Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Jonathan Rush at every level of this country, Illinois, Chicago,
New York, Massachusetts, Democrats have jerry mandered the vote beyond recognition.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Kelly Nash.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Democrats rigged the twenty twenty census. Twenty to thirty of
House Democrat seats wouldn't exist but for illegal aliens.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Jonathan and Kelly Show. Wow, this is a never ending
crescendo argument that's now going to get even higher pitched
now that Donald Trump has told the Department of Conference
to initiate plans for a new census.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
I mean, it gets a bit expensive and at the
same time, how accurate is it going to be? I mean,
I heard that guy testifying yesterday and he was getting
grilled both. I mean, it was funny because you had
what's her face, Marjorie Taylor Green almost right after you
had Marjori Retailer, Green's sworn enemy, Jasmine Crockett grilling the
(00:56):
same guy and getting answers that they wanted. I mean,
you can manipulate that information however you want to manipulate it,
and you know, Jasmine Crockett focusing on the fact that
there was some overcounting in some Republican states, and of
course Marjorie tail Green focusing on overcounting in some Democrat states,
(01:17):
some undercounting, and some Republican states. So what is the
how are we going to do this? I mean, it's
never going to be perfect, said as the guy said,
as far as I know, even going back to Jesus,
we've never had a great census. It's never worked. So
the best we can do is just assume that we're
in the ballpark.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
And strangely enough, between the buweru of labor Statistics trying
to count, now we've got the census people trying to count.
We got accounting problem in DC. We get back to
some of that coming up in a few minutes, but
first we're going to go to the Jonathan and Kelly hotline.
Kelly Nash, Welcome on the phone. South Carolina State Senator
Wes Climber, now looking at the fifth USQUE congressional seat
(01:56):
since Ralph Norman's announcement. Thank you for being here, sir, Hey.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Good morning.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
Yes, there are going to be with you all this morning.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
So your first call into the Jonathan and Kelly show.
We're excited to have you on and I think you know,
before we get into the Ralph Norman seat stuff, let's
talk a little bit about this lawsuit. You're you file
the lawsuit against basically yourself because you're part of the
body that got the big raise and you said, no,
we shouldn't be getting the raise. The people who work
(02:24):
at the State House here don't. It's unconstitutional for us
to give ourselves a raise, right.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
I mean, everybody talks about being a constitutional conservative, and
there is a provision in our constitution that is based on,
you know, a James Madison principle, which is that the
legislature does have the power to set the legislatures pay,
but only the next legislatures pay, because the people did
(02:50):
have a check on that decision by the way of
an election that takes place in between when the pay
raise is passed and when it takes effect. And in
this case, the South Carolina General Assembly attempted to raise
its own pay in real time, take more of the
people's money appropriated to themselves in real time, in violation
of the Constitution, in violation of good government principles, and
(03:13):
it had to be stopped where that the Supreme Court
agreed to hear the case, which was a good first step,
and the Supreme Court enjoined the pay raise immediately, which
is to say that the Supreme Court blocked it from
taking effect. And then there will be ongoing arguments or
briefs before the Court in August and September, and I
think we reasonably anticipate our final ruling from the Court
(03:38):
by the end of the year. I'm not an attorney,
I'm a business guy. I'm a financial advisor. But the
attorneys who I've talked to tell me that the sweeping
scope of the Court's initial injunction would typically imply that
the court's final ruling would not reverse the court's initial decision,
and that tends to be the case. Pready bullish on
(04:00):
the likelihood of a victory before the Supreme Court before
year end.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
By the way, Jess for Grim's, was it your idea
and a bipartisan effort to reach across the aisle to
actually get Dick Carpoutley in to be a part of
this legislative a legal effort in de fite.
Speaker 4 (04:16):
Or former Senator Harputley and I worked together on Bannon's
Secret dear Mark. We worked together on cleaning up getting
more transparency and accountability at the Commerce Department. And so
after all this went, you know, happened in the budget,
that's all Dick and say, hey, I'm really thinking about
filling a lawsuit over this ing would you represent me
any stays not only would I represent you, I'll do
(04:38):
it for a reasonable rate, and I don't need to
disclose with the reasonable.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Reasonable you know, for free.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
But we had long since saluted Dick Carputley for his
transparency efforts. I was thinking, for a second there he
was going to step back into his public servant shoes
and do it for free.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
I ten reports that we enjoyed a barbecue lunch together
in Colombia, so I can at least say that.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
All right, now, let me just ask if the result
of this lawsuit is what you anticipate. Am I to
understand that all this is actually doing is delaying the
pay raise till they start their next session.
Speaker 4 (05:16):
That could be the case. The General Assembly may come
back and seek to raise its pay serve the next selection.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Oh, so they'll have to redo the vote. This whole
vote will be null and void, meaning it doesn't just
it's not just applying it later. It's you got to
redo the whole vote.
Speaker 4 (05:33):
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (05:33):
Yes, Okay, interesting, Yeah, And.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
So you know what my hope would be. Look, anytime,
anytime legislators start talking about, you know, taking more of
the people's money for themselves, you've got to have a
high bar of transparency, disclosure, full, fair, free debate on
that subject. It should not be a proviso inserted at
(05:56):
the end of the budget process. The taxpayers deserve subcommittee
hearings where they can testify. They deserve full committee hearings
where there's open debate. They deserve a full and fair
debate on the floor where amendments can be offered.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
In all the rest, let's take the focal point and
spread it out a little bit, make it a little
more broad. As we look for you to make your
announcements here that you've already made public, so it won't
be a surprise that you're going to run for Ralph
Norman's fifth District congressional seat. A lot of South Carolinians,
I would imagine, you can't pick up a rock and
throw it without hitting a South Carolina who feel South Carolinian,
(06:29):
who feels like the House and the Senate here as
well as where you're headed, possibly do nothing but right.
