Kevin McCarthy served as the 55th Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives from January 2023 to October 2023, and as a Republican congressional representative for California from 2007 to 2023. He won the position of speaker in 2023 after a historic 15 ballots before being ousted from the role and ultimately replaced by current Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). McCarthy sat down with the Harvard Political Review for a wide-ranging interview about the war in Iran, immigration, and the upcoming midterm elections.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
HPR: I want to ask about Iran, which has been a big topic of contention. Although top congressional Democrats and Republicans were notified before the first strike happened, there’s still been no authorization from Congress for these strikes. Do you believe that the Trump administration should have gone through Congress before conducting the strikes on Iran?
KM: No, the President has the power to do it. They followed the law by telling the leaders at the time. Look, I think the world’s in a very critical place. If you allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon, the world will look much different. And from the standpoint of safety and security, you have a challenging world that we have not seen. Are you familiar with the CRINKs: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea? We haven’t seen something like that since the ’30s. You’ve also got a Europe where — who’s the leader of Europe today? They’re in a weaker spot than they’ve ever been.
Do you know Graham Allison? Graham works at the Kennedy School. He worked for Reagan and for Clinton, and he wrote “Destined for War” in 2017. It says that 16 times in the history of the world, the number two power has passed the number one. Only four times did they not go to war. But he wrote this very interesting article a number of years ago with Henry Kissinger. If you update the 80/80/9 numbers that he started with, it’s been 80 years since world power has been in a great war. Now, is that a long time? It’s the longest time in history since the Roman Empire. Even longer since then, it’s been 80 years since countries used an atomic or nuclear weapon, while nine countries have the capability.
If you and I were having this discussion after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and we wanted to predict how many countries in the year 2026 would have a nuclear weapon, you’d say 40. And that would’ve been a low number. There’s only been nine. You’ve got a world coming out of COVID, and something like COVID only happens once a century, and when that happens, leaders in democracy lose — not because she or he has done something wrong, but because it’s so life-changing. But authoritarians stay in power, and we watch these CRINKs come into the system of power. You have to make sure Iran does not have a nuclear weapon. We watch what they want to do with the Strait, control world prices, and others. So no, the President has the authority to do this. We all want to make sure this is a successful operation at the same time, and be able to be done with it as soon as possible.
HPR: Regarding your comment that there’s no leader of Europe, let’s discuss the future of NATO. Because of the lack of allied support with Iran, President Trump is now openly discussing U.S. withdrawal from NATO. As Speaker, you had to navigate some situations where some of your Republican colleagues spoke out against the alliance. Are you concerned about America’s relationships with its allies, and do you think NATO membership is still important for U.S. security?
KM: I think NATO is important. I also think those in NATO need to carry their fair share, and sometimes you have to have a very honest and open discussion with those that are your closest allies. Look, we have shed blood together. We have given the ultimate sacrifice together. So, people shouldn’t question our bond with one another. But the idea that NATO countries deny America the ability to fly through that airspace — whereas if you go into the Middle East, and look at how UAE, Saudi Arabia, and others united against the terroristic actions of Iran — you begin to wonder, where are these individuals? Why are these NATO allies denying America’s ability, because they’ll be the first countries to say they’re in the closest range of a nuclear weapon from Iran. It’s from that standpoint they need to be united with us as we go through carrying out this operation.
HPR: Following up, what or who would you characterize as America’s greatest threat? Do you think it’s those sorts of foreign powers? Do you think it’s domestic actors?
KM: There’s a number of ones you worry about based upon what happened during the Biden administration regarding the border being wide open. I remember one month going down there, and the border agents told me they had caught more people in this one month of February that were on the terrorist watch list than we had in the entire last four years.
I think Iran is a big threat to America. China, I want to make sure they’re a competition for America, not a threat to America. I think that America has become too dependent upon China, such as for critical minerals. You watched how they handled the critical mineral issue this year, shutting it off, which could harm our medical supplies and others. And this is a place where we can work closer, even with our allies, to make sure they’re not dependent and we can all make the products together. So they’re competition for us, but we want to make sure the competition is fair, because if it’s a fair competition, I think America wins.
HPR: I want to ask more about immigration enforcement, which was something that you brought up. A recent poll from NPR shows that two-thirds of Americans think that immigration enforcement has gone too far. Considering that border security is something your party has historically won with voters, what action should they take to improve this perception?
KM: Well, you’ve seen some of the actions taken. Tom Homan going up to Minnesota, dragging down the temperature, getting that under control, working with local law enforcement. Markwayne Mullin becoming the new Secretary of Homeland Security. I think we’ve seen these very smart moves to go forward.
The securing of the border, I think that’s universal. People think Republicans do the best job securing it. Between now and the election, there’s a lot of time to show these new actions because Americans firmly believe, if someone came here illegally — gang members or others — that it’s not safe for them to be in the country, and they would like to see those individuals removed. I think with the calming of the temperatures, the new secretary, and Tom Homan’s involvement, in a little while, you’ll probably see that poll change.
HPR: Let’s pivot now to the midterms, starting with redistricting, which is changing the midterm landscape. The “race to gerrymander” effectively started in Texas, where lawmakers drew lines to pick up five Republican seats, and California then responded by passing Proposition 50, allowing Democrats to regain five seats. Given that you’re from California, was Governor Newsom justified in his response to Texas, and do you condemn redistricting on both sides of the aisle?
