James Clark (Maine)

James Clark (Republican Party) is running for election to the U.S. House to represent Maine's 2nd Congressional District. He declared candidacy for the general election scheduled on November 3, 2026.^[source]

Clark completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2025. Click here to read the survey answers.

Biography

James Clark earned his GED. He earned a graduate degree from the Royal Military College of Science and graduated from the Academy of Health Sciences. His career experience includes working as a businessman.^[1]

Elections

2026

Note: At this time, Ballotpedia is combining all declared candidates for this election into one list under a general election heading. As primary election dates are published, this information will be updated to separate general election candidates from primary candidates as appropriate.

General election

The general election will occur on November 3, 2026.

General election for U.S. House Maine District 2

The following candidates are running in the general election for U.S. House Maine District 2 on November 3, 2026.

		Candidate
		Joe Baldacci (D)
		Matthew Dunlap (D)
		Paige Loud (D)
		Jordan Wood (D)
		James Clark (R)
		Paul LePage (R)

	Incumbents are bolded and underlined.
= candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Withdrawn or disqualified candidates

Jared Golden (D)

Endorsements

Ballotpedia is gathering information about candidate endorsements. To send us an endorsement, click here.

Campaign themes

2026

Ballotpedia survey responses

James Clark completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2025. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Clark's responses.

Expand all | Collapse all

Who are you? Tell us about yourself.

I'm a Christian, husband, father, veteran, humanitarian, and business leader who believes Maine and America deserve better than what Washington has become.

I grew up in poverty and those early hardships shaped my belief that people matter more than politics. I served overseas, worked internationally, and earned post-graduate degrees focused on issues that matter, such as U.S. Homeland Security.

I’ve responded to some of the hardest places on earth after major disasters, not because anyone ordered me to, but because people were hurting and someone had to show up. That experience earned me national recognition, but I’m just someone who strongly believes service should be action, not a slogan.

I’ve run businesses, hired employees, helped others do the same. I’m also a VA-rated disabled veteran who knows firsthand how broken systems fail the people they’re supposed to serve.

I’m a former Democrat running as a conservative Republican because I can't support extreme views (in any party), believe strongly in public safety, personal liberty, fiscal responsibility, and taking care of our seniors, veterans, and working families.

What unites us matters more than what divides us. Above all, I’m running because Maine needs representatives who will listen, tell the truth, and fight for ordinary people—not for party bosses or Washington insiders.

Learn more at voteforclark.com.

Please list below 3 key messages of your campaign. What are the main points you want voters to remember about your goals for your time in office?

I’m not a career politician—I’m a veteran, a small-business owner, and someone who has spent years showing up where people are hurting as a volunteer on humanitarian missions around the world. Mainers deserve a representative who is transparent, accessible, and accountable every single day, not someone who hides behind staff or party talking points. I'll hold regular town halls, keep my schedule public, hire local staff instead of D.C. loyalists, and make myself available to the people I serve. I will always remember who I work for: the people of Maine and our fellow Americans, not lobbyists or political insiders.
Congress is broken because too many politicians stay for decades, live in Washington instead of their constituency, enrich themselves, and forget the people who sent them there. I support term limits, strict ethics rules, and I will not trade stocks while in office. I will serve no more than three terms, refuse any bill I haven’t personally read entirely, push for single issue bills, and work to end insider trading, closed-door dealmaking, and conflicts of interest. Maine families play by the rules every day; it’s time Congress did the same. I’m running to restore integrity, enforce accountability, and rebuild public trust in government. We all deserve better.
The challenges Mainers and our fellow Americans face aren’t partisan—they’re real life. Families are being squeezed by rising costs, housing shortages, workforce gaps, healthcare delays, and aging infrastructure. I'll work with anyone, Republican or Democrat, who is willing to actually get off their ass and deliver real solutions for our communities. I believe in putting people, the American people, before parties and focusing on common-sense policies that strengthen families, protect freedoms, grow opportunities, and support allies without endangering our sons and daughters. Maine needs leadership rooted in service, not ideology. I’m here to fight for the people of Maine, not for Washington or big companies.