Laws in such a way that they take advantage and
actually become like an insider trader and up have the
opportunities that the average person doesn't have and the even
far more insulting right laws that don't apply to them. So,
as you now go to d C, let's talk about
(06:50):
some of the things that you see from your perch
now as opposed to where you will be, hopefully if
you win the election.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
So I'm glad you raised it. I mean, the insider
trading in Congress is completely repulsive. I mean, it is
a stain on the institution. It is a stain on
everybody who does it, and it is offensive to God,
Fear and taxpayers who sent these people up to Washington
to do a job and focus on them instead of
(07:18):
focusing on how they can get richer in the job.
I am all in on any effort to crack down
on that insider trading, and in fact, I'm gonna leak. Look,
I'm gonna I'm a financial advisor. I currently own a
bunch of individual stocks. If I get elected, I will
never own an individual stock while I serving Congress. Broad
(07:40):
based funds, not even sector specific funds. It's okay to
remain invested, but you shouldn't be able to transact on
the information that you receive as a member of Congress.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
I was thinking that Nancy Pelosi is so great. I mean,
think about that, she doubled the returns of one Warren Buffett.
Warren Buffett looks at Nancy Pelosi goes, how does she
do it? She's a wizard.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
No, you know, really, she's just in the room when
major decisions get made. And that's what happened.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Well when you go to DC, if you were to
go to DC, well, first off, let's keep you here
in South Carolina for a minute. A lot of South
Carolinians that are on the right. You've got the South
Carolina Freedom Caucus, You've got a new group called the
South Carolina Doge. There's a bunch of people in this
state who feel as if South Carolina is one of
(08:33):
the reddest states in America, but we're not governed as
a red state. That we have a lot of liberal
antics going on. Do you subscribe to that theory or
do you think that for the most part, South Carolina's
governed good pretty well to the right.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
I think we have to be careful about occupying too
much of our time and attention on intramural conflict, and
we ought to keep our eye on the goal, and
the goal is the enactment of conservative policy that makes
life better for South Carolinians. Now, my view is I
welcome the hard work for transparency accountability of discal conservatism
(09:10):
with the Freedom Caucus. I welcome the ongoing efforts by
mister Reddy and Doge to fight for a smaller government
that unleashes economic opportunity for our people. Regardless of who
it is or what caucus or club they're in, I
just want to put conservative policy into action so that
(09:32):
South carolinians lives are improved.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Well, one of the hottest conversations going on right now,
and there's a clearer distinction, but apparently people are using
the words interchangeably redistricting and jerry mandering. But as we
look at what is well, what Ralph Norman said he
thinks that the state of South Carolina should look at
redistricting because he thinks that James Clyburn's district was jerry mandred.
(09:56):
I'm not sure that you use that word or districted
in a way that protects him. And then let's talk
a little bit about what your position is on this
as Donald Trump now is making a big issue of
it as well as a lot of Republicans from Washington.
Speaker 4 (10:09):
Look, all right, so the legislature went through the redistricting process,
you know, when was that that's right? And during that process,
you know, it was discussed a lot of different times
that the Supreme Court has ruled that partisan partisan jerry
mandering is perfectly constitutional. Racial jerry mandering is unconstitutional, but
(10:33):
partisan jerry mandering is constitutional, and so on that basis,
I've had a couple of maps drawn up during that
debate to you know, go to an all seven Republican
congressional delegation. Now, the benefit of that is obviously you'd
get rid of completely safe Democratic seat. The risk to
(10:53):
that is that in doing so, you're going to turn
a couple currently safe Republican seats into swing districts. And
so you got to think through second and third order
effects of that. But it's absolutely something the states should consider.
If Illinois and California, let's look at the maps in
democratic states just I mean, look at the absurd maps
(11:14):
in some of these democratic states. And I think it
is totally fair to say that conservatives cannot unilaterally disarm
in the fight for control of Congress.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
We're talking with Wes Climber, and Wes you know, this
idea of moving to Washington, d C. To take on
the federal budgets and all those types of things. It
seems as if that's far more dysfunctional than what we've
already got going on here in South Carolina. What do
you see this playing on? Have you spoken with Ralph Norman?
(11:44):
I mean, he seems like a very frustrated individual with
how DC operates. Do you have any insights as to
how you can make things work better?
Speaker 4 (11:51):
Ralph is frustrated. Everybody's frustrated. I'm frustrated. I mean it
is Look, we're going broke as a country. We can't
continue what we've been doing. And I'll tell you this,
it was very frustrating to watch during debate over the
Big Beautiful Bill how controversial Medicaid work requirements were in Washington.
