Enfranchise Young Men • Restore the American Village • Regain Our Sovereignty

Most Americans once lived in real communities—unique places where culture thrived, neighbors knew one another, and genuine support and connection were part of daily life. Utah has preserved this spirit better than any other state, yet even here the erosion of community is accelerating.

For decades the GOP has acted as the party of progressives driving the speed limit—applying the brakes while Democrats steer us toward a godless, lonely, “diverse” corporate slopworld. Conserving what little remains is no longer enough. We must go beyond conservative. We need a bold vision of thriving, distinct American communities built on duty, honor, and mutual responsibility—communities worth building and defending.

The greatest threat to this vision is the systematic exploitation and rejection of young American men. Working men built this country; young men are its future. Globalism, feminism, diversity politics, and multinational capital have united to parasitize, crush, and blame them simply for existing. Men are not blameless, but we must deliberately empower, enfranchise, and call them to their highest duty, especially the young.

Society is protected by young men - and from young men. They alone possess the raw capacity for organized violence, making them both the guardians at the gate and the potential barbarians outside it. If we continue to alienate them, history shows they will eventually tear the system down and rebuild it in the image of their resentment. We must instead craft a future that young men are proud to defend.

When I read the Utah Republican Party Platform, I saw that it is fundamentally right.

Unlike other politicians, I will not “promise to try” to implement that platform. Most Republicans campaign as conservatives and govern as moderates, compromising away the very values they claim to hold.

I offer no ordinary campaign promises. The truth is this: I will be more radically conservative in office than I appear on the campaign trail. While other politicians exaggerate how bold they will be, I am doing the opposite. I am understating my intentions. This country requires a serious course correction, or it will break apart.

On two issues that divide Republicans:

Israel is not our ally. Our national sovereignty has been compromised by Zionist influence. To regain true independence, we must cut unnecessary strategic ties with Israel and strictly regulate their lobbying activities under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The clients of Jeffrey Epstein must be fully exposed and prosecuted; those guilty of the worst crimes should face the death penalty.

For general policy positions on taxes, education, family, life, guns, immigration, and more, visit the official Utah County Republican Party Platform. Below is how I think we should prioritize implementing that platform. 

Part I: Enfranchise Young Men

Young men need to be economically enfranchised, educationally enfranchised, and relationally enfranchised. Economics and education can be improved by the federal government, and there is low-hanging fruit on the relational side that the federal government can legislate.

Enfranchising young men will lift all citizens’ economic status. We have made tradeoffs for decades in favor of retirees, financial companies, and established corporations at the expense of manufacturing, agriculture, infrastructure, and law enforcement. These traditionally male-dominated sectors are the foundation of our economy, and we should strengthen and revitalize them.

The direct economic means to do this is to bring manufacturing and agriculture back to the US, embark on infrastructure projects, and increase funding and support for law enforcement personnel. Beyond that, reforms in the education system that build and analyze new strategies to help young men succeed are necessary. My current framework for all of this follows:

Manufacturing

Bringing manufacturing back requires tariffs. Trump’s haymaker tariffs shock the market and are more suited to foreign policy and diplomatic pressure than genuinely bringing manufacturing back. 

At the inception of this country, 250 years ago, the only federal tax was an import tariff. Tariffs generated over 50% of federal revenue until the 1900s, when the income tax became the primary source of revenue. President Trump only took the share of revenue generated by tariffs from 1% to 2%. This is due to many tariff exceptions, unequal application, and maintenance of old trade deals.

My proposal is for Congress to levy a 1% tariff on all imported goods, with an automatic raise of 1% every year for four years until we reach a 5% flat tariff rate. That would generate $160 billion, enough to replace the income tax on the bottom 50% of earners. Slowly climbing, stable tariffs, to replace the income tax, would give businesses time to open factories and bring manufacturing home. Tariffs in excess of that 5% should be managed by the president for diplomatic reasons, though constraints on how high tariffs can be set are a good idea.