What areas of public policy are you personally passionate about?

I’m passionate about public policy that puts people before politics. That means tackling the real pressures families face every day—rising costs, housing shortages, and access to dependable healthcare. It means protecting seniors who rely on earned benefits, strengthening rural communities through better jobs and infrastructure, and ensuring safe towns with accountable government. I care most about policies shaped by real lives, not party agendas: listening first, responding with common sense, and focusing on solutions that strengthen families, communities, and the future of this country.

Who do you look up to? Whose example would you like to follow, and why?

Man, that's a long list. But prob the first person is Jesus, and many of the individuals in the old and new testaments. But the list is long, and includes philosophers, theologians, jurists, and many others. We have so much we can learn from lives lived before us.

What characteristics or principles are most important for an elected official?

I believe the most important qualities in an elected official are integrity, transparency, accountability, and genuine respect for the people they serve. Trust to me is the foundation—without it, nothing in government works. That means telling the truth even when it’s uncomfortable or at personal risk, keeping your word, and never forgetting who you work for. The job belongs to the voters, not to the politician.

Public service also requires humility. Leaders should listen before they legislate, understand the lived experiences of their constituents, and be willing to adjust their views when real evidence or real lives demand it. A representative shouldn’t arrive in Washington with a rigid script. They should bring principles and and an open mind.

I believe conservative principles matter too: limited government, personal responsibility, fiscal discipline, strong national defense, and the protection of constitutional freedoms. But representing a diverse district means respecting different viewpoints, working with anyone (Republican, Democrat, Independent) who is serious about solving real problems that Americans have to deal with every day. You can defend your values while still being a decent human being.

Courage is essential. Washington and big money pressures elected officials to follow party lines or special interests, please lobbyists, and avoid hard votes. A good representative must resist all of that and instead vote based on what helps the people. They must read the bills the vote on, reject shady deals, refuse to trade stocks in office, and operate with the kind of honesty they’d expect from anyone entrusted with public money.

Above all, an elected official MUST remember that real families feel the consequences of every decision made in Congress. It’s not a game. It’s not a stepping-stone. It’s a responsibility to fight for the people who sent you there—fairly, honestly, and with unwavering respect for the trust they placed in you.

What do you believe are the core responsibilities for someone elected to this office?

To me, the core responsibility of a Member of Congress is simple: to faithfully represent the people—not a party, not lobbyists, not a political machine.

James Madison wrote that government must be “dependent on the people alone,” and that mandate still holds. The job begins with listening, understanding, and carrying the concerns of real families into every committee room and every vote.

A representative must protect constitutional freedoms, safeguard taxpayer dollars, and ensure federal power remains limited, transparent, and accountable.

Public office isn't a platform for self-promotion; it's stewardship. Edmund Burke reminded the UK Parliament that “Your representative owes you… his judgment,” meaning leaders must think clearly, act ethically, and vote with courage—even under pressure from their own side.

This includes maintaining national security, a strong economy, and preserving the systems Americans rely on—Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ care, and public safety. These responsibilities require discipline: reading the bills, rejecting waste, and resisting the partisan theatrics that erode public trust. The Founders warned repeatedly that factionalism could consume the nation; the job today includes guarding against exactly that.

A member of Congress must build coalitions, not barricades. You don’t have to surrender your principles to work with others—you have to remember, as Lincoln said, that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” The goal is solutions that make life better for the people back home, not victories in party skirmishes.

I believe office demands moral clarity. Representing a district means fighting for the vulnerable, defending the voiceless, and ensuring that every vote reflects both the will and the well-being of the constituents you serve. Public service is a trust handed temporarily to one person, grounded in the belief that they will honor it. The core responsibility is to prove that trust was not misplaced.

What was your very first job? How long did you have it?

