McCaul says he’ll miss the clowns, not the circus, as he eyes life after Congress

Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul signaled that his time on Capitol Hill is approaching a full arc as he maps a post-Congress life focused on national security, diplomacy and advisory roles. In an interview with Fox News Digital, the longtime lawmaker described four possible endings for a congressional career—dying, losing, getting indicted, or going out on top—and indicated the latter path looks most attractive. He said he will not run in the upcoming November midterms, and he will be 64 when he departs Congress at the end of 2026.

McCaul has been a defining voice on foreign policy and national security within a Republican Party that has grown more skeptical of international commitments. He has chaired the House Foreign Affairs Committee and, before that, led the House Homeland Security Committee for what would be the maximum allotment of time for a GOP member on those panels. He told Fox News Digital that he has discussed with the Trump administration the possibility of serving as the United States ambassador to Australia, arguing that the post would align well with his work on AUKUS, AI and advanced weapons systems. He said his relationships with key players in allied capitals would help him be effective abroad and on a corporate board dealing with national security concerns. It’s a role that would fit his background, he suggested, while allowing him to influence policy from a different perch.

I think door number four looks attractive, he said, referring to the idea of leaving Congress on a high note. There are offers in the national-security space, and I’d still be in it one way or another. I’ve had several offers, and I’ll figure it out. I’ve got a year and a half left around here, and I’ll be thoughtful about the next chapter. In the meantime, the offers are coming in from a range of national-security circles, including think tanks and groups that value his voice on foreign policy and defense issues. And even if he steps away from elected office, he said, he expects to remain visible—whether on television or on a board of directors—where he can keep advocating for the priorities he’s spent more than two decades advancing in Congress.

The veteran lawmaker’s leadership has anchored a period of intense national-security challenges. As a former chair of Foreign Affairs, he played a central role in shaping U.S. policy toward Ukraine after Russia’s invasion and in overseeing discussions about the broader strategic implications of the conflict. He recalled the emergency wartime supplemental bill for Ukraine as one of the most consequential acts of his tenure, arguing that without it, Russia would have a much stronger foothold today and would threaten allies beyond Ukraine’s borders. He pointed to the importance of continuous Western support and the need for burden-sharing among NATO allies, while also acknowledging the political and fiscal complexities that domestic debates have imposed on foreign policy.

During his time as the ranking member on the Homeland Security Committee and later as its chair, McCaul said he helped drive initiatives on cybersecurity, border security and the modernization of agencies that respond to evolving threats. He highlighted the creation of a comprehensive cybersecurity framework and border-screening reforms as practical, bipartisan achievements. He described the period as a climactic stretch for someone who has spent more than two decades working to translate national-security priorities into policy and resources. And while he credited himself with tangible policy wins, he also expressed concern about a withdrawal from global leadership within parts of his own party, warning that retreat from the world stage would invite trouble elsewhere.

McCaul emphasized that his views are shaped by a belief that the United States must remain engaged abroad. He cited the rise of extremist movements, the persistence of state-level threats, and the need for a coherent alliance structure as reasons to sustain U.S. leadership. He argued that the 1930s-era failure to rally democracies in the face of aggression offers a cautionary parallel to contemporary times, and he urged fellow Republicans to support a strategy that strengthens NATO and coordinates secondary sanctions with allies. In his view, American leadership is not a concession to foreign influences but a necessary framework for maintaining stability and deterring aggression. He also stressed that while he supports the America First sentiment in some contexts, it should not come at the expense of America’s obligations to its allies or its own security.

I think there’s a real risk in stepping back from international leadership, he said. The burden-sharing argument is real, and NATO stands as a critical backbone for collective defense. He described his stance as a recognition that the United States cannot shoulder every challenge alone and that a credible, unified alliance posture requires ongoing investment and political will from partners around the world.

McCaul’s comments about life after Congress reflect a broader theme among senior lawmakers who are balancing the desire to influence policy with the realities of political cycles. He noted that while he might consider public roles or think-tank work, his focus will remain on issues he has long cared about: national security, cyber policy, intelligence oversight and the strategic competition with adversaries such as Russia and China. He suggested that his expertise would be valuable in settings that demand a deep understanding of defense technologies, alliance politics and the mechanics of international diplomacy.

There was a time when a Senate path might have been possible, he acknowledged, but he said he would not trade what he has accomplished in Congress for any other outcome. He described his tenure as an honor and said he would miss the colleagues and the daily debates, but not the logistical grind and the internal frictions that often accompany life in Congress. He framed his departure as a candid acknowledgment that leadership requires both ambition and an ability to step aside when the time is right—a sentiment that resonates with several veteran lawmakers contemplating retirement amid a polarized political environment.

As he contemplates a future beyond the House, McCaul said his ambition remains rooted in national security and the ability to influence policy from outside the chamber. He emphasized that his work has always been about outcomes—achieving results in defense modernization, border security, and international diplomacy—more than the institution itself. And while he expects to stay engaged publicly, he said the goal is to be a constructive voice that contributes to the national dialogue on how best to protect U.S. interests and promote global stability.

McCaul’s broader message to colleagues and constituents centers on a pragmatic path forward: sustain American leadership, work with allies to share burdens, and keep a robust posture toward those who threaten U.S. values and security. He indicated that his post-congressional life could blend public service with private-sector insight, staying connected to the national-security agenda through a combination of diplomatic service, policy advocacy and strategic communications.

I’ll still be around, he said, suggesting that the next chapter will give him a platform to champion the issues he’s spent years championing. He left open the possibility of returning to public life in another capacity or taking on roles that enable him to shape U.S. policy on intelligence, defense technologies and allied security cooperation, all while avoiding the daily grind and distractions of elected office.

As McCaul plots a future beyond the House, his stance underscores a familiar dynamic: seasoned lawmakers who see national security not just as a portfolio but as a throughline that connects diplomacy, defense and technology. Whether as ambassador to Australia, a seat at a think tank, or a boardroom role tied to the defense-industrial complex, McCaul’s path will likely keep him close to the issues that have defined his career. The coming years will reveal how his broad experience translates into influence outside of Congress and whether the clowns he jokes about will fade from the Capitol stage as he moves toward a different kind of service.