That 5% tariff is not enough. Regulations, red tape, and liability risk would keep many companies manufacturing offshore. Streamlining and walking back these regulations—especially carbon initiatives—is essential to bringing manufacturing, energy, and resource extraction back to America.

Agriculture

Agriculture has to be dealt with carefully. First, Thomas Massie’s proposal to let small farmers sell home-butchered meat within state lines is obviously a good idea. Smallholding farms should be able to sell all types of food within their communities, at farmers markets and permanent farmstands, and accept the appropriate liability risk without FDA or USDA oversight. This would reduce the price of food, and especially reduce the price of organic, fresh food.

Larger farms currently cannot compete with Mexico without using illegal or exploitative labor. The 5% tariff must apply to food, or American farmers will continue to slide into debt and bankruptcy. The middlemen - butchers, meatpackers, and processing plants - have been consolidated by private equity into monopolies that take massive profits while farmers struggle. Strategic deregulation, while deploying temporary incentives to new middleman companies, will bring free-market competition back to this sector.

Infrastructure Projects

The major infrastructure project I’m proposing is the Three Rails: heavy, light, and high-speed. Long-haul trucking is often less efficient than heavy rail, but the heavy rail system has been poorly maintained, is overloaded, and needs modernization. High-speed rail would take a ton of pressure off the air-travel system, and light rail/subways in cities improve walkability, reduce traffic, and reduce cost of living - even when they aren’t “Mamdani Free.” In ten years America could produce a million miles of rail and it would only make us more prosperous, more resilient to disaster, and more free.

“How are you gonna pay for it?” First, red tape and regulation need to be cut and private companies given open markets to construct rail through public land and leased or purchased private land. Second, once the federal budget is balanced, defense spending should temporarily be reallocated toward manufacturing, extraction (especially uranium for nuclear power), and transportation infrastructure for at least a ten-year period. Some of the rail system should be privatized, but probably not all of it. America would lose a drawn-out world war because we cannot produce, transport, or extract our own resources. Fixing this is a matter of national security. I lived on military bases as a child, and an enormous amount of time and money is wasted by the officer class. Auditing and restructuring pentagon spending would free up huge amounts of resources. The Army Corps of Engineers has historically been used for infrastructure, namely dams, and reallocating resources toward manufacturing, extraction, and transportation infrastructure is both possible and accessible.

Law Enforcement

Our country needs better law enforcement. Similar to my previous point about defense spending on infrastructure, using defense resources to secure our cities and borders has precedent and makes sense. Further reallocation will be easier once Medicare, Medicaid, and Defense spending are thoroughly audited.

Law enforcement personnel should be thoroughly trained in physical combat, verbal de-escalation, detective work, and constitutional practices. Dealing with crime without spending more money has pushed federal and state legislatures to do away with constitutional protections on the accused. Many of our rights enshrined in the Constitution have been walked back to deal with “terrorism”, “illegal immigration”, “hate speech”, and crime generally. We can enforce the law constitutionally—it just takes more resources, and we need to be willing to pay that cost. Increasing personnel in local law enforcement and using detective resources to solve thefts is important for citizens to trust the system. I rarely hear about petty crimes being solved by local police, except by accident. Local police spend too many resources protecting Walmart and not enough dealing with bike thieves, aggressive homeless men, or illegal dumping—all of which are crimes that make life for Americans unpleasant and unsafe. This isn’t their fault, it is the fault of incentive systems that keep police busy with traffic tickets and Walmart.

Higher Education

Higher education has inflated in price beyond any other market segment. The main driver of this is federally backed student loans and FAFSA. We all like FAFSA, but it makes college more expensive through subsidy-induced price inflation. Partially cutting back Pell grants will be painful, but necessary to wake up the market.

Student loans are federally backed, and people cannot declare bankruptcy on them. This makes no sense, no other loan works this way. Bankruptcy should be an option. You may think, “everyone with a gender studies major would declare bankruptcy,” and you would be right. Going forward, student loans should have a maximum interest rate and in many ways be regulated more tightly than they are today. However, they should be given to qualified candidates who are most likely to pay their loans back, like any other loan.