My first job ever, was walking around and asking neighbors if I could do odd jobs for them. I mowed lawns. Pained numbers on curbs. And had a paper route by 12, where I'd be on the corner at 3:30 am folding papers and stuffing them into a bag that hung on my handlebars. I'd then deliver my route until about 6:00, head home, and get ready for school.

What qualities does the U.S. House of Representatives possess that makes it unique as an institution?

The U.S. House of Representatives is unique because it's the institution closest to the people—by design. The Founders built it as the chamber that reflects the pulse, pressures, and priorities of everyday Americans. Unlike the Senate, which Washington called the “cooling saucer,” the House is meant to be the nation’s immediate heartbeat. Frequent elections, smaller districts, and direct accountability ensure Representatives cannot hide from their constituents. They can feel the consequences of votes quickly, because you live with supporters.

The House also holds the power of the purse, the single most important check on government. Madison wrote in Federalist 58 that giving spending authority to the House ensured that “immediate representatives of the people” controlled taxation and funding—not distant elites. That responsibility is both a privilege and a safeguard; it requires discipline, transparency, and moral courage in an era where Washington spends money like it grows on trees.

Another unique quality is the diversity of voices. The House brings together rural districts, inner cities, tribal lands, fishing communities, agricultural regions, military bases—each with its own character and needs. That mix isn’t a flaw of the system; it is THE system. It forces representatives to learn from one another, build coalitions, and recognize that national policy must work for more than one type of American.

The House is the chamber where ordinary citizens have historically risen to leadership. Calvin Coolidge said, “The people cannot look to legislation for success, but they can look to legislators for integrity.” The House should embody that ideal because its members are meant to be public servants first, partisans second.

The House is unique because it's the most direct expression of the people’s voice, in theory, and the steward of the public treasury, the institution where broad American diversity must be woven into workable policy. So I hope.

Do you believe that it's beneficial for representatives to have previous experience in government or politics?

Experience can help, but it isn’t the gold standard. What matters most is judgment, character, courage, and a willingness to listen. I’ve met plenty of “experienced” politicians who stopped learning years ago, and plenty of ordinary citizens who understand their communities far better than any committee chair in D.C. Experience in real life—running businesses, raising families, serving in uniform, showing up when people are hurting—is often far more valuable than experience climbing political ladders. The Founders didn’t envision a professional political class; they expected farmers, shop owners, tradesmen, veterans, and community leaders to step in, serve their neighbors, and go home. That’s the spirit we need to recover. Experience matters only if it’s tethered to humility and a reality-based understanding of how policy hits the ground. If it isn’t, it’s just resume padding.

What do you perceive to be the United States’ greatest challenges as a nation over the next decade?

The greatest challenges America will face over the next decade are not only geopolitical or economic—they're moral, cultural, and structural. The way Americans treat our fellow Americans, is one of our greatest challenges.

Abraham Lincoln warned, “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.” Our division, distrust, and political hostility pose a greater threat than any foreign adversary. A nation cannot stand strong abroad if it is fractured at home.

Economically, we face rising debt, aging infrastructure, a shrinking workforce, and industries struggling to compete globally. James Madison said a republic must avoid “the accumulation of debt,” yet Washington continues spending as if limits don’t exist. That path is unsustainable, especially as China expands its economic and military reach.

National security challenges are increasing—trafficking, cyberattacks, cartels, and hostile foreign powers exploiting our vulnerabilities. George Washington reminded us that “to be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace,” and preparedness includes border security, energy independence, strong alliances, and modernized defense.

But perhaps the greatest long-term challenge is the erosion of shared purpose. Tocqueville warned that democracies fail when citizens retreat into isolation and lose their sense of mutual responsibility. We see this today in the breakdown of civic trust, institutional credibility, and the belief that America can still rise to great challenges.

Our strength has always come from ordinary Americans—families, workers, small businesses, veterans, and communities who refuse to quit. If we restore trust, demand accountability, rebuild our economy, secure our borders, and rediscover the common good, the next decade can be one of renewal, not decline. We have the tools; the question is whether we have the leadership and unity to use them. That's why I'm running.