(12:12):
That is insane to me that anyone can plausibly make
the argument that it's fair and good for the country
for some people to get up every morning and go
to work and pay taxes so that other people who
could work can sit at home and play video games
on the couch. Basic good government reforms like work requirements
(12:34):
in medicaid are I mean, that has to be the
elementary level of solving this debt crisis. And the fact
that that was so challenging to get enacted with Republican
control of the House, Republican control of the Senate, Republican
control of the White House is really a bad sign
(12:54):
for what's coming in Washington. But I want to tell
you this. I'm a financial advisor. I study capital markets
for a living. The debt markets are demanding higher and
higher interest rates on America's outstanding debt obligations. The current
debtload of the United States is financed below three percent
on average. When the debtload of the United States gets
(13:17):
refinanced at these higher higher rates that the market is demanding,
because the market is telling the federal government you're a
bad credit risk. Our debt service puls will very soon
be twice the amount we're spending on our own security.
We are barreling towards a debt crisis, and solving that
debt crisis is not going to be easy. We're going
(13:38):
to have to cut things that people like. The simple
fact of the matter is the government is spending too
much money, and it must spend less. When the government
spends less money, people who are beneficiaries of the programs
that are currently spending money aren't going to like it.
But that's what has to happen in order to solve
this problem. It's just like in your household. If you're
used to going out to a fancy steakhouse every Friday night,
(14:01):
but you're going broke, you got to quit go into
the steakhouse. And the federal government has to do the
exact same thing.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
But if I stop going to the steakhouse, don't the
terrorists twin?
Speaker 4 (14:14):
Well, you have enough money then to buy bullets to
go after the terrace.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Let's use the phrase that I'm so tired of hearing.
But let's unpack that a little bit, because you mentioned
the interest rates in the outstanding debt, and certainly that
case is well justified and incredible. Specifically now with what
Chairman Powell has been doing for the past year, tell
me about what you think the FED should be doing
(14:42):
from your position as a financial advisor.
Speaker 4 (14:45):
So the FED as a duel mandate right prevent inflation
promote full employment. We saw some stats last week on
the labor market. Now, maybe some of those stats are questionable,
but it's inarguable that those stats show a massive hiring spree. Right,
and so as the labor market softens up a little bit,
(15:05):
I think the President is right that the FED is
slow to acting. This FED is slow to cut rates,
economic conditions, merit rate cuts. I'm disappointed of the FED
hat and't acted sooner.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
West Climber, as you begin this campaign for District five
is a This is a long term project, right, I
mean we're still like over a year away from the election.
Do you find that this is going to be hard
balancing because you are a state senator who also has
to have a full time job and now another full
(15:37):
time job in the sense that you're going to be
running for office. How are you going to manage all this?
Speaker 4 (15:42):
I work a lot, I work long hours, but I'm
used to working. I've had a job since I was
twelve years old, when my granddad used to pay me
to pick up cigarette butts in the parking lot of
his hardware store. You know, I've never not had a job.
I've never not worked hard. Hard work is fulfilling, and
I'm excited to get out and do the hard work
to continue. You serve in my constituents and the Senate concern,
(16:02):
serve my clients in our financial advisory practice, and show
the people of the fifth Congressional District that I'm the
kind of guy they're going to want to hire for
this job.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
What an ask the description of a job? By the way,
I don't think anybody would want that job, but look,
I love a great work ethic. Now, one of the
things I wanted to ask you about is you're going
back to d C. What did a young West climber
first start to recognize in Washington, d C? And when
did you get frustrated with it and decided that you
wanted to be a part of the solution.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
I think the reason I ran for the State Senate
is because I got tired and frustrated of being of
the Senate being the place where conservative policy went to die.
You know, for for the first twenty years that Republicans
had the majority, it was a majority in name only
because there weren't conservatives in the Senate who could enact
conservative policy. That same frustration is true about Washington today, right.
(16:53):
I am so tired of watching bickering, watching people post
memes trying to the Instagram famous, trying to just get
their next cable news hit and not actually solving problems
to make the lives of their constituents better. So for
the exact thing reason that I first got so mad
that I decided to run for the Senate in twenty sixteen,
(17:15):
That's why I'm running for Congress today and the Senate
over the last eight years, I think if you look
back through the record, you'll see that I have found
a way timing again to put real points on the
board for conservative policy outcomes that make South Carolinians be
in a better place. And that's exactly what I want
to do when I go up to Washington.
Speaker 3 (17:33):
Well, West Climber, we've enjoyed your first call into the
Jonathan and Kelly Show. Wish you all the best in
your campaign, all the best in that lawsuit. We'll keep
on eye on that. Make sure to see how it
turns out. If you're going to be able to block
the raises, it'll be interesting if that happens. How those
people are going to treat you when you come back
into session.
Speaker 4 (17:50):
Yeah, I believe me, Fellas. I have gotten my fair
share of mean text and phone calls. But look, if
anybody runs for office because they're trying to make friends.
They're making terrible choice. Your friends and your family are
at home, and your job is in Columbia or Washington,
and you need to focus on being keeping those two
things separate. You don't go into politics to make friends.
You go into politics to do the job.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
Senator, thank you so much for your time. Look forward
to talking to you soon as you get closer to
this race, and we'll have an opportunity to talk more
about specific issues between now and then.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
Yes, sir, good to be with you all this morning,
look forward to the next one.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
While we're talking about District five, let's talk about Ralph
Norman for a second. Okay, our old pal that this headline,
South Carolina Republican for governor says state's only black congressional
district should be jerry mandered out.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
Now, did he use the phrase black? Or did that?
