The Ongoing Mission of the Gem State Chronicle

We live in interesting times.

The battle for the soul of Idaho, which intensified during the COVID-19 lockdowns, has reached a fever pitch. All sides point to each other as the reason the Gem State will go blue like Colorado or California. Yesterday’s allies have become today’s enemies, as disagreements over strategy, tactics, and policy positions have turned into name-calling and slander.

We on the right have long debated the meaning of true conservatism. What was once a coalition organized in opposition to FDR’s New Deal in the 1930s, one that was given structure and voice by William F. Buckley and Phyllis Schlafly in the 1960s, has become a sprawling metropolis of competing and even contradictory ideas. Our movement is full of people passionately devoted to doing what each believes is right and opposing what they believe is immoral. The problem is, we all have slightly different ideas about how to define those things.

Is conservatism simply reaction—reflexive opposition to power? Is it a set of political heroes and villains? Is it just bumper sticker slogans and memes to make liberals cry? Is it complaining about the latest progressive outrage? Is it posting Bible verses on Facebook and calling on someone somewhere to do something?

Or is it something more?

I believe our project is greater than whatever current controversy is going viral or winning the next election. Three and a half years ago, in my introductory post on this platform, I wrote that we must have a positive vision for the future:

Rather than simply taking a position against whatever the left is pushing today, a new conservatism must stand for something real, something tangible, something that will allow American families to live and prosper in this new world.

When I started the Gem State Substack, I never imagined it would become what it is today. I simply enjoyed writing, learning, and politics, so I put those things together in a way that might be useful for readers. This platform opened doors I could never have dreamed of. Many people, voters and legislators alike, took interest in what I had to say. My involvement in politics increased to the point where it competed with my day job. When I had the opportunity to work for the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF), it was as if a whole new world had opened up.

When I left IFF, this platform was still here, and I made the choice to become a full-time writer. As an independent author, journalist, analyst—whatever you want to call me—I have the freedom to say what I believe without worrying whether a boss or supervisor will disapprove. People are still free to disagree, of course, and many do. That’s fine.

Yet I believe a lot of the criticism you might have seen lately about me and this platform comes from people who once thought they could control what I say. There’s a very small group of outspoken political activists who, just two years ago, sang my praises but today are engaged in continual slander, seemingly doing their best to discredit my work and drive readers away.

I remember one person who, after I was hired at IFF, said they hoped I would bring a calmer tone to the organization. Ironic.

The thing is, I haven’t changed. I still hold to the same principles I did when I first began writing here. My tone has moderated, and my outlook has become more optimistic, but my goals remain the same. In that same introductory article, published January 7, 2022, I wrote:

Stopping these forces requires more than just token participation in our democracy. We must not only defend what we have but reclaim the occupied territory of our public schools, colleges and universities, and big cities like Boise. All of us must awaken to the danger at hand and focus on fighting back, so that our children and our children’s children will have the opportunity to live in freedom. Ronald Reagan said that every generation must fight to preserve their liberties. For too long we have taken them for granted.

Many in our current leadership do not appreciate the gravity of the situation. The politicians club would rather compromise our liberties than take a stand that might get them disinvited from posh cocktail parties or jeopardize campaign contributions from big business and special interests. Many are simple ignorant of what is happening, too lost to the minutiae of political wheeling and dealing to notice the bigger picture. Some of these leaders might be convincible, but most simply need to retire and allow a new generation of patriots to take the reigns of our government.

I have never wavered in the idea that my task is to:

1. Present a positive vision for the future
2. Elevate the discourse
3. Raise up more engaged citizens of the Republic
4. Help people understand what time it is

I believe the biggest conflict we see within Idaho’s conservative movement today centers on two axes: is versus ought, and policy versus politics.

The first is the difference between description and prescription—talking about the way things are rather than the way we wish they were. Step back and look at the messages coming from conservative media figures and groups—often they start from the premise that things should be different. If only we had more conservatives in the Legislature. If only people voted better. If only everyone agreed with me.