Do you believe that two years is the right term length for representatives?

Two years is short, but it forces accountability. Or, at least that was the design. In theory, you can't hide in a two-year cycle; you’ve got to stay rooted in your district and answer for your choices. The Founders designed the House to be close to the people—always listening, always responsive. But, that has become a bit more of the past than our current situation. The downside today is constant campaigning and raising funds, which can absolutely distracts from governing and pushes politicians toward short-term thinking and the next election. But the real problem isn’t the length of the term; it’s the lack of term limits and control on who can fund campaigns. If representatives knew they had a fixed window to serve, two years wouldn’t feel like a treadmill. It’d feel like a mission. Presidents know the second term is where they cement legacy. For Reps, two years works—but only when paired with real term limits that keep the House a citizens’ assembly, not a retirement plan for lifelong politicians who spend 38 years in office making millions off the backs of every day Americans.

What are your thoughts on term limits?

I support term limits—firmly and without qualification. The Founders never intended Congress to become a lifetime profession. Public service was meant to be temporary, accountable, and grounded in humility. George Mason warned that without rotation in office, representatives would “become the masters instead of the servants of the people,” and that is exactly what we see today.

Too many members of Congress stay for decades, accumulate power, build political machines, trade stocks, and grow wealthy while the people they represent struggle. That is not public service; that is self-preservation. Term limits restore what the system has lost: honesty, urgency, and alignment with the real world. When you know your time is limited, you stay connected to the people, not the lobbyists. You focus on outcomes, not reelection.

I believe that six years in the House—three terms—is long enough for anyone to serve effectively. Long enough to learn the job, build coalitions, and deliver results; short enough to prevent entrenchment and corruption. Career politicians fear turnover because it threatens their influence, but healthy democracies depend on renewal. Fresh leaders bring new ideas, lived experience, and real-world perspective that Washington desperately lacks.

Term limits won’t fix every problem, but they will break the cycle in which power accumulates, accountability fades, and insider interests dominate public policy. We need a Congress that looks like America, not a ruling class insulated from it. Term limits help restore that balance.

Ultimately, elected office belongs to the people—not to those who occupy the seats. Rotation in leadership keeps representatives honest, grounded, and humble. That’s why I’ve pledged to serve no more than three terms myself. If I can’t deliver meaningful results in that time, I don’t deserve to stay.

Is there a particular representative, past or present, whom you want to model yourself after?

I don’t want to copy anyone, but I respect leaders who put conviction before comfort. I admire people like Teddy Roosevelt, who believed public office demanded "action, and not mere criticism." I respect moderates like Margaret Chase Smith, who broke with her own party to call out McCarthyism because she refused to trade integrity for applause. And I admire veterans in Congress—past and present—who know what service really means. I especially respect men and women who kept their promises to the people who elected them. I’m not looking to imitate personalities; I’m looking to emulate virtues: courage, humility, honesty, and the stubborn belief that public office is about service, not status. If I can live up to those traits, I’ll have honored the people who sent me there, and all of the Americans who gave their lives so we can have the freedoms and opportunities that America affords us today.

Both sitting representatives and candidates for office hear many personal stories from the residents of their district. Is there a story that you’ve heard that you found particularly touching, memorable, or impactful?

I’ve heard stories that shook me actually. There's a story of a man in his seventies who froze to death during a winter storm because they couldn’t afford heating oil, and tried to get by with a small generator. A lobsterman said he was skipping boat repairs because diesel and bait prices were eating him alive. The cost of fuel in Downeast Maine is double what you pay in places like Oklahoma. A young mother told me she drives an hour each way for groceries because everything closer has shut down. A veteran said he’d been waiting months for PTSD treatment and was starting to lose hope. A high school kid who just turned 18 told me he wants to stay in Maine but doesn’t see any jobs that would let him build a future here. None of them were asking for pity. None were delivering talking points. They were describing what it feels like to live in a place where the margin for error is thin, and bad policy hits hard. These stories aren’t abstractions—they’re the cost of Washington forgetting who it works for. I started my campaign by listening to normal people like me, and I will continue to do that if I'm elected. They’re the stories I’ll carry with me to Washington to motivate me.