Was that? The paper added that for him? The paper
added that, Okay, trying to make it a little more Insceinnario.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
Yeah, he's said I want to get No, I'm looking
for it. I'm looking to see what the words were.
See if you use that word, well, the state newspaper,
I mean the posting Caurier knew what he meant he did.
Here's an interesting quote. This is a good quote. Jim
Clyburn is. He's a nice man. I respect him, but
he is a liberal Democrat who helped Joe Biden in
(19:11):
the White House. Yes, that's not the kind of representative
representation South Carolina needs. So he's saying that we are
to look at our redistricting as every state in the Union, now,
I believe, is starting to come out with their own Well,
they've got a representative in each one of the states
who claim me Now they're going to read district there's
and Jerry manned Are it so that? And what was
(19:33):
that stupid little thing? JB J d or JB.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Pritzker JB B JD vance JB. Pritzker.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Yeah, that's right, because I remind myself it's LB for pounds,
so it's JB for Pritzker. Anyway, he was all heavyweight.
He was on with Stephen Colbert. Colbert now is not
going to book anybody except liberal Democrats.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
By the way, I heard a hysterical statistic the other day.
They went back and they asked the Colbert Show, how
many Republicans have you booked in the last like it's
like it's five years now. He's had one hundred and
seventy This is his numbers, one hundred and seventy six Democrats,
(20:20):
one Republican. You want to guess who the one Republican was?
Nancy Mays almost? No, no, not even almost, that's not
that's not Liz Cheney. Oh was the Republican that they
had on. So he's gone one hundred and seventy seven
and oh and then he went one hundred and seventy
eight and o when he had Kamala Harrison.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
That's true. Well, he was showing a map with Prinsker
the other night and they wanted to bring up the
map of Texas. They didn't bring up the map of Illinois, strange,
but they want to. They want to bring up the
map of Texas. And they were making a He was
talking about one of the districts that went way up
got thin, and he said it looked like a scorpion's tail,
you know. And I'm like, can you I think.
Speaker 3 (20:58):
That is the Illin map?
Speaker 1 (21:01):
No, no, no, no, this was in the Texas.
Speaker 3 (21:03):
Map, okay, because district is the Illinois map. And he said,
and Pritzker's joke was we had Kindergartener's draw our maps,
so maybe it was their map then, yeah, he was
trying to get them to defend your own maps. You've
been jeremandering for years.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
I was trying to figure out because I was a
Sally had asked me about the term Gary mandering because
I said it that way, and I said, well, it
goes back to a guy named Gary and then mandering.
I know something, I need to look at the definition
of the word mandering. But I ended up going to
the Wikipedia page, where I was reminded that it was
termed a mander because of the salamander image that in
(21:39):
fact was part of the Illinois map when it was
first conceived. And then Governor Gary, who I think went
on to be vice president Vice president. Yeah, Governor Gary then.
Actually the newspaper coined the term after him. So anyway,
so now we got South Carolina Republican for Governorsyes, the
(22:02):
only black congressional district should be jerrymandered out.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
He's right, by the way. I mean, I don't say
that because I'm a racist, and I don't say that
because I don't think the Democrats deserve an opportunity to vote,
but I do say it because that district was jerrymandered
specifically at a negotiations table with the NAACP thirty years ago,
and it was designed specifically to make sure that there's
(22:26):
always going to be a Democrat will win at least
one of the House seats. Now, if you look at
the vote totals for South Carolina, there's about forty percent
Democrats in this state. There's about forty percent Republicans. In Massachusetts,
they have nine congressional seats, none go to Republicans. If
you have look at our state, we've got seven congressional
(22:48):
seats and one goes to a Democrat. They should get nothing.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
Well, I know that with this conversation is going to
continue as you're going to hear more and more people
chime in about it. Then, particularly if Donald Trump is
going to insist we have a new census. I'm not
sure that that's going to be part of the strategicy,
As George W. Bush would say, the strategy that's going
to help it certainly wouldn't help before the midterms. That's
more of a long range plan. But they're looking to
(23:15):
make sure that they're redistricting opportunities having to do with
coming out of a lawsuit in Texas that they're going
to be able to redistrict now that will give them
an opportunity to pick up five seats. Now, will New
York and California do what they're threatening to do? Now?
From Illinois to Massachusetts, where those also do what they're
threatening to do.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
I mean, it's pretty funny to think about, because they
have been jerrymandering for years, so it'll be tough. And
you heard Gavin Newsom get into a fight with Arnold
Schwarzenegger the other day because Schwarzenegger is the one who
put up the nonpartisan Commission to actually set up the
congressional districts in California, and Newsom said, in essence, I
agree with this. I think it's the right thing to do.
(23:56):
But because Texas is disenfranchising people, we need to disenfranchise
people here as well in order to make it fair.
But I'll tell you, getting back to James Clyburn, you
know who would be a fan of jerrymandering. That would be,
I hate to say it, the NAACP, The NAACP, doctor
Annie Andrews and the whole crew in District one actually
(24:18):
tried to sue the State of South Carolina because we
had jerrymandered, in their words, District one too much and
gave all the votes to James Clyburn. Well, now listen,
you wanted it. Here you go, doctor Annie NAACP. We're
gonna give you a shot in District one. Now, now
(24:38):
you got a shot. We're gonna put a whole bunch
of Republicans from District one in District six. You're gonna
be oh my god, what happened to James Clyburn.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
There's an answered prayer.