Credit score, area of study, high school grades, ACT/SAT, work experience, military service, and physical health should all be taken into account and used to predict likelihood of repayment, and thus qualification for student loans. For example, a premed college student is more likely to repay their loan than an English major. English majors are important, but the degree should probably cost less than premed. Fewer people should choose that major, and young people shouldn’t need a loan to access it.

The university system has a lot of problems, and many are derived from the fact that the industry is highly regulated to protect the wealthiest universities and progressive agendas. The market needs freedom, or it will collapse—as it is collapsing now. Young men graduate from college less, the prices are ridiculous, the grades are inflated, and overall the environment is geared toward progressive young women with infinite loans. This proposal is an economic shock to the market, but there is more federal red tape to be cut to reform higher education.

Public Education

K-12 education is a sector I personally know well. I worked as an outdoor immersion specialist for a public charter for three years, and I graduated from public school in 2018. The system desperately needs an update. My proposal is a three-stage process to update the policies, procedures, and curriculum of the American education system.

Stage 1: Measure – GAME testing

In my proposal, school choice becomes a federal policy—with a caveat. Parents will have freedom to use the federal funds allocated to their children at whichever schools accept their children, including ESAs for homeschoolers. The caveat is that use of these federal funds requires participation in a nationwide study.

This already happens to an extent with standardized testing, but the tests only measure math and reading, and students do not take them seriously. Students know that colleges, creditors, and employers cannot see these test scores, and so they flunk them intentionally. Standardized tests need to matter, but the ability to keep personal data private needs to be protected. These test results should be easily sealable at any time, so institutions cannot see them, but they should also serve as official benchmarks if unsealed, appearing in background checks or when applying for universities, jobs, or loans. Again, this data should not be public unless the students choose for it to be upon graduation. It should be an optional advantage, not a mandatory ability score.

The standardized tests should be administered every two years starting at 6th grade, and adults should have the opportunity to retake at age 20, 24, 30, and every ten years thereafter for a small cost. The tests will be accompanied by a lengthy questionnaire with questions about diet, health, and environmental factors to allow researchers to better understand the data presented. This data must be protected and encrypted with extreme care and caution and be permanently anonymized at will by the owner of the data (i.e., the parent, and later the student).

The standardized tests should expand beyond reading and math to be a comprehensive test of four sectors: Emotional Regulation and Conscientiousness, Empathetic and Relational Abilities, Physical Health and Motor Skills, and Math and Reading. All scores should be expressed as a percentile on the bell curve of students the same age and sex testing the same year.

Stage 2: Broaden

The Broaden stage is all about expanding educational options. School choice should initially be extremely wide, including funding high school apprenticeships, work/learn programs, military-style boarding schools, private schools, and foreign exchange programs. With any of these institutions, receiving funding must be dependent on taking a rigorous record of policies, procedures, curriculum, and offered lunches.

This way, researchers can study the variables that institutions manipulate. What time lunch is, minutes of outdoor time, temperature of overhead lighting, screen time vs. paper time, male vs. female teachers, may each give valuable gains to students’ outcomes in abilities. Similarly, the highly unconventional homeschool, boarding school, and apprenticeship programs may perform better in some ways than normal schooling, or perform better in different areas. Some of the best data will come from measuring the change in outcomes for students who change institutions, moving from one style to another. None of this will be “clean” data with isolated variables, but with enough dirty data, real evidence can be obtained.

Stage 3: Implement

After eight years, enough data will be collected to produce a multifactorial analysis of the better and worse practices for secondary education. This will be delivered as a series of recommendations for educational institutions across the country, but they will not be enforced.

Implementation will show the strengths and weaknesses of these recommendations, and it will take time to show what these are. So they will stay as official recommendations, to be updated every eight years.

