H2: 01/24/14: Rep. John Campbell, Brian Wesbury

January 24, 2014 by  
Filed under Radio Show

01241402 Hugh Hewitt: Hour 2 – Hugh is joined in studio by California Congressman John Campbell, as they debate the cuts to the retired military COLA, and then Brian Wesbury, chief economist at First Trust Portfolio, joins in to talk about the unease in the stock market.

Comments

11 Responses to “H2: 01/24/14: Rep. John Campbell, Brian Wesbury”
  1. James Braselton says:

    Kudos to Rep. Campbell for standing his ground on this military pension issue. Conservatives cannot credibly argue that the military is sacrosanct and untouchable in terms of budget constraint measures (not real cuts, just reductions in the rate of pension growth), when they argue that every other program – many of which are necessary to the survival of the poor – are fair game for cuts. Further, for Hugh to argue that Congress should just “go borrow the money” to maintain the rate of increase in military pensions illustrates just how nigh impossible it will be for this country to ever regain fiscal sanity. That argument will be cited by every democrat as support for every entitlement program.

  2. James Braselton says:

    Kudos to Rep. Campbell for standing his ground on this military pension issue. Conservatives cannot credibly argue that the military is sacrosanct and untouchable in terms of budget constraint measures (not real cuts, just reductions in the rate of pension growth), when they argue that every other program – many of which are necessary to the survival of the poor – are fair game for cuts. Further, for Hugh to argue that Congress should just “go borrow the money” to maintain the rate of increase in military pensions illustrates just how nigh impossible it will be for this country to ever regain fiscal sanity. That argument will be cited by every democrat as support for every entitlement program.

    • Kerry Davis says:

      What really gets me is when anyone – including Hugh or Duane – says something like “we can’t put a price on military service.” As if the PRE-change arrangement was not exactly that.

    • Duane Patterson says:

      no one ever said cuts weren’t necessary. what we’ve said repeatedly is cuts should be across the board, not just singling out the career military who put 20 years in. not even cops get shot at with the frequency most of the active duty front-line vets do. I’m all for reform. just start everywhere else, first. when you have cut and reformed everything else, then we’ll work on the Defense Department. It’s insane to cut there first and only, especially when it’s for a token $6 billion out of a $101 billion dollar spending bill. And what makes it worse is that while this is going on, the “deal” is going into effect with Iran, where we’re going to essentially give them $6 billion in aid that could easily instead have gone into the Pentagon for readiness against the Iran nuke we’re guaranteeing will eventually happen.

      • larrydag says:

        Hugh and Duane are right on this issue. This disgusts me to no end that we could make the argument that career military are the first to be cut. Rep. Campbell keeps saying this is such a lucrative deal. Tell me how lucrative this deal is to the families that have lost husbands, wives, sons and daughters. How lucrative is this deal to those that have lost limbs and suffered internal injuries. The cost of career military is greater than any pension or benefit we could ever pay them monetarily. The articles of the Constitution make it clear to budget for our national defense. Every other budget item is inferior Constitutionally.

      • Kerry Davis says:

        You may want to ask Hugh about that before, it seems, basically putting words in his mouth. I get the feeling that he wouldn’t think any such military cuts are acceptable even if everything else were cut first by two or three times as much.

        Meanwhile, yes, actually defense has already been cut far too much. We, especially the left, never seem to learn the lessons of the past about that. But as you’ve said on other occasions, the #1 thing is we have to WIN THIS TIME. Meaning, flip the Senate this year, and also hopefully get a Republican in the White House in ’16.

        If not doing the military cuts out of some kind of single-minded stubbornness means another “shutdown” and not getting those election results, you tell ME if even the retired military would think that would a good deal. Even aside from the likelihood that the cuts won’t even go into effect, if we DO win like we need to. So, what’s the real deal? A token “cut” that never really happens, so we can win? Or no cut NOW and even more REAL cuts later?