My position is: “Well, they don’t, so what will you do now?”

You cannot base your strategy on a wish that circumstances were different. You can only deal with the circumstances at hand, while working to change unfavorable conditions as much as possible. This is the heart of Otto von Bismarck’s maxim that politics is the art of the possible. It doesn’t mean “give up your principles,” but rather “pursue your principles intelligently.”

It’s important to clearly understand what you want to accomplish in politics, and then lay out a roadmap for getting there. Last November, when the conservative civil war was beginning to flare up, I wrote about how we need more than courage to achieve our goals:

Moral clarity is not enough. Courage is not enough. We need savvy operators who not only have moral clarity, but also the knowledge and skills to turn those moral principles into policy wins. A good representative must know what is right, and they must have the ability to implement what is right in the form of policy. Oftentimes, people mistake disagreements about strategy as disagreements about principles.

The second axis of disagreement is policy vs. politics. Policy is the art of legislating, of governing, of the arduous and tangled process of applying those principles to real life. Politics, on the other hand, is “the game”—the never-ending campaign season in which various figures and organizations jockey for position and try to tear each other down.

For many figures, PACs, and organizations, campaign season is eternal, and even policy is only important insofar as it affects the next election. This is what leads some to push for bills that have zero chance of passage, with the point being to get legislators “on the record” with nay votes that can then be used in campaign ads.

While I agree it’s important to expose a lawmaker’s true positions so their voters can make informed choices, I depart from this strategy when it puts actual policy-making secondary. There were voices during the 2025 session who, I believe, would have preferred forcing a losing vote on a stronger school choice bill than H93 rather than uniting behind the one that had a real chance of passage. If they had their way, then PACs would surely have made some hard-hitting ads, but Idahoans would be without school choice for yet another year.

Campaigns and elections should serve policy, not vice versa. The purpose of supporting conservative candidates is to achieve conservative legislation. Yet many political figures and organizations treat it the opposite way, using the legislative session as fodder for campaign ads. I suspect that some of these groups don’t actually want to succeed, because success undermines their message of doom and gloom. How many political emails or social media ads do you see that try to convince you the world is ending unless you sign their petition or donate right now?

Far too many PACs, influencers, and political figures are addicted to outrage. Why? Because anger gets clicks, donations, and short-term loyalty. They don’t want you to think critically. They don’t want you to step back and assess the long-term strategy. They want you angry, tribal, and reactive. The only winners in this frenzied system are those who profit off of chaos.

Part of this anger-generating machine is a fierce tribalism. We’re told we should evaluate lawmakers on their votes, which is why Wayne Hoffman created the Idaho Freedom Index in the first place. Yet now there are people and organizations who ignore scorecards and even votes themselves, instead labeling certain politicians as irredeemable villains.

The root of this whole conservative civil war was the refusal of a small handful of loud activists to accept the idea of working with Speaker Mike Moyle to pursue conservative policies. Pretty much every attack on me that you’ve seen out there, for example, revolves around that one man. I’m a sellout, they say, for not denouncing him daily. I’m compromised, they say, because I’ve worked with people who work with him. I’m a hypocrite, they say, for not writing hit pieces on those who support him.

This isn’t discourse, it’s Mean Girls politics driven by personal animosity. Too many would rather burn down the entire movement than allow their personal enemies to enjoy even a shred of success.

From Day One, my goal with the Gem State Chronicle has been to better equip you to fight for your principles, not to tell you what to think or who to hate. That means I try to traffic less in red meat and outrage bait in favor of more thoughtful analysis and more tools to help you better engage in the political process.

So what is my vision? Imagine an Idaho where citizens know their legislators by name, show up to hearings, and hold leaders accountable not just in election years, but year-round. Where policy debates happen in the open, rooted in principle and prudence, not just social media firestorms. Imagine an Idaho where truth matters more than outrage.

We arrive at the central truth of any matter by asking questions. One of my favorite questions since childhood has been “Why?” I believe it’s tremendously important to critically examine our own positions, subjecting them to even harsher critiques than we give our opponents. Iron sharpens iron.