Stages 1-3 repeat, with Stage 3 occurring every eight years. Something to note is that Stage 3 could be taken today and could immediately be applied by a competent Department of Education if we had one. Education is studied all over the world, and Europe has us beat in many ways. A multifactorial analysis of experimental education strategies, with corresponding recommendations, could be accomplished this year. This legislation may not be urgent, but it is clearly important, and if we put it off forever we will continue to pay the cost of a subpar educational system. Our system specifically disadvantages boys and young men. The norms, policies, incentives, and curriculum clearly are better designed to educate girls, because boys do far worse in school while having the same average intelligence as girls. A wider bell curve cannot explain all the ways that boys and men are failing and being failed. It is time to address it.

Relational

Beyond economics and education, a problem is brewing among young men. The “male loneliness epidemic” and the “gender war” have left many unpartnered, unmarried, childless, and not seeking to date. These relational issues are waved off by some—“most men in history did not reproduce”—but past a certain point this becomes a disaster.

Unmarried, unpartnered young men are radically dangerous. I stated before that society is both protected by young men and from young men. If “incels,” or resentful single men, continue to grow as a demographic, they will grow out of proportion in power. Whether they are voting or not, they have a capacity for organized violence. All power is derived from organized violence. The Arab Spring saw economically disadvantaged, single young men overthrow nations and create new ones from scratch that guaranteed them submissive wives. That was not a coincidence.

Empowering young men to date, to marry, and to enter partnerships with women that are not exploitative or authoritarian is a difficult task. In general, this is a culture-war issue, and legislating on it seems incredibly dangerous. This is why I have, until now, only spoken on economic and educational empowerment of men, because presumably this will help them marry and stabilize.

But there is some low-hanging fruit here. It has become a norm in America for employers to discourage or ban workplace romances. Men and women are more likely to pair permanently if they spend time around each other, without romantic pressure, in cooperative roles. The ability of an employer to regulate human relationships seems like an overreach.

So my proposal is that we legislate to protect the freedom of workers to date and enter relationships with other coworkers, without being blocked or discouraged in any way by their employer. To roll this in as a new Worker’s Right. To let people be unconstrained to establish relationships that begin in workplaces, period. The MeToo movement made strides in the culture war against exploitative power dynamics. Now it is time to let adults be adults.

Part II: Restoring the American Village

Enfranchising young men is only half the battle. They need real places to defend, real communities to belong to, and real families to build. For decades the federal government has imposed car-centric sprawl and lonely suburbs on the American people. The Interstate Highway Act, FHA policies, and Euclidean zoning rules destroyed the old American villages. These were top-down decisions that turned our communities into isolated pods of driveways and big box stores. My approach is the opposite: use federal power to enforce freedom by removing the barriers that the government itself created.

My first priority is restoring the right of families to live together on their own land. Young men should be able to live near their parents and grandparents, and grandparents should be able to age in place with family nearby. I will push to make it a federal requirement that any locality taking HUD, DOT, or CDBG money must allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Small Dwelling Units (SDUs) on single-family lots and agricultural lots for extended family—grandparents, adult children, cousins, and siblings. The freedom to build a living space for family on the dirt you own is worth fighting for.

I also propose walking back federal safety and building codes specifically for ADUs and SDUs on single-family/agricultural properties. Homeowners should have the freedom to use experimental or traditional building methods to house their own family however they see fit. If a family wants to build with earthbags, timber framing, or other low-cost traditional techniques, the federal government should get out of the way. This will dramatically lower the cost of creating housing for our own blood on our own land.

We must also restore basic property rights against anti-village zoning. Local governments should be incentivised to allow missing middle housing—duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes—by right in single-family zones if they want to keep receiving federal dollars. Parking minimums and single-use zoning that prevent corner stores and small shops need to go. We should be cautious to not force high-density. But stopping the federal government from rewarding the policies that destroyed walkable communities makes sense.