KM: Governor Newsom was wrong in every shape or form. Electoral officials shouldn’t pick the voters. I served in the California State Assembly, and on my very first day, you could introduce one bill. So on my very first day being sworn in, my bill was to change redistricting to a commission. I like the idea of competition. Throw me out, but let me win on my merits. Most Republicans in the country live in California. They get 40% of the vote, but they’re gonna have less than 6% of the say. We’re the fourth-largest economy in the world and we’re not going to have representation. I think this was purely played for political purposes.
The other thing you want to look at is California voters actually made a decision on this. A number of years prior, 61% of the voters voted to have a commission. They put it in their state constitution. For Gavin Newsom to go and change that, he’s going against the constitution — all for his own political belief, to try to run for president, which I don’t think will pan out very well for him.
I think it’s bad for politics if we’re pre-determining races, because we’re not getting the best of the candidates. Look, when I became leader, Pelosi became speaker, and in four years, I won the majority by five seats. Do you realize I gained five more Republican seats in California without redistricting, and I elected the most Republican women and the largest number of Republican minorities? We won seats we’d never won before. I’m one of the few leaders to always have added seats instead of lost. Even when Republicans lost the presidency and the Senate, we gained seats. I think that’s a better way to be more competitive: get better candidates and have a better message. This redistricting is going to cause voters to become disenfranchised because their vote won’t make a difference.
HPR: Would you support a national ban on redistricting, then?
KM: You’ve got the 10th Amendment. You’ve got state-run elections. So I can’t go and ban everybody else. I can go and advocate; especially when I lived in California, that’s what I did. I lived by what I believed in. And I think it’s very disingenuous when the voters themselves take a position by 61% — which is one of the largest margins of something passing — and then [Governor Newsom] goes and enacts something differently. I think that goes against the will of the people.
I’d rather have competition. I think competition is better for people. Look, this election is going to be tough for Republicans. They’re not in a strong position. History is against them. You look at New Jersey and Virginia governor races, those are usually early indicators. You look at the state races, you look at the number of retirements, probably the highest level that they’ve had in modern history. That’s a bad sign. And then you look at the number of discharge petitions that have passed. These are all challenges, and it’s easier to win an open seat than defeat an incumbent. Why are incumbents leaving? Do they know something other people don’t? They know it’s going to be bad.
HPR: I want to ask a little bit about the Republican strategy, because you did mention there have been some barriers to Republicans succeeding in these midterms. According to The Economist, Trump’s approval rating sits at just 36%, which is about seven points lower than in his first term. Given his unpopularity, what do you think Republican strategy should be for the upcoming midterm elections, which tend to be unfavorable towards the incumbent party?
KM: I think this election will be about the economy, about health care. You’ve got to make sure you put the economy in the best position. You’ve got to be talking to your voters. You’ve got to give a reason why you should be reelected. You gave me some poll numbers on Trump, but if you take poll numbers on the Democrats, they’re also bad and worse. That’s what’s so amazing. Democrats don’t like the Democrats. Then you’ve got a money advantage for Republicans. You’ve got a basis where you can run and win, but it’s what you produce to show that you can run and win. That’s what they’ve got to do a better job at.
Have they recruited? I was concerned about the number of women who have lost in the Republican Party. I’m concerned that after this next election, there won’t be any Black Republicans in Congress. When we had gotten the number up, we had elected the most women, and in the last freshman class, I think there were more people in the Republicans named Mike than women. That doesn’t bode well long-term. So recruiting shows a good sign of where you’re going to go and be on offense.
HPR: Faith in GOP leadership has dropped, most notably among independents. Independents are also sour on Democrats as well, but they’re a crucial voting block for both parties. What would you tell an independent voter who perhaps voted for Trump in 2024 and is not feeling necessarily as optimistic about current Republican leadership?
KM: I would remind them of what it means if you have the Democrats in, from inflation to the borders and other activities. I would show the successes that we’ve had: the Big Beautiful Bill, the securing of the border, the economic gains. With Iran, there is going to be a spike in oil, but that will come down. Give them what a new majority would have; show what you will cover in legislation. Literally make a commitment to America. These are the things we’ll do if we’re maintained to the majority. I’d let them know ahead of time, and then contrast that with what the Democrats propose.
HPR: What would the Democrats propose?
KM: Pretty much they’ll impeach and just investigate. That’s not government.
HPR: To end on a positive note, what is an action that we can retake to restore unity in this country?
KM: I think the part we lost is respecting one another. You can disagree and you can be partisan. That’s not a negative. What is negative is when you take away the respect for another person’s opinion. You may disagree with that opinion, but they have a right to provide it. And of all years, this is the year with the 250th anniversary. We should renew our commitment to our Constitution, to our country, and think about all the challenges that we overcame. It makes our challenges today seem so much smaller. Think about just becoming a country itself. We weren’t a country. The greatest strength of America is that the idea of America, it’s not an aircraft carrier; it’s the freedoms that inspire other countries and other people. I think when we renew those, we lead. That’s the shining city on the hill that Reagan spoke about.
Senior Interviews Editor