Do you believe that compromise is necessary or desirable for policymaking?

Compromise is not only necessary in policymaking, It's the foundation of how our republic was built. The Constitution itself is a compromise, forged by people who disagreed deeply yet understood that the nation mattered more than their egos. As Ronald Reagan famously said, “If you can get 80 percent of what you want, take it and fight for the other 20 another day.”

Compromise Doesn't mean surrendering your principles. It means holding firm to your convictions while recognizing that 330 million Americans don't think with one mind. James Madison warned that in a free society, “a degree of moderation” is essential, because without it, factions harden and government ceases to function. Today, we see the consequences of leaders who treat politics like warfare rather than public service. That pisses me off. And it should you too.

I believe in conviction with humility: the courage to stand up for what you believe and the wisdom to listen when others may be right. Most people I talk to—Republicans, Democrats, and independents—all want the same basic things: safe communities, fair wages, affordable living, secure borders, and a government that works. I've seen that everywhere, not just here in the US but in every country I've been to. These aren’t partisan ideals; they’re rational human ideals.

In Congress, compromise should be how you solve real problems. How you protect Social Security, support veterans, rebuild infrastructure, lower costs, and strengthen national security. Refusing to compromise isn’t strength—it’s paralysis. It's moronic. Our duty should be to deliver results, not headlines.

I will fight for American values, negotiate in good faith, and never forget who I work for. Good policy comes from listening, understanding, and building coalitions—not from shouting matches to get headlines and clicks. Lincoln warned, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” Compromise is how we hold the house and everything else together.

The Constitution says that all bills for raising revenue must originate in the House. What role would this power play in your priorities if elected?

“Power of the purse” isn’t symbolic—it’s the core check on government. If elected, I’d treat it as a sacred trust. Too many representatives let agencies write their own budgets, run their own empires, and balloon spending without restraint. That’s not oversight—that’s abdication. I’d use this power to restore fiscal discipline, rein in waste, and make sure federal dollars go where they actually help people, not where lobbyists point. Every dollar Congress spends comes from a family, a worker, or a business that earned it. My priority would be simple: fund what strengthens the country, cut what doesn’t, and force Washington to live within limits like every household in America.

How should the U.S. House use its investigative powers?

Investigations shouldn’t be political theatre—they should be tools for truth. I graduated from a police academy, have an undergraduate degree in Law Enforcement, and have worked high stakes investigations that impact real people. Congress should investigate corruption, waste, abuse, and threats to national security wherever they appear. Period. Full stop. No matter who is in power. But it shouldn’t use subpoenas as TV props or as revenge campaigns. Madison warned that power must be checked “because men are not angels.” That means investigations must be serious, fact-driven, and aimed at accountability. Whether it’s government agencies abusing authority, corporations exploiting Americans, or foreign adversaries influencing our systems, the House must follow the facts, not the cameras. If an investigation doesn’t produce reforms, policy changes, or accountability, then it wasn’t oversight—it was performance. Americans deserve better than that.

What role should the United States government have in the development or use of artificial intelligence?

AI is powerful. It's so powerful in fact, that ignoring it would be irresponsible. Part of my doctoral research centers around AI and how criminals, state actors, and terrorists use for everything from social engineering to recruitment to recruiting and propagandizing. Government shouldn’t smother innovation ever, but it should set guardrails that protect Americans and the world. After all, much of the technology used globally comes right from where I grew up in California, and we have to take responsibility for that. I support policies that ensure AI is transparent, traceable, and accountable, especially in national security, healthcare, education, and elections. AI must never replace human judgment where life, liberty, and rights are at stake. This includes during times of war. I also believe AI should never become a surveillance tool of the state. We're already seeing mistakes that cost lives, and that can't continue to happen. We need clear standards for data privacy, auditing, cybersecurity, and responsible use in government agencies. America should lead the world in ethical AI development, not by fearmongering, but by setting a model that encourages innovation while protecting freedom.