Public transit should serve real American villages, not social engineering projects. Light rail and high-speed rail (which I mentioned in Part I) will work far better when people are actually allowed to build family housing, small shops, and cafes near the stations. I would tie federal transit dollars to removing the zoning rules that currently make transit useless for most suburban families.

We also need real third places where people can meet and form relationships. The federal government should stop making it illegal or extremely difficult for small businesses and community spots to exist in residential neighborhoods. I support using targeted grants and conditions on existing programs to protect the freedom of Americans to run tiny businesses on their property. 

To prevent land speculators taking advantage of these initiatives, a total ban on foreign corporations, non-citizens, and large real estate firms buying up single-family homes and agricultural land is necessary. The system should benefit citizens, especially young citizens, not globalist corporations or chinese speculators.

Finally, we need the freedom to grow food and nurture the land again. Americans should be free to grow whatever native plants or noninvasive food-bearing plants they want on their own property. This ties to agricultural self-sufficiency and a freer market of food. Each state can maintain its own blacklist of plants so we avoid invasive species, but the default should be freedom on your own land. This restores the ability of families to feed themselves and reconnect with the soil instead of depending entirely on corporate supply chains. I also think that the ability to raise rabbits and chickens on quarter acre and larger lots should be the default.

These are not changes to mandate how people live. They simply undo the top-down damage the federal government has done for seventy years. Building resilient, connected communities has been the last priority of corporations and Washington D.C., in fact it seems like destroying them has been the purpose. Young men and women should once again have stable, multigenerational neighborhoods where they can court, marry, raise children, and stand as protectors of something real.

Part III: Regain Our Sovereignty

The sovereignty of America is being betrayed by three main factions: huge corporations, foreign actors, and mass immigration.

The largest corporations are responsible for swaying elections through massive spending, aggressive lobbying, and the regulatory-corporate revolving door. The ability of PACs to influence elections needs to be curbed - not by restricting speech, but by enforcing real transparency. PACs of all types must be fully transparent about who funds them before any ads go live, and all political advertisements should clearly name their funders in plain English. To stop money from being hidden through shell companies, we should require naming all majority shareholders of the PAC, tracing all the way back to the actual human beings who own them. Honest disclosure is essential for voters to make informed decisions. The regulatory-corporate revolving door needs to be criminalized, and congressmen should be banned from trading stocks.

Beyond elections, giant corporations have committed horrifying, large-scale crimes against the American people. The Sackler family and the opioid epidemic, DuPont and the Teflon poisoning in West Virginia, and Johnson & Johnson’s asbestos-tainted baby powder all come to mind. These crimes—whether from gross negligence or deliberate malice—demand real accountability. The human majority shareholders who oversee and profit from the destruction of American lives should personally face jail time. We must strip corporate liability protections in cases of provable negligence that maim, poison, or kill Americans. The owners must be held responsible.

The most obvious foreign actor betraying our sovereignty is the state of Israel. Israel influences our elections through AIPAC and other lobbying groups in clear violation of FARA. Israeli-aligned citizens and organizations must be forced to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act when they participate in our election campaigns. Israel also threatens us with intelligence operations. Mossad agents should be treated like enemy spies. As I have stated earlier, Israel is no longer our ally. We should treat them as a neutral country or even a rival unless they prove otherwise. Fighting their wars has bankrupted us, damaged our moral standing, and destroyed our diplomatic relations in the Middle East. It’s time to cut ties.

Mass immigration has also severely damaged our sovereignty. In many communities across the United States, native-born Americans have been replaced by new arrivals who hold opposing values. While immigrants bring some benefits, there are always tradeoffs. When immigration comes in massive waves without pause, newcomers tend to form closed communities and resist assimilation. Historically, America would have a wave of immigration, close the doors for a generation, and allow assimilation to happen. Since the 1970s, we have had nonstop waves from every corner of the world. There has been no settling period. Even under Republican administrations, we continue pushing to bring in more Indian and Chinese workers and students. This needs to stop.