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Jonathan Rush at every level of this country, Illinois, Chicago,
New York, Massachusetts, Democrats have jerry mandered the vote beyond recognition.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Kelly Nash.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Democrats rigged the twenty twenty census. Twenty to thirty of
House Democrat seats wouldn't exist but for illegal aliens.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Jonathan and Kelly Show. Wow, this is a never ending
crescendo argument that's now going to get even higher pitched
now that Donald Trump has told the Department of Conference
to initiate plans for a new census.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
I mean, it gets a bit expensive and at the
same time, how accurate is it going to be? I mean,
I heard that guy testifying yesterday and he was getting
grilled both. I mean, it was funny because you had
what's her face, Marjorie Taylor Green almost right after you
had Marjori Retailer, Green's sworn enemy, Jasmine Crockett grilling the
(00:56):
same guy and getting answers that they wanted. I mean,
you can manipulate that information however you want to manipulate it,
and you know, Jasmine Crockett focusing on the fact that
there was some overcounting in some Republican states, and of
course Marjorie tail Green focusing on overcounting in some Democrat states,
(01:17):
some undercounting, and some Republican states. So what is the
how are we going to do this? I mean, it's
never going to be perfect, said as the guy said,
as far as I know, even going back to Jesus,
we've never had a great census. It's never worked. So
the best we can do is just assume that we're
in the ballpark.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
And strangely enough, between the buweru of labor Statistics trying
to count, now we've got the census people trying to count.
We got accounting problem in DC. We get back to
some of that coming up in a few minutes, but
first we're going to go to the Jonathan and Kelly hotline.
Kelly Nash, Welcome on the phone. South Carolina State Senator
Wes Climber, now looking at the fifth USQUE congressional seat
(01:56):
since Ralph Norman's announcement. Thank you for being here, sir, Hey.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Good morning.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
Yes, there are going to be with you all this morning.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
So your first call into the Jonathan and Kelly show.
We're excited to have you on and I think you know,
before we get into the Ralph Norman seat stuff, let's
talk a little bit about this lawsuit. You're you file
the lawsuit against basically yourself because you're part of the
body that got the big raise and you said, no,
we shouldn't be getting the raise. The people who work
(02:24):
at the State House here don't. It's unconstitutional for us
to give ourselves a raise, right.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
I mean, everybody talks about being a constitutional conservative, and
there is a provision in our constitution that is based on,
you know, a James Madison principle, which is that the
legislature does have the power to set the legislatures pay,
but only the next legislatures pay, because the people did
(02:50):
have a check on that decision by the way of
an election that takes place in between when the pay
raise is passed and when it takes effect. And in
this case, the South Carolina General Assembly attempted to raise
its own pay in real time, take more of the
people's money appropriated to themselves in real time, in violation
of the Constitution, in violation of good government principles, and
(03:13):
it had to be stopped where that the Supreme Court
agreed to hear the case, which was a good first step,
and the Supreme Court enjoined the pay raise immediately, which
is to say that the Supreme Court blocked it from
taking effect. And then there will be ongoing arguments or
briefs before the Court in August and September, and I
think we reasonably anticipate our final ruling from the Court
(03:38):
by the end of the year. I'm not an attorney,
I'm a business guy. I'm a financial advisor. But the
attorneys who I've talked to tell me that the sweeping
scope of the Court's initial injunction would typically imply that
the court's final ruling would not reverse the court's initial decision,
and that tends to be the case. Pready bullish on
(04:00):
the likelihood of a victory before the Supreme Court before
year end.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
By the way, Jess for Grim's, was it your idea
and a bipartisan effort to reach across the aisle to
actually get Dick Carpoutley in to be a part of
this legislative a legal effort in de fite.
Speaker 4 (04:16):
Or former Senator Harputley and I worked together on Bannon's
Secret dear Mark. We worked together on cleaning up getting
more transparency and accountability at the Commerce Department. And so
after all this went, you know, happened in the budget,
that's all Dick and say, hey, I'm really thinking about
filling a lawsuit over this ing would you represent me
any stays not only would I represent you, I'll do
(04:38):
it for a reasonable rate, and I don't need to
disclose with the reasonable.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Reasonable you know, for free.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
But we had long since saluted Dick Carputley for his
transparency efforts. I was thinking, for a second there he
was going to step back into his public servant shoes
and do it for free.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
I ten reports that we enjoyed a barbecue lunch together
in Colombia, so I can at least say that.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
All right, now, let me just ask if the result
of this lawsuit is what you anticipate. Am I to
understand that all this is actually doing is delaying the
pay raise till they start their next session.
Speaker 4 (05:16):
That could be the case. The General Assembly may come
back and seek to raise its pay serve the next selection.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Oh, so they'll have to redo the vote. This whole
vote will be null and void, meaning it doesn't just
it's not just applying it later. It's you got to
redo the whole vote.
Speaker 4 (05:33):
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (05:33):
Yes, Okay, interesting, Yeah, And.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
So you know what my hope would be. Look, anytime,
anytime legislators start talking about, you know, taking more of
the people's money for themselves, you've got to have a
high bar of transparency, disclosure, full, fair, free debate on
that subject. It should not be a proviso inserted at
(05:56):
the end of the budget process. The taxpayers deserve subcommittee
hearings where they can testify. They deserve full committee hearings
where there's open debate. They deserve a full and fair
debate on the floor where amendments can be offered.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
In all the rest, let's take the focal point and
spread it out a little bit, make it a little
more broad. As we look for you to make your
announcements here that you've already made public, so it won't
be a surprise that you're going to run for Ralph
Norman's fifth District congressional seat. A lot of South Carolinians,
I would imagine, you can't pick up a rock and
throw it without hitting a South Carolina who feel South Carolinian,
(06:29):
who feels like the House and the Senate here as
well as where you're headed, possibly do nothing but right.
