Clark Bossert

Strongly Agree

Life begins at conception.Any society that does not preeminently value human life has no future. At conception, an unborn baby has unique DNA, and the baby will have its own heartbeat as early as 3 weeks. A moral society must provide and care for those among us that are unable to protect and defend themselves. The responsibility to stand in the gap and fight for the constitutional and God-given right to life is chief among our duties as Americans.

Strongly Disagree

Only in a situation like an ectopic pregnancy where the Baby does not have any chance of survival and the life of the mother is jeopardized.

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Disagree

We are already functionally defaulting on our debts through inflation, and the only way to divert our collision course with financial ruin is to drastically reduce government spending and unleash the innovative and productive capacity of Americans through deregulation.

We should have a flat tax. Eliminate death and inheritance taxes along with many others. We need a much more competitive corporate tax rate. Overall the tax burden on Americans should be reduced.

Strongly Agree

Government exists just to preserve your God given rights.

Strongly Disagree

Absolutely not.

The state should stay out of the Church, but I am an advocate for the faith community to be more actively involved in Government.

None. We will always retain our bodily autonomy and right to choose what we put in our bodies. Vaccine mandates are beyond the jurisdiction of what the government is allowed to speak to.

Option B. The United States spends nearly twice as much on healthcare as many other developed nations that have similar outcomes in terms of overall health and life expectancy. Sadly, our healthcare system is still failing millions of Americans in regard to its ability to deliver accessible good quality healthcare at an affordable price. This failure is due to the government’s obstruction of a truly free market economy within the healthcare system and a policy framework that provides for special interests over public health. Currently, health insurance companies play an inappropriately large role in the relationship between patients and doctors. I am in favor of a drastically reduced health insurance industry that primarily provides for catastrophic insurance claims. I am also a proponent of tackling inequality of healthcare access by funding a zero out-of-pocket cost healthcare plan for children until they are 18. This establishing a personal, portable, and transferrable Health Savings Account for each citizen at the time of birth. Fundamentally, I do not believe that anyone is entitled to be given something that requires the labor of someone else, but I do believe that, as a society, we have a moral obligation to provide for those that are unable to provide for themselves such as children and intellectually disabled people. The application of free market principles to our healthcare industry will make healthcare affordable for everyone because competition always drives costs down while driving up the quality of the product or service. It is also important to mandate ubiquitous advertised pricing for all healthcare services because it is impossible to make a good decision for you and your family without good information. When we have a shortage in any other industry, we call it an opportunity, but when it comes to shortages in the healthcare industry, we call it a crisis. It’s time for this to change. We need to fix the incentive structure between providers, administrators, and corporations to where every effort is geared towards improving patients’ health rather than increasing their dependence on the system.

Option C.

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

We spent 20 years replacing the Taliban with.... The Taliban. You will never eradicate the threat as long as the Religion and ideology of Islam has adherents globally. We should work to address the sleeper cells within our borders and fight for strong national defense.

Strongly Agree

My stance on the border and immigration issue is that I believe in national sovereignty and strong borders, and I will only support legal paths to immigration. I believe that every person present in the United States should have a legal right to be here.When we allow a person to enter the country illegally, we condemn them to work for lower wages, and we place them at a much greater risk of being trafficked and exploited.

Strongly Agree

Deserving individuals from every country as we have capacity each year. Credible Asylum seekers. My stance on the border and immigration issue is that I believe in national sovereignty and strong borders, and I will only support legal paths to immigration. Fundamentally, a nation ceases to exist if it can no longer define its borders. I am not a globalist and there is no such thing as global art, global language, or global citizenship for that matter. All people are created equal, but not all forms of government are equal. There are some governments and societies that support freedom and equality more than others. These societies have flourished throughout history because their worldview corresponds more accurately with human nature and human incentive than societies that have adopted repressive authoritarian worldviews and systems of government. Every person that immigrates to the United States should go through the full citizenship classes and processes. Of course, immigrants will retain much of their ethnic and cultural foods, traditions, and practices, which is a part of what makes our country beautiful and diverse, but the education about our nation’s founding and the Naturalization Oath of Allegiance require that the oath-taker embrace a new national identity. This process ensures that the participant desires to become an American and contribute to our country. This approach is in stark contrast to the path of an illegal immigrant whose very first action violates federal immigration law and positions him or her to be the beneficiary of a social system in which they have not contributed to through taxes. My stance on DACA immigrants is that they should not be deported, and they should be offered a path to citizenship. I believe in accountability for actions that people take when they are of an accountable age. Adults that choose to violate our immigration laws and enter the United States illegally should be deported. Children that were brought to the United States, through no action of their own, should be allowed to stay because they should not bear the consequence of an action that was taken on their behalf by an adult. For obvious reasons, our nation cannot physically accommodate every person in the world that would like to come here. This is why immigration policy is crucial, and the debate against the idea of open borders is vital. I believe that every person present in the United States should have a legal right to be here. When we allow a person to enter the country illegally, we condemn them to work for lower wages, and we place them at a much greater risk of being trafficked and exploited. We also allow illegal immigrants crossing our southern border to cut in line ahead of deserving people around the world that do not share a geographic border with the United States. Greater than 50% of the children that are brought across the southern border have no biological relationship to the adults with whom they are traveling. In simple terms, this is large scale, United Sates-government-sponsored sex and labor trafficking. Our current immigrationpolicies are the absolute furthest thing from compassion, and they have resulted in one of the greatest justice issues of our time. I support a strong border and a strong America that protects its citizens.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

CRT is Wicked.