To that end, where other conservative platforms might simply assume a premise, I often dig deeper and ask why:

Grocery taxes are immoral.

Why?

Government needs to be smaller.

Why?

We should eliminate property taxes.

Why?

Abortion is wrong.

Why?

Many people, reading these words, might automatically assume that questioning these things means I disagree. That’s not the case at all! I believe it is supremely important to figure out why we believe the things we say we believe. Otherwise, we’ll find ourselves tossed and turned in the treacherous waves of rhetorical discourse. If you hold a position without knowing why, then how can you hope to persuade anyone to join your cause?

Colton Bennett, a candidate for the House up in District 6, had a fantastic answer to the question of abortion on Twitter this week:

For every arbitrary claim there is an arbitrary claim equal and opposite.

To those who say “that baby could be the next Beethoven! Don’t kill it” this is ridicules. That baby could also be the next Stalin.

The reason it’s wrong to kill preborn children has nothing to do with potential consequences (I.e. bad for women, child deserves a chance, etc) and everything to do with the truth that the child is a human being made in the image of God. And it is wrong to kill innocent image bearers.

My point—and the point I believe Bennett and Sen. Brandon Shippy (to whom he was replying) were making—is that it’s not enough to believe something; we must know why we believe it, and understand how that belief rests on natural law and first principles. I want readers of the Gem State Chronicle to head out confidently into the marketplace of ideas, ready to defend their positions and advance our shared movement.

Those who think only in the short term, or whose entire model rests on telling people what to think, find this kind of discourse distasteful. Erstwhile allies who are used to creating strawmen don’t like it when I search for the steelman to debate. I’ve been criticized many times for sharing things from those labeled villains in the political world. I believe some out there are afraid of allowing people to think for themselves, for fear they’ll come to the “wrong” conclusion. I don’t believe we should be afraid of words, even those with which we disagree.

Let me tell you now: I do not fear disagreement. If I present all sides of an issue as comprehensively as I can, without strawmen or manipulative language, and you come away disagreeing with my position, then more power to you. I’d rather we disagree after a deep exploration of the issue than for you to simply agree without giving it any thought. Iron sharpens iron!

I started this platform for a simple reason: Idaho is my home, and it’s worth defending. I wasn’t born here, but most of my children were, and I hope their children will call Idaho home as well. I didn’t come here to change Idaho—I came because Idaho was already a place where my values and principles were cherished. As my friends at Citizens Alliance of Idaho like to say: “Idaho is what America was.”

The Chronicle exists to inform, motivate, and mobilize thoughtful conservatives—not to create rage addicts or cult followers, but engaged citizens of the Republic, people who, in the words of Ayn Rand, have “an upright posture, an intransigent mind, and a step that travels unlimited roads.”

To that end, the Gem State Chronicle provides:

• Unfiltered reporting on state and local issues
• Extensive tools for better understanding and engaging the political process
• Historical context and principled analysis
• A voice rooted in conviction

I won’t insult your intelligence. I won’t ask you to turn your brain off or join a tribe. I’ll ask you to think. I’ll ask you to stand up. And I’ll stand with you.

One of the charges leveled against me and this platform is that I’ve changed; that I’ve somehow abandoned my principles in pursuit of so-called “access politics.” Nothing could be further from the truth. My strategy has evolved as I’ve learned more about the political process. My tone has matured as I’ve found my niche in the discourse. But my principles have not changed.

Consider the grocery tax, which remains a top priority for quite a few outspoken activists. I’ve been accused of selling out or being a RINO because I haven’t joined the crusade. Yet consider that on February 14, 2022—just six weeks after launching this platform, before I ever worked for IFF or had any legislator’s phone number in my Rolodex—I wrote that the grocery tax was a red herring.

