people did.' But in the pages of the Washington Examiner, Musk's stance on the bill was praised because Trump's budget plan 'deserves to die'. 'I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,' Trump wrote to cap off a series of posts and public comments about Musk. Musk has 'lost his mind', the president said in a TV interview Friday. So far, Republican officials are lining up behind Trump. 'President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads,' JD Vance said. If Musk ultimately loses, he could take his money and run elsewhere. He floated the idea of creating a third political party, a prospect that's been tried many times before but without the wealth infusion and bully pulpit he'd offer to the cause. Democrats, themselves quite reliant on rich donors, will lobby for him to switch sides. The Democratic representative Ro Khanna suggested the party should 'be in a dialogue' with Musk. Although Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley and has called for the left to embrace economic populism, saw intense backlash against his comments from his party, he doubled down. 'If Biden had a big supporter criticize him, Trump would have hugged him the next day,' he wrote on X. 'When we refused to meet with @RobertKennedyJr, Trump embraced him & won. We can be the party of sanctimonious lectures, or the party of FDR that knows how to win & build a progressive majority.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fury as Republicans go ‘nuclear' in fight over California car emissions
California has long been one of the nation's preeminent eco-warriors, enacting landmark environmental standards for cars and trucks that go much further than those mandated by the federal government. Vehicles across the country are cleaner, more efficient and electric in greater numbers because of it. But that could all change if Donald Trump and his Republican allies manage to revoke the state's ability to set its own, stricter emissions standards amid a White House crusade to combat climate-friendly policies. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets and updates its own federal standards for all states on smog and emissions from cars and trucks, which the Biden administration made even stricter last year, saying they will save American drivers thousands in fuel costs and maintenance over the life of a vehicle. But for decades, California has been granted the ability to make those rules even stricter to help address some of the worst smog and air quality issues in the nation, which are linked to a host of health effects that disproportionately affect people of color. On Wednesday, the Senate voted to reverse the waivers, in move that prompted fury from Democrats who call it a 'nuclear' option, calling it an unprecedented, and illegal, use of the statute. The Government Accountability Office and the Senate parliamentarian have agreed, saying EPA waivers are not subject to the review law. The House approved similar resolutions earlier this month. The resolutions now go to the White House, where Trump is expected to sign them. 'This move will harm public health and deteriorate air quality for millions of children and people across the country,' said senators Alex Padilla, Sheldon Whitehouse and the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, in a statement. 'This Senate vote is illegal. Republicans went around their own parliamentarian to defy decades of precedent. We won't stand by as Trump Republicans make America smoggy again,' California's governor, Gavin Newsom, said in a statement on Thursday. 'We're going to fight this unconstitutional attack on California in court.' Kathy Harris, the director of clean vehicles at the Natural Resources Defense Council, emphasized California's ability to mandate strict emissions standards for cars, trucks and buses had existed for nearly 60 years, noting the state had been granted more than 75 waivers under Republican and Democratic presidents. Among the waivers include rules to increase the share of electric vehicles each year among all new car and truck sales, as well as mandates that auto companies introduce progressively cleaner vehicles. She described the waivers as a 'quadruple win', benefiting public health, air quality, drivers' pockets and the economy as a whole. 'These waivers are not new or novel,' Harris said in an interview. 'California has historically been innovators in systems to help produce cleaner air and stymying California's ability is a direct attack on our ability to limit pollution and health harming pollutants in the air.' She added revoking the waivers would immediately lead to an increase in pollution on the nation's roadways. More than a dozen states follow California's lead on emissions standards, according to the California air resources board. The standards now cover nearly 40% of new light-duty vehicle registrations and more than a quarter of heavy-duty vehicles like trucks across the entire US. Automakers have largely followed California's emissions standards as well so they can continue to sell cars there, as the state equates to the fourth-largest economy on the planet. Newsom upped the ante in the nation's environmental future in 2020, declaring his state would ban the sale of all new gas-powered vehicles by 2035. Eleven states have also joined California's plan to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by the 2035 deadline, a reality that has spooked major car companies. Joe Biden's administration approved the plan at the end of his term. Trump, however – a vehement opponent to many of the nation's climate efforts – has vowed to see them reversed. 'California has imposed the most ridiculous car regulations anywhere in the world, with mandates to move to all electric cars,' Trump said during his campaign last year. 'I will terminate that.' Newsom on Wednesday cast the battle as a nail in the coffin for the American car industry and decades of public health advancements. 'The United States Senate has a choice: cede American car-industry dominance to China and clog the lungs of our children, or follow decades of precedent and uphold the clean-air policies that Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon fought so hard for,' he challenged Republicans in a statement. 'Will you side with China or America?' The Senate's decision may have sweeping effects far beyond the state's borders. Harris said she recently pulled up pictures of what air quality looked like in cities around the country in the 1960s before the Clean Air Act, the seminal environmental law that regulates the nation's air quality, was in effect. She described normal levels of smog in California as blanketing the state similar to the apocalyptic clouds of wildfire smoke that have descended during recent fire seasons. The American Lung Association also found last month that Los Angeles remained the country's smoggiest city for the 25th time in 26 years of tracking, despite decades of improvements in air quality. 'I think we have forgotten about what our air used to look like,' Harris said. 'We take it for granted because it's a policy that's been around for so long we don't really recognize those direct benefits. 'There is still a long way to go, we have not succeeded in fully cleaning up our air yet,' she added. 'These types of policies help ensure we are moving in a positive direction.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sanders warns of authoritarianism after Trump deploys national guard to LA
Bernie Sanders warned of the US's slide into authoritarianism following Donald Trump's decision to deploy the national guard to Los Angeles over the city's protests against federal immigration raids. Speaking to CNN on Sunday, the leftwing Vermont senator said: 'We have a president who is moving this country rapidly into authoritarianism … My understanding is that the governor of California, the mayor of the city of Los Angeles did not request the national guard but he thinks he has a right to do anything he wants.' Sanders, and many others, have long warned for the potential risk to American democracy that Trump represents in his second term. Since returning to the White House Trump has roiled American politics and civic life with numerous actions including attacking universities, slashing government spending and firing tens of thousands of employees and rolling back the rights of LGBTQ+ people. Sanders added: 'He is suing the media who criticizes him. He is going after law firms who have clients who were against him. He's going after universities that teach courses that he doesn't like. He's threatening to impeach judges who rule against him. And he's usurping the powers of the United States congress. This guy wants all of the power. He does not believe in the constitution. He does not believe in the rule of law.' Pointing to the Republican-led House and Senate, Sanders went on to say that the future of the US 'rests with a small number of Republicans in the House and Senate who know better, who do know what the constitution is about'. 'It's high time they stood for our constitution and the rule of law,' Sanders said. His latest interview comes after widespread backlash from California leaders towards Trump's decision to deploy 2,000 California national guards to respond to the immigration protests. Trump's decision came at the objection of California governor Gavin Newsom, who called it 'purposefully inflammatory.' 'The federal government is taking over the California National Guard and deploying 2,000 soldiers in Los Angeles – not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle,' Newsom said, adding: 'Don't give them one.' Over the weekend, Los Angeles has been rocked by widespread protests in response to the Trump administration's draconian immigration raids against migrant communities. Trump's deployment of the national guard marks the first time a US president wielded such power since the 1992 riots in Los Angeles over the brutal beating of Rodney King, a Black motorist, by four white police officers who were acquitted.