I propose a ten-year moratorium on legal immigration—net zero immigrants. We can achieve this by raising the standards for permanent residency and work visas. English proficiency, knowledge of American law, and proof of connection with natural-born citizens should be required. I would give current permanent residents a five-year period to study, connect, and pass new residency exams. Those who fail should be deported. Diversity is not an inherent good, it comes with positive and negative trade-offs. We have many benefits and advantages due to legal immigrants, but we also have too many. Going forward, we should allow only a very small stream of newcomers, prioritizing those coming through marriage and close family ties, and from countries that match with our culture better.

America is not just a collection of ideas, an economic zone, or the Constitution. America is also the soil, the water, and the people who live here. We have the sovereign right to decide who comes into our country. For the good of our children and for the future of this nation, it is time to simply say: pause.

Strategy

Many republican officials in the federal government rely on cooperation, sameness, and quiet compromise to move legislation. I see Mike Kennedy as a classic expression of this trend. After two years in office, it is hard to read his voting record and proposed legislation as unique, or particularly conservative. This is the argument: cooperate, keep your head down, vote yes when party leadership tells you to, and in a few more years you can pass some moderate bills of your own. We will help you get re-elected, and maybe someday you can deal with the most important things, if you just stay in office at all costs. 

This strategy has been played out, and it doesn't work. Our way of life is being eroded, our young people are struggling, and the payoff is cheap streaming services and 401ks. The debt clock is running up, the interest is piling, and everyone wants prosperity without adversity. There is no exit strategy that costs nothing. The default throughout American history was struggle, but the postwar prosperity years have left us expecting something for nothing. Since the early 2000s, we have lived off of debt and inflation, the petrodollar, and financial dominance of the world. All three of those strategies are at risk now, and the collapse of even one means going back to harder times. It's time to prepare for harder times. 

This isn’t an inspirational, hopeful message, unless you know how adversity brings us together, strengthens our faith, and builds our resilience. This isn’t your classic campaign literature. I’m not fighting for the “everything good everything nice give everyone money” bill, because that bill has been passed dozens of times and it makes quality of life for Americans worse. 

We need republicans willing to vote No. I plan to use No vote often, on every single bill where republicans work in that the deficit is increased, that huge corporations are prioritized over entrepreneurs, that new immigrants are prioritized over citizens, that communities are eroded, that our rights our trampled, that abortion or genital mutilation be funded, that soldiers are sent to die for israel, and every single time they tell me its for my career or for the party or for the optics I will especially vote No. 

Charlie Kirk was brave. He said what he believed and listened. Charlie Kirk spoke about many of the trends, and policies I have proposed here. He died at my university, a week after I dropped out to begin working on this campaign. His death made me decide to not hide or obscure my arguments, not moderate my conservatism, not excuse our failures as a nation. He, like me, was giving up on helping Israel, and said that the war in Iran would be a disaster. His death was either the first casualty of the war, or it was further proof of the disintegration and violent radicalization of disenfranchised young men. Either way, he lived and died for families, for communities, for our rights, for the young, for America. I hope I have the honor of doing the same.

Final Words on Policy

This is not a comprehensive or perfectly predictive list of my stances on all legislation. I align with the Utah County Republican Party Platform, including the soon-to-be-ratified draft. Above are the priorities I hold that stand out from the crowd of republicans asking for your vote. What sets me apart is my lack of fear, my honesty, and my willingness to fight anyone, including the DC republicans, to improve the lives of Americans. 

In most other ways, I am like the other republicans. I love free enterprise, our God-given rights, and the ability to explore and enrich this land. I like happy families, hearing the music of parties, seeing young people celebrate graduation and succeed. I like to build, to honor the past, and to envision a better future. I hold the same naive optimism that makes Americans so unique and so productive. I have my criticisms for elected officials, but I recognize that many mean well, and truly care about the future of this nation. We just need to do better, as the party of honor, of duty, of tradition, of responsibility. 

Utah First. America Only.

Hardman for Congress.

To find more general stances on different sectors, THIS LINK will take you to the Utah County Republican Party platform.