I returned to the issue last summer, and—what do you know—my position had not changed. Nevertheless, I recognized that this is a very important issue to a lot of people, so I spent many hours researching the history of the tax and what it would take to eliminate it. My position remains the same as it was three and a half years ago: I don’t think it should be the top priority, but if a large majority of voters want it gone, the Legislature should oblige. The Idaho GOP has resolved to get behind a ballot initiative to eliminate the grocery sales tax which will clearly show, one way or another, what the people of Idaho really want.

My principle is lower taxes. I’m open to conversations about the best policy to achieve that goal. Excommunicating people from the party or the movement over policy differences when they share the same overarching principle is absurd. The eventualy result of endless purity tests is a constituency of one, and that’s not going to win any battles.

That’s just one example. I challenge anyone to find a case where I’ve changed my principles for any reason. On the contrary, I continue to urge activists and legislators alike to clearly lay out their own first principles. That’s why I spend so much time getting to the why of the issues. Yet principles are only the goal; achieving that goal takes hard work. Last summer, I wrote about how putting principles into practice requires strategy, comparing politics to a football game:

Let’s say you own a professional football team. To make it to the Super Bowl, you need to win games, and to win each game, you need to score more points than your opponent. Scoring those points requires gaining yards.

Not every play results in a touchdown or even a first down, but the team must still step up to the line and do its best every time. Sometimes, the right choice is to punt — to give up the chance for short-term gains in order to improve your field position and thereby your long-term chances. Throwing a Hail Mary on every play is not a winning strategy.

Some of the loudest figures and organizations in conservative discourse see any play that’s not a Hail Mary as a failure, or even a betrayal. In the same way that scoring touchdowns requires gaining four yards a play and throwing the long bomb when the time is right, achieving conservative policy goals means slow and steady work moving legislation and discourse in the right direction, then grabbing the big wins when they are within reach.

Yet we are in a much better position than we were 10, 5, or even 2 years ago. Rather than acting like we’re still a persecuted minority, conservatives must take advantage of the fact that we’re in the driver’s seat now.

As Will Chamberlain put it on Twitter yesterday:

There’s some psychological desire for some “dissident right” types to remain dissident even after the MAGA right won power

It’s ok to win and replace the establishment

But remember: many of the organizations that denounce incremental victories don’t seem interested in policy wins anyway. Rather, the policy debates are simply campaign material for the next election.

I want to take a moment to clarify the difference between what I believe are the permanent campaigners—those who only want to make you angry—from the figures and groups actually doing the hard work of advancing conservative policy. For example, during the last session I disagreed with some of IFF’s bill ratings, but I continue to believe they are indispensable in the ongoing fight for freedom and conservative principles in Idaho.

When evaluating a political organization, ask yourself if they’re focused on the next election—or on passing conservative legislation. The former have their uses; obviously, we all want more conservative legislators. However, at some point, we need to score actual policy wins rather than living in a constant state of “wait ‘til next year!”

The nature of political coalitions is to unite around big-picture goals, even when members disagree on specific policies. It’s impossible to build a movement large enough to win elections while expecting everyone to agree on every issue. We won’t align on every policy, and that’s okay. But if we can agree on our foundational principles—liberty, virtue, order, and truth—then we can build effective coalitions, pass good laws, and defend Idaho’s future.

So all that said, what is the purpose of this platform? What are my guiding principles for the Gem State Chronicle? Here are six foundational ideas that guide my work:

Idaho Is Worth Defending

I reject the notion that Idaho is destined to become the next California or Colorado. Our state is unique and precious, and I intend to do everything I can to preserve its character, values, and way of life.

Republican Government Requires Active Citizens

A republic survives only when its citizens care enough to understand it and fight for it. That means voting, volunteering, running for office, and holding public officials accountable, not just complaining from the sidelines.

Virtue Must Come Before Victory

I believe in character: self-restraint, responsibility, and courage. Political success means little if it’s built on the sand of moral compromise. Lasting victories come from standing on principle, even when it costs something.