Laws in such a way that they take advantage and
actually become like an insider trader and up have the
opportunities that the average person doesn't have and the even
far more insulting right laws that don't apply to them. So,
as you now go to d C, let's talk about
(06:50):
some of the things that you see from your perch
now as opposed to where you will be, hopefully if
you win the election.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
So I'm glad you raised it. I mean, the insider
trading in Congress is completely repulsive. I mean, it is
a stain on the institution. It is a stain on
everybody who does it, and it is offensive to God,
Fear and taxpayers who sent these people up to Washington
to do a job and focus on them instead of
(07:18):
focusing on how they can get richer in the job.
I am all in on any effort to crack down
on that insider trading, and in fact, I'm gonna leak. Look,
I'm gonna I'm a financial advisor. I currently own a
bunch of individual stocks. If I get elected, I will
never own an individual stock while I serving Congress. Broad
(07:40):
based funds, not even sector specific funds. It's okay to
remain invested, but you shouldn't be able to transact on
the information that you receive as a member of Congress.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
I was thinking that Nancy Pelosi is so great. I mean,
think about that, she doubled the returns of one Warren Buffett.
Warren Buffett looks at Nancy Pelosi goes, how does she
do it? She's a wizard.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
No, you know, really, she's just in the room when
major decisions get made. And that's what happened.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Well when you go to DC, if you were to
go to DC, well, first off, let's keep you here
in South Carolina for a minute. A lot of South
Carolinians that are on the right. You've got the South
Carolina Freedom Caucus, You've got a new group called the
South Carolina Doge. There's a bunch of people in this
state who feel as if South Carolina is one of
(08:33):
the reddest states in America, but we're not governed as
a red state. That we have a lot of liberal
antics going on. Do you subscribe to that theory or
do you think that for the most part, South Carolina's
governed good pretty well to the right.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
I think we have to be careful about occupying too
much of our time and attention on intramural conflict, and
we ought to keep our eye on the goal, and
the goal is the enactment of conservative policy that makes
life better for South Carolinians. Now, my view is I
welcome the hard work for transparency accountability of discal conservatism
(09:10):
with the Freedom Caucus. I welcome the ongoing efforts by
mister Reddy and Doge to fight for a smaller government
that unleashes economic opportunity for our people. Regardless of who
it is or what caucus or club they're in, I
just want to put conservative policy into action so that
(09:32):
South carolinians lives are improved.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Well, one of the hottest conversations going on right now,
and there's a clearer distinction, but apparently people are using
the words interchangeably redistricting and jerry mandering. But as we
look at what is well, what Ralph Norman said he
thinks that the state of South Carolina should look at
redistricting because he thinks that James Clyburn's district was jerry mandred.
(09:56):
I'm not sure that you use that word or districted
in a way that protects him. And then let's talk
a little bit about what your position is on this
as Donald Trump now is making a big issue of
it as well as a lot of Republicans from Washington.
Speaker 4 (10:09):
Look, all right, so the legislature went through the redistricting process,
you know, when was that that's right? And during that process,
you know, it was discussed a lot of different times
that the Supreme Court has ruled that partisan partisan jerry
mandering is perfectly constitutional. Racial jerry mandering is unconstitutional, but
(10:33):
partisan jerry mandering is constitutional, and so on that basis,
I've had a couple of maps drawn up during that
debate to you know, go to an all seven Republican
congressional delegation. Now, the benefit of that is obviously you'd
get rid of completely safe Democratic seat. The risk to
(10:53):
that is that in doing so, you're going to turn
a couple currently safe Republican seats into swing districts. And
so you got to think through second and third order
effects of that. But it's absolutely something the states should consider.
If Illinois and California, let's look at the maps in
democratic states just I mean, look at the absurd maps
(11:14):
in some of these democratic states. And I think it
is totally fair to say that conservatives cannot unilaterally disarm
in the fight for control of Congress.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
We're talking with Wes Climber, and Wes you know, this
idea of moving to Washington, d C. To take on
the federal budgets and all those types of things. It
seems as if that's far more dysfunctional than what we've
already got going on here in South Carolina. What do
you see this playing on? Have you spoken with Ralph Norman?
(11:44):
I mean, he seems like a very frustrated individual with
how DC operates. Do you have any insights as to
how you can make things work better?
Speaker 4 (11:51):
Ralph is frustrated. Everybody's frustrated. I'm frustrated. I mean it
is Look, we're going broke as a country. We can't
continue what we've been doing. And I'll tell you this,
it was very frustrating to watch during debate over the
Big Beautiful Bill how controversial Medicaid work requirements were in Washington.