What legislation would you enact related to election administration in the United States?

Elections should be simple, secure, and trusted—period. I say that not as a someone running for office, but as someone who has actually tested these systems working professionally in the space. Years ago after seeing the hacked at DEFCON and Black Hat, I legally purchased a decommissioned voting machine off eBay, and what we found was alarming: unencrypted voter information still stored on the device, and communication hardware that had never been fully disabled. It wasn’t some Hollywood hacking stunt. It was a real demonstration of how gaps in oversight, sloppy decommissioning, and outdated security standards can undermine public confidence. That experience convinced me that election integrity isn’t something we assume, it’s something must verify and that may require robust legislation and oversight.

I’d support legislation that strengthens voter ID nationwide, maintains paper ballots as the gold-standard record, and requires routine, transparent audits that every citizen can understand. As someone who has spent years working in high-level security arenas, I believe voting machines should be treated the same way we treat critical infrastructure systems: mandatory source-code audits, penetration testing, strict chain-of-custody rules, and federal certification that actually means something, not a rubber stamp. States should also be required to maintain clean, accurate voter rolls, because outdated rolls hurt public trust and create unnecessary vulnerabilities.

At the same time, I believe access matters. Rural states like Maine face real challenges—long distances, harsh weather, unreliable transportation. I’d support expanded early voting windows, secure ballot tracking, and clear standards for mail-in ballots so voters don’t feel like the rules are changing each election cycle. We known when elections are, and almost everything we do requires and ID. So, it's not remotely the "big bad" issues people pretend it is. Security and access are not opposites; we can—and must—do both.

I also want criminal penalties for tampering, negligent handling of machines, or intentional violation of election procedures. Even if that means holding our elected officials personally responsible. Voters deserve elections where the rules are clear, the process is transparent, and the results are trusted across party lines. Election integrity is critical. It's not a party thing. It is necessary for our Republic. I've worked in countries where it's a joke; we can't let that happen here. Without election integrity, every other debate becomes meaningless. My goal is simple: make it easy to vote, hard to cheat, and impossible to doubt the results.

Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.

Campaign finance summary

Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.

James Clark campaign contribution history
Year	Office	Status	Contributions	Expenditures
2026*	U.S. House Maine District 2	Candidacy Declared general	$50	N/A**
Grand total			$50	N/A**
Sources: OpenSecrets, Federal Elections Commission *This product uses the openFEC API but is not endorsed or certified by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
* Data from this year may not be complete
** Data on expenditures is not available for this election cycle
Note: Totals above reflect only available data.

External links

Search Google News for this topic

Candidate

U.S. House Maine District 2

Personal

Footnotes

↑ Information submitted to Ballotpedia through the Candidate Connection survey on November 13, 2025

[show]

Maine's current delegation to the United States Congress

Senators

Susan Collins (R)

Angus King (I)

Representatives

District 1

Chellie Pingree (D)

District 2

Jared Golden (D)

Democratic Party (2)

Republican Party (1)

Independent (1)

[1] Information submitted to Ballotpedia through the Candidate Connection survey on November 13, 2025

[1]

	v • e State of Maine Augusta (capital)
Elections	What's on my ballot? \| Elections in 2026 \| How to vote \| How to run for office \| Ballot measures
Government	Who represents me? \| U.S. President \| U.S. Congress \| Federal courts \| State executives \| State legislature \| State and local courts \| Counties \| Cities \| School districts \| Public policy

James Clark (Maine)

Contents

Biography

Elections

2026

General election

General election for U.S. House Maine District 2

Withdrawn or disqualified candidates

Endorsements

Campaign themes

2026

Ballotpedia survey responses

Campaign finance summary

See also

External links

Footnotes

Information about voting

2026 Elections

2025 Elections

Election analysis

Trending

Public Policy

Information for candidates

Get Engaged

Services

Additional analysis

SITE NAVIGATION