MTPR is airing interviews with candidates running for federal office in 2026. MTPR's Austin Amestoy speaks with Patrick McCracken, a Libertarian running for Montana’s eastern district U.S. House seat.
Austin Amestoy: Patrick, tell us a little bit about yourself and what makes you the best person for this job.
Patrick McCracken: When I look out at the state and the federal government, I think about my kids and my wife and the rest of the citizens in the state here. I know what Montanans are going through as far as cost of living, cost of health insurance, cost of food, and I'd like to think that we can make a real difference applying a Libertarian framework to those problems in Washington.
Austin Amestoy: Patrick, I'm curious about your background and prior experience and how those things would inform what you'd bring to Congress if you were elected.
Patrick McCracken: Well, my background — I'm 48 years old. I've been in Montana my whole life, fourth generation, I suppose, if we're counting. I went to school in Bozeman after graduating high school in Billings at West. And I became a financial advisor and I did that for 10 years. And then my wife and I left the state for work, for better work opportunities and came back. And we're lucky to have work-from-home jobs. And, you know, most of my career now for, I suppose it's been 20 years or more has been working with Montanans and Americans on their financial lives, trying to orient themselves in a way that gets them to a goal of retirement and a better than average lifestyle for their kids and grandkids.
Austin Amestoy: So you feel that those things are going to make you an effective lawmaker, should you be sent to Congress?
Patrick McCracken: I think the most effective lawmaker at this point is somebody who understands the people who elect them.
Austin Amestoy: Let's talk about some policy issues that I know are top of mind for a lot of Montanans. The U.S. Supreme Court this year overturned the tariffs that had been enacted by President Trump. The court said that he had overstepped into congressional authority in that instance. I'm wondering if you agree with that ruling and then more broadly, how you think the U.S. Should approach foreign trade.
Patrick McCracken: I think that the way that Trump enacted the tariffs was strong-handed and didn't leave a lot of room for our trading partners to adjust in a timely fashion. It certainly appears now as if whether or not we choose to move forward with tariffs, that two things have happened. We've uncovered that once again Congress is unwilling to take on one of the core challenges of legislating and two, that for the most part, the American people have borne the increased cost of goods and services, food, and all imported products. I don't have a great answer for you on the other side of what happens if we disregard the tariffs or go back to the way things were, but Trump may have had the right idea in mind, but the application of which was poor and Congress needs to take up the mantle here and make a decision based on their constituency's demands.
Austin Amestoy: Let's talk about another Trump administration action over the last year. And that was a big push, especially in 2025, to downsize the federal government. That was in particular through the DOGE administration and structure. Are you happy with the results of that effort? And do you think further downsizing is necessary? And if so, where would you like to see that happen?
Patrick McCracken: I am absolutely not happy with the results. I think that dismantling DOGE in so quick a fashion after they uncovered so much fraud and abuse is short-sighted. That sort of forensic accounting into where the American taxpayers' money goes is overdue. I don't think they went far enough. And while they may have cut some things, there's other things that are quite bloated and need cutting. 86,000 new IRS agents, maybe? I guess we'd have to let DOGE operate so we could find more fraud.
Austin Amestoy: I'm curious in your conversations with your potential future constituents, what you've heard is their top priority right now in terms of policy.
Patrick McCracken: Policy or not the top priority for most constituents is cost of living.
Austin Amestoy: What do you see as Congress's role in addressing the cost of living? What should be done right now in this moment?
Patrick McCracken: I believe there are some current bills that are moving through to break up private equity ownership of single family homes. And I would support those. More often than not, in an issue like this though, government can be the problem. And the problem in its most recent form started post-COVID during the $6 trillion bailout. And so we would like to avoid that going forward, printing more money.