(12:12):
That is insane to me that anyone can plausibly make
the argument that it's fair and good for the country
for some people to get up every morning and go
to work and pay taxes so that other people who
could work can sit at home and play video games
on the couch. Basic good government reforms like work requirements
(12:34):
in medicaid are I mean, that has to be the
elementary level of solving this debt crisis. And the fact
that that was so challenging to get enacted with Republican
control of the House, Republican control of the Senate, Republican
control of the White House is really a bad sign
(12:54):
for what's coming in Washington. But I want to tell
you this. I'm a financial advisor. I study capital markets
for a living. The debt markets are demanding higher and
higher interest rates on America's outstanding debt obligations. The current
debtload of the United States is financed below three percent
on average. When the debtload of the United States gets
(13:17):
refinanced at these higher higher rates that the market is demanding,
because the market is telling the federal government you're a
bad credit risk. Our debt service puls will very soon
be twice the amount we're spending on our own security.
We are barreling towards a debt crisis, and solving that
debt crisis is not going to be easy. We're going
(13:38):
to have to cut things that people like. The simple
fact of the matter is the government is spending too
much money, and it must spend less. When the government
spends less money, people who are beneficiaries of the programs
that are currently spending money aren't going to like it.
But that's what has to happen in order to solve
this problem. It's just like in your household. If you're
used to going out to a fancy steakhouse every Friday night,
(14:01):
but you're going broke, you got to quit go into
the steakhouse. And the federal government has to do the
exact same thing.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
But if I stop going to the steakhouse, don't the
terrorists twin?
Speaker 4 (14:14):
Well, you have enough money then to buy bullets to
go after the terrace.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Let's use the phrase that I'm so tired of hearing.
But let's unpack that a little bit, because you mentioned
the interest rates in the outstanding debt, and certainly that
case is well justified and incredible. Specifically now with what
Chairman Powell has been doing for the past year, tell
me about what you think the FED should be doing
(14:42):
from your position as a financial advisor.
Speaker 4 (14:45):
So the FED as a duel mandate right prevent inflation
promote full employment. We saw some stats last week on
the labor market. Now, maybe some of those stats are questionable,
but it's inarguable that those stats show a massive hiring spree. Right,
and so as the labor market softens up a little bit,
(15:05):
I think the President is right that the FED is
slow to acting. This FED is slow to cut rates,
economic conditions, merit rate cuts. I'm disappointed of the FED
hat and't acted sooner.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
West Climber, as you begin this campaign for District five
is a This is a long term project, right, I
mean we're still like over a year away from the election.
Do you find that this is going to be hard
balancing because you are a state senator who also has
to have a full time job and now another full
(15:37):
time job in the sense that you're going to be
running for office. How are you going to manage all this?
Speaker 4 (15:42):
I work a lot, I work long hours, but I'm
used to working. I've had a job since I was
twelve years old, when my granddad used to pay me
to pick up cigarette butts in the parking lot of
his hardware store. You know, I've never not had a job.
I've never not worked hard. Hard work is fulfilling, and
I'm excited to get out and do the hard work
to continue. You serve in my constituents and the Senate concern,
(16:02):
serve my clients in our financial advisory practice, and show
the people of the fifth Congressional District that I'm the
kind of guy they're going to want to hire for
this job.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
What an ask the description of a job? By the way,
I don't think anybody would want that job, but look,
I love a great work ethic. Now, one of the
things I wanted to ask you about is you're going
back to d C. What did a young West climber
first start to recognize in Washington, d C? And when
did you get frustrated with it and decided that you
wanted to be a part of the solution.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
I think the reason I ran for the State Senate
is because I got tired and frustrated of being of
the Senate being the place where conservative policy went to die.
You know, for for the first twenty years that Republicans
had the majority, it was a majority in name only
because there weren't conservatives in the Senate who could enact
conservative policy. That same frustration is true about Washington today, right.
(16:53):
I am so tired of watching bickering, watching people post
memes trying to the Instagram famous, trying to just get
their next cable news hit and not actually solving problems
to make the lives of their constituents better. So for
the exact thing reason that I first got so mad
that I decided to run for the Senate in twenty sixteen,
(17:15):
That's why I'm running for Congress today and the Senate
over the last eight years, I think if you look
back through the record, you'll see that I have found
a way timing again to put real points on the
board for conservative policy outcomes that make South Carolinians be
in a better place. And that's exactly what I want
to do when I go up to Washington.
Speaker 3 (17:33):
Well, West Climber, we've enjoyed your first call into the
Jonathan and Kelly Show. Wish you all the best in
your campaign, all the best in that lawsuit. We'll keep
on eye on that. Make sure to see how it
turns out. If you're going to be able to block
the raises, it'll be interesting if that happens. How those
people are going to treat you when you come back
into session.
Speaker 4 (17:50):
Yeah, I believe me, Fellas. I have gotten my fair
share of mean text and phone calls. But look, if
anybody runs for office because they're trying to make friends.
They're making terrible choice. Your friends and your family are
at home, and your job is in Columbia or Washington,
and you need to focus on being keeping those two
things separate. You don't go into politics to make friends.
You go into politics to do the job.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
Senator, thank you so much for your time. Look forward
to talking to you soon as you get closer to
this race, and we'll have an opportunity to talk more
about specific issues between now and then.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
Yes, sir, good to be with you all this morning,
look forward to the next one.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
While we're talking about District five, let's talk about Ralph
Norman for a second. Okay, our old pal that this headline,
South Carolina Republican for governor says state's only black congressional
district should be jerry mandered out.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
Now, did he use the phrase black? Or did that?