Conservatism Requires Both Principle and Prudence

I reject the false choice between purity and effectiveness. True statesmen hold fast to their principles while navigating reality with wisdom, learning from history and preserving what is good, even in imperfect systems. As Jack Posobiec said, “If you have power but not principles, you are a tyrant. If you have principles but not power, you are delusional.”

Liberty Must Be Grounded in Order

Freedom without limits devolves into chaos. I believe in ordered liberty: freedom guided by moral law and just governance, not by arbitrary whims or cultural drift.

America and Idaho Are Worth Saving

Idaho is what America was. That’s why I want to keep Idaho Idaho, and help make America great again. I’m not a doomer or defeatist. I believe our state and our country are still worth fighting for, and I believe we can win.

---

Personally and politically, I support nearly everything that both the Idaho Freedom Foundation and Idaho Freedom Caucus laid out in their vision statements prior to the 2025 legislative session. Just over a year ago, I presented what I consider to be my own political principles in an article reminding readers that the purpose of politics is to implement policy:

The purpose of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, and a safe, healthy, and fulfilled society must be founded on the eternal truths of God that built Western Civilization.

What does that mean with regards to policy?

• Protecting Children: Ban abortion as strictly as feasible, protect children from harmful materials, and ensure a functional public school system by allowing money to follow the student.
• Protecting Resources: Ensure equitable access to water and provide cheap, reliable energy, with nuclear as the future. Remove government regulations that make housing and resources expensive, while protecting them for future generations.
• Reducing Taxes and Spending: Minimize government spending, as every dollar spent is taken from taxpayers.
• Enforcing the Border: Use every resource to expel those here illegally and punish businesses that knowingly hire them.
• Eliminating DEI, CRT, and Radical Gender Theory: These programs aim to divide and destroy, and must be removed from the public square.

Look, I’m just a guy with a keyboard. I’m grateful for the support you’ve shown me over the past three and a half years, and I’m thankful for the opportunity to play a role in the movement for liberty and traditional values in Idaho. I know I’m not everybody’s cup of tea, and that’s fine. If you like red meat and ragebait, there are plenty of platforms that will satisfy you. If you care more about political campaigns than policy, you’ve got options.

But I’m thankful for those who appreciate my work of going beyond the headlines. I’ll continue doing my best to equip you with the tools you need to make positive change in Idaho. That doesn’t mean changing our state into something new and different, but rather defending Idaho from the progressive tide that has swept over our nation for the better part of the last century.

You won’t always agree with everything I write, and that’s fine. I’m not building a cult, rather I’m building a platform for citizenship.

I will do my best to:

• Tell the truth
• Treat people fairly and respectfully, even when I disagree
• Challenge your assumptions
• Inspire you to act
• And above all, to help you think clearly in a time of confusion

Back in January 2022, I closed my introductory post with this paragraph:

I intend to use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is happening in Idaho and in our country. I want to help you be informed, to know what is going on, and to understand the historical context. I want to encourage and motivate you to get involved at the local level, to build a movement that is capable of saving our state and our country. I invite you to join me on this journey as we struggle to preserve the Gem State for our own posterity.

Today, I continue that mission, and invite you to partner with me in that endeavor. If you’re tired of the neverending outrage machine, and want to truly work to save our state, then I humbly ask you to join me. Share this platform. Invite your friends. Subscribe for free. Upgrade if you want to support my work.

I can’t outspend the countless platforms that aim to keep you angry, but I can do my best to outwork them while remaining grounded in principle. Let’s take a longer-term view than the next election or the next social media post, and ensure that our children’s children will enjoy the state and the nation that we’ve taken for granted.

Benjamin Franklin said we have a republic, if we can keep it. Theodore Roosevelt said, “The success of republics like yours and like ours means the glory, and our failure the despair, of mankind.” As a citizen of the Republic, and of the great state of Idaho, the future of our society and our civilization is in your hands. I am doing my best to equip you to defend it, and to move forward toward a positive vision of the future.

Let’s be the kind of citizens worthy of the Republic our fathers left us.

Gem State Chronicle is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.