I am Bible believing, born again christian. Here is my Bio. Clark Bossert is a husband, father, community leader, and a constitutional conservative candidate for Nevada’s 3rd congressional district. Raised at China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station in Ridgecrest California, Clark moved to Las Vegas in 2015 to serve a movement that was pioneering transformation in the city’s toughest neighborhoods. Due to the implementation of Marxist anti-American policies by our leaders, what started as a desire to love and serve local communities has become a passion to fight for the rights, freedoms, and futures of Nevadans against the threats of tyranny. As a high schooler, the experiences of working in construction and managing a restaurant during the years immediately following the 2008 financial crisis instilled a deep sense of gratitude for being among the ones that were able to find work during those challenging years. Clark earned an Associate’s degree in Welding in this season and was able to complete his Bachelor’s degree in business through a scholarship opportunity to attend college in Virginia. This formative time in Clark’s early career taught him the value of hard work and the critical need for accessible educational opportunities and paths towards economic mobility for all Americans. During college, Clark felt called to spend his summer breaks investing in some of the most underserved neighborhoods of Las Vegas, so he moved with a group of friends to a Christian missions base on the corner of D Street and Washington. Clark taught various training curricula to 210 members of short-term teams and led over 78 citywide outreach efforts directed at meeting the needs of homeless people, foster parents, and trafficking victims. This work resulted in the restoration and healing of countless lives, families, and futures, but it became apparent at the same time that the cycle of poverty and brokenness in these areas was due in large part to failed public policies that needed to be reformed from the top down. The experiences of serving, loving, and seeking transformation for the city of Las Vegas had a profound impact on Clark’s career goals and vision to see communities revived and institutions reformed. Upon graduation, Clark and his wife Lindsey moved to Las Vegas to continue serving, and they accepted positions as the UNLV Budget Coordinator for Student Affairs and as an ICU Nurse respectively. Clark transitioned in his role at UNLV to become an Engineer for Research Projects and the Science and Engineering Machine Shop Manager where he managed all programmatic and functional aspects of a 2,500 square foot core research facility. Clark developed proprietary products and engineering solutions in use by scores of campus researchers and various private industry partners. He consulted on projects that required machining solutions for research applications in a variety of disciplines from biochemistry to aerospace engineering. This cross disciplinary background and central finance experience has uniquely prepared Clark to lead the policy discussions on our most important issues ranging from fiscal and monetary policy to renewable energy and environmental stewardship. Clark’s rationale for jumping into this race and his sense of urgency for action stem from the facts that the foundations of the country are being eroded, and the threats to the nation at this time are greater than ever before. Clark believes that the fiscal, monetary, and tax policies passed in Washington have absolutely stolen the wealth of the middle class, gutted private business investment, and exchanged Americans’ bright economic future, for a vision of government dependence and scarcity. The foundation of public trust in America’s institutions has been totally lost, and every day there is a new attack on civil liberties, and God given rights. Nevada’s leaders’ lack of integrity, morality, and courage has left the constituents of Congressional District 3 without meaningful representation, and devoid of an opportunity to enact substantive reform. In this hour, Nevada needs principled leaders with vision and conviction. Clark Bossert has been a tireless advocate for Nevada families, the unborn, business owners, and Americans from every walk of life. Clark Bossert’s commitment to “NEVER back down and NEVER sell out” makes him the clear choice for District 3 voters that are looking for a candidate to champion the cause of freedom and prosperity in Washington.

Strongly Disagree

Voter ID is not Racist.

The importance of election integrity and the ability of Americans to feel confident in the outcome of an election cannot be understated in regard to its effect on national cohesion and trust in our democracy. It is an indisputable fact that the 2020 election process was fraught with millions of credible reports of substantial election irregularities and outright fraud in many cases. Joe Biden has attempted to sweep this issue that is plaguing the legitimacy of his administration under the rug, but the proper leadership response to this crisis is to reassure Americans of his victory by welcoming full independent forensic audits in every state. Whether we accomplish a full forensic audit in 2022, 2024, or at any time in the future, it is an imperative matter of principle that we uncover exactly what took place nationwide in the 2020 election. Millions of Americans feel that they were defrauded of their opportunity to participate in our representative democracy. For their sakes, it is vital that we press forward towards confirming the truth or falsehood of what took place in the 2020 election regardless of how inconvenient and unprecedented the implications of the outcome may be.