Was that? The paper added that for him? The paper
added that, Okay, trying to make it a little more Insceinnario.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
Yeah, he's said I want to get No, I'm looking
for it. I'm looking to see what the words were.
See if you use that word, well, the state newspaper,
I mean the posting Caurier knew what he meant he did.
Here's an interesting quote. This is a good quote. Jim
Clyburn is. He's a nice man. I respect him, but
he is a liberal Democrat who helped Joe Biden in
(19:11):
the White House. Yes, that's not the kind of representative
representation South Carolina needs. So he's saying that we are
to look at our redistricting as every state in the Union, now,
I believe, is starting to come out with their own Well,
they've got a representative in each one of the states
who claim me Now they're going to read district there's
and Jerry manned Are it so that? And what was
(19:33):
that stupid little thing? JB J d or JB.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Pritzker JB B JD vance JB. Pritzker.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Yeah, that's right, because I remind myself it's LB for pounds,
so it's JB for Pritzker. Anyway, he was all heavyweight.
He was on with Stephen Colbert. Colbert now is not
going to book anybody except liberal Democrats.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
By the way, I heard a hysterical statistic the other day.
They went back and they asked the Colbert Show, how
many Republicans have you booked in the last like it's
like it's five years now. He's had one hundred and
seventy This is his numbers, one hundred and seventy six Democrats,
(20:20):
one Republican. You want to guess who the one Republican was?
Nancy Mays almost? No, no, not even almost, that's not
that's not Liz Cheney. Oh was the Republican that they
had on. So he's gone one hundred and seventy seven
and oh and then he went one hundred and seventy
eight and o when he had Kamala Harrison.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
That's true. Well, he was showing a map with Prinsker
the other night and they wanted to bring up the
map of Texas. They didn't bring up the map of Illinois, strange,
but they want to. They want to bring up the
map of Texas. And they were making a He was
talking about one of the districts that went way up
got thin, and he said it looked like a scorpion's tail,
you know. And I'm like, can you I think.
Speaker 3 (20:58):
That is the Illin map?
Speaker 1 (21:01):
No, no, no, no, this was in the Texas.
Speaker 3 (21:03):
Map, okay, because district is the Illinois map. And he said,
and Pritzker's joke was we had Kindergartener's draw our maps,
so maybe it was their map then, yeah, he was
trying to get them to defend your own maps. You've
been jeremandering for years.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
I was trying to figure out because I was a
Sally had asked me about the term Gary mandering because
I said it that way, and I said, well, it
goes back to a guy named Gary and then mandering.
I know something, I need to look at the definition
of the word mandering. But I ended up going to
the Wikipedia page, where I was reminded that it was
termed a mander because of the salamander image that in
(21:39):
fact was part of the Illinois map when it was
first conceived. And then Governor Gary, who I think went
on to be vice president Vice president. Yeah, Governor Gary then.
Actually the newspaper coined the term after him. So anyway,
so now we got South Carolina Republican for Governorsyes, the
(22:02):
only black congressional district should be jerrymandered out.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
He's right, by the way. I mean, I don't say
that because I'm a racist, and I don't say that
because I don't think the Democrats deserve an opportunity to vote,
but I do say it because that district was jerrymandered
specifically at a negotiations table with the NAACP thirty years ago,
and it was designed specifically to make sure that there's
(22:26):
always going to be a Democrat will win at least
one of the House seats. Now, if you look at
the vote totals for South Carolina, there's about forty percent
Democrats in this state. There's about forty percent Republicans. In Massachusetts,
they have nine congressional seats, none go to Republicans. If
you have look at our state, we've got seven congressional
(22:48):
seats and one goes to a Democrat. They should get nothing.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
Well, I know that with this conversation is going to
continue as you're going to hear more and more people
chime in about it. Then, particularly if Donald Trump is
going to insist we have a new census. I'm not
sure that that's going to be part of the strategicy,
As George W. Bush would say, the strategy that's going
to help it certainly wouldn't help before the midterms. That's
more of a long range plan. But they're looking to
(23:15):
make sure that they're redistricting opportunities having to do with
coming out of a lawsuit in Texas that they're going
to be able to redistrict now that will give them
an opportunity to pick up five seats. Now, will New
York and California do what they're threatening to do? Now?
From Illinois to Massachusetts, where those also do what they're
threatening to do.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
I mean, it's pretty funny to think about, because they
have been jerrymandering for years, so it'll be tough. And
you heard Gavin Newsom get into a fight with Arnold
Schwarzenegger the other day because Schwarzenegger is the one who
put up the nonpartisan Commission to actually set up the
congressional districts in California, and Newsom said, in essence, I
agree with this. I think it's the right thing to do.
(23:56):
But because Texas is disenfranchising people, we need to disenfranchise
people here as well in order to make it fair.
But I'll tell you, getting back to James Clyburn, you
know who would be a fan of jerrymandering. That would be,
I hate to say it, the NAACP, The NAACP, doctor
Annie Andrews and the whole crew in District one actually
(24:18):
tried to sue the State of South Carolina because we
had jerrymandered, in their words, District one too much and
gave all the votes to James Clyburn. Well, now listen,
you wanted it. Here you go, doctor Annie NAACP. We're
gonna give you a shot in District one. Now, now
(24:38):
you got a shot. We're gonna put a whole bunch
of Republicans from District one in District six. You're gonna
be oh my god, what happened to James Clyburn.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
There's an answered prayer.
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com