        How about it, people? You (supposedly) get that 80k or whatever over 20 years, but it costs you – and all the rest of us too – another 2 years of Obama doing what he wants and then 8 years of President Hillary. Both of which probably also mean even BIGGER pension cuts than we’re talking about now, because they’re freakin’ DEMOCRATS!!! Come on!!!

        • Duane Patterson says:

          Kerry, perhaps you might want to know what you’re talking about before telling to ask hugh first. I work with the guy. every day. all day. I know where he is on this issue. perhaps you could just hold your diatribe and let people wonder if you don’t know what you’re talking about rather than weigh in and remove all doubt. if this was an all-in thing, the military types would be much more receptive to the cuts in COLA. this wasn’t an all-in thing.

          • Kerry Davis says:

            All we people out here in audience-land can do, is listen to what he says, including what he says to people like John Campbell and Paul Ryan. In all of that, I haven’t heard anything from Hugh that leads me to believe he would accept even this ‘head fake’ token COLA cut even if it was part of across-the-board ‘cuts’ (which, as usual for DC, aren’t even really cuts just reductions in the rate of increase).

            If there’s some kind of secret inside information that he’s holding back from us that is only known to you and Marlon et al, it’s hardly fair to criticize us out here for not being mind readers.

            Under the real-world circumstances we should thank whatever deity we might believe in, or our lucky stars, or Lucky Charms cereal if you like, that the Dems including Obama fell for it. Especially with some GOP people out there saying openly that it isn’t actually real.

            Considering how desperately they’ve been trying to keep Obamacare etc out of the news, I am pretty amazed that they would give up the chance to blame another “shutdown” on Republicans before the November elections.

          • Kerry Davis says:

            And, in the Tapper show audio, Hugh makes the same point as me: focus on Obamacare. Immigration, etc – and I would include the COLA head-fake too – serve as distractions that could end up leading to GOP defeat in the mid-terms, and perhaps in 2016 as well. Especially if those distractions lead to another “shutdown.”

            I sometimes wish that Hugh would do better at following through on his own arguments.

            WE NEED TO WIN IN NOVEMBER.

        • bumsteaddithers says:

          Kerry, I got the distinct impression Hugh could have been for the cuts in military pensions for the early retirees IF it were part of a total redo of entitlements.

          And, is it really the Republicans doing the cuts? Seems to me that the military had a certain budget including the COLA. However, the military went to the politicians and told them they couldn’t operate a military unless they had more money and it was they who suggested cutting the COLA.

          If I were R and faced with that choice, it would be a tough call. I would tend to go with keeping the COLA, though.

          • Kerry Davis says:

            From the sound of it, that means the Dems wouldn’t have gone along and/or Obama vetoes, which means no settled budget even for now, which means another Republican-blamed “shutdown” or two perhaps including right before the election, which means we very likely lose both this year and in 2016.

            Congratulations. Was it worth it?

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Important Links
Lileks Private reserve
Duanes World
Hugh Hewitt Store
  • RSS Hugh Hewitt Blog

    • Ebola In NYC, And Possibly A Jihadi Too: The Backdrop For Early Voting October 24, 2014
      Hard to keep an eye on early vote counts when Ebola arrives in the Big Apple, and a hatchet-wielding, police-attacking Queens man may indeed be the latest ISIS-inspired terrorist. That is the backdrop of the campaign’s final stretch and it cannot be helping Democrats that a generalized anxiety about world driven by the virus and ISIS and a very specific set […]
    • More from Mark Steyn on “The [Un]documented Mark Steyn” October 23, 2014
      In response to the terrorist attack on our neighbor and staunch ally to the north, I’ve invited Mark Steyn back to discuss the West’s paralysis in the face of Islamist radicalism on Thursday’s show.  Mark was a guest for two hours on Monday (transcript here), but it was mostly happy talk –show tunes and “cultural arcs” for the most part. Mark, on a book tour […]