Strongly Disagree

No I dont believe that it is the threat that the left would like it to be. My Christian faith informs my belief that we are all created in God’s image, and that every tribe, nation, people, and tongue carries a unique and beautiful expression of God’s character and nature. There is no valid biological, moral, or sociological case that can be made for subdivision of humanity along the lines of race. Tragically, the false notion that there are separate races of human beings has been used as the rationale to justify slavery in the United States and motivation to enact policies that perpetuate cycles of poverty and brokenness in minority communities across the nation. Policy reform that empowers underserved community members to fully realize the American Dream for themselves and their families is at the core of my campaign. Many of the institutions in our country benefit from pitting Americans against each other, but the answer to the problem of racial division in our country is radical humility, radical repentance, and radical forgiveness on both sides. We need leadership that is able to elevate this conversation to the national level, and lead the fight against disunity on the basis of skin color.

Strongly Agree

I fully support American energy independence.

Option A. I believe that all human life has dignity, and preserving life is of paramount importance. I am vehemently opposed to population control and depopulation measures, but I do recognize the need for clean energy and environmental stewardship. The media narrative regarding climate change and the required preventative measures has been a sham since the 60s. I do hold the position that our planet has experienced changes in temperature and pollution, but I reject the unscientific sole attribution of these changes to CO2 emissions. Furthermore, the solutions proposed by the left to tackle climate change are even more flawed than their understanding of the problem. For example, after 20 years and billions in clean energy subsidies, wind and solar energy only account for a mere 3% of global power. This is because these technologies have run up against the inherent physical and chemical limitations of what is capable in terms of energy output, efficiency, and storage. A total conversion to these renewable energy sources by 2050 as proposed by the left would require a 2000% increase in mining, and just the disposal of worn-out solar panels will constitute over double the tonnage of all of today's global plastic waste according to the International Renewable Energy Agency. Two of my environmental stewardship proposals are to expand the United States’ nuclear energy production capability and to license clean energy and waste disposal technologies to developing countries. France gets over 70% of their energy from nuclear power, but the US only gets 20% of its power from nuclear. The facts of nuclear energy are that it is safe, clean, cheap, abundant, and it produces zero carbon emissions. Environmentalists that are detractors of nuclear energy are neither serious about the problems we are facing nor sincerely interested in tackling climate change and promoting real solutions. The problem of global pollution needs to be tackled by licensing clean energy and waste disposal technologies to countries like India that will have 1 billion people coming online, increasing consumption, and expanding their environmental footprint in the next ten years. Bangladesh’s ship breaking industry and China’s pollution of our oceans at a rate that is 29.3 times higher than the US are just two examples of issues that need to be addressed through partnerships that transform the responsible industries. For too long, United States energy and climate policies have focused on “solutions” that don’t fix the problems and put American companies and workers last. It’s time to change that.

Very Conservative

I would recommend that you listen to any recorded interview available on youtube or social to verify my willingness to go on the record and state my conservative stances on a variety of issues. More content is coming daily!

No

I will NEVER back down and I will NEVER sell out! I will always fight for freedom and limited role of government that exists to preserve your God given rights. I am not just going after a few single issue voter topics, but I am going after everything. We need revival and reformation in our country like what William Wilberforce accomplished in England. We need masses of individual changed hearts, but we also need the reformation of society from the top down. Its time to restore the foundations and Its time to fight for our future!

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

None. The 2nd shall not be infringed. I fully support Americans’ right to keep and bear arms. The resurgence of tyranny in America has brought the fight against gun control to the forefront. The second amendment protects the rest of our rights, and it is the only true check that we have on a tyrannical government. It must never be forgotten that Communism has killed 100 million people over the last 100 years. Globally, citizens of countries whose governments have even flirted with Communism and Socialism are statistically over 622 times more likely to be killed by their own governments than they are by any act of gun violence. The left has errantly made the argument that guns cause violence, and perpetrators of gun crimes should not be held accountable. The reality is that every person is responsible for his or her actions regardless of the circumstance. It is unjust to blame society or an inanimate object for the actions of an accountable individual. We all want safer communities, but the factual reality is that the left’s argument in favor of gun control is based on fear instead of data. The gun ownership rate does not correlate with the homicide rate, and in most cases the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. According to the CDC, there were roughly 38,000 gun deaths in 2016: 2/3 of them were suicides. There are over 5x more murders by knives than by rifles. The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world, but it is ranked 28th in gun murders. This is a rate of 2.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Handguns are responsible for more than 80% of total mass shootings. Between 1993-2003, gun ownership increased by 56% while gun violence decreased by nearly half. Since 1950, nearly all mass public shootings have occurred in gun free zones. Switzerland has a population of over 8 million people, over 2 million privately owned guns, almost no gun legislation, and it has an overall gun homicide rate of practically zero. Americans use firearms to defend themselves between 500,000 and 2 million times per year. My position is that I will always be an ardent defender of the second amendment, and it is vital, now more than ever, that we hold the line together in the fight against unconstitutional restrictions to the second amendment.

Strongly Disagree