The First 100 Days of a Kyle Austin Presidency: What the Record Suggests

Photo: David Wilson, via Wikimedia Commons

01 The record and the scenario

Kyle Austin is the Libertarian Party's 2026 nominee for Montana's open U.S. Senate seat, having won the June 2 primary with 53.3 percent (1,819 votes) over Tom Jandron, per the Montana Free Press election guide. He faces Republican Kurt Alme, Democrat Alani Bankhead and independent Seth Bodnar in November — and, as KTVH reported, he has pushed back against the idea that the race is three-way, noting he has received the least attention of the four candidates from opponents and outside groups.

He is 43, a fourth-generation Montanan born and raised on the Hi-Line, and a graduate of Havre High School (2001). He grew up on his grandfather's farm, which he still owns and farms — wheat, barley and canola on family land west of Havre — and worked for other local agricultural producers. He attended the University of Montana School of Pharmacy from 2003, graduating in 2008 with a Doctor of Pharmacy, returned to Havre to provide health care to rural Montana, and in 2020 opened Pharm406, an independent pharmacy based in Billings with an office in Butte serving customers across the state, per the Libertarian Party's candidate page. His political biography is unusually specific for a first-time federal candidate: he won the highest award at Boys State, initiated changes in Montana's vehicle weight regulations that benefited agricultural communities, and fought the public initiative I-141, which he calls corrupt, for hurting the ag industry.

He is also a two-time former Republican: he ran for Montana's eastern U.S. House seat in 2022 and 2024, races he now describes as a “dress rehearsal,” and switched to the Libertarian Party because he believes both major parties have become dysfunctional. He told NBC Montana he still holds conservative views but sees Libertarian politics as a better fit for the moment, and his campaign message is “stop voting for the party and vote for the person.” His top priority, per Montana Public Radio, is blunt: “Our government has gotten so big and it has gotten so costly to the Montana families... The number-one priority is: we need to DOGE. I mean, we need to DOGE the government on a federal level and even on the state level; to cut government spending so we can lower taxes and create a... less costly cost of living.”

This article does not predict that Kyle Austin will become president. It examines how the individual's documented positions and record could translate into executive priorities if placed in presidential office.

Analysis — not prediction. N43 and Hermes AI grounds every scenario in the documented record as of September 21, 2026; where evidence is incomplete we say so.

02 Day One: what a president could do alone

Austin's entire candidacy rests on a single diagnosis — big, costly government — and one credential: he has fought regulators from the small-business side and won attention doing it. What a president controls on Day One is directives, personnel, enforcement priorities and clemency; the Austin record maps onto that toolkit as follows.

Likely Day-One Actions (unilateral)

• A government-wide regulatory review. His documented fight — challenging the Montana Board of Pharmacy over “regulatory overreach” to defend small businesses and consumer access rights — scales directly: a Day One executive order launching a regulation-by-regulation review across agencies, with small-business impact as the stated test, and a freeze on new rules pending the audit.
• Spending and hiring directives. The “DOGE the government” thesis translates first as what a president can do alone: federal hiring freezes, spending-review commissions, and a public cost audit of programs — the executive half of a project whose substance is congressional.
• Health-care enforcement priorities. A pharmacist who “understands the healthcare issues and corruption related to the healthcare industry” and wants fewer middlemen could direct FDA and FTC enforcement attention at pharmacy benefit managers, drug pricing and consumer access barriers within existing law.
• Rural health and agriculture directives. His biography — rural pharmacy, family farming, the vehicle-weight fight — points to USDA rural-health and agricultural directives prioritizing small producers and rural access within existing authority.

Actions the Candidate Could Not Do Alone

• The DOGE program itself — cutting government spending to lower taxes is the core promise, and spending is appropriations: Congress would have to legislate the cuts and the tax reductions.
• Healthcare 2.0 — his health-care reform label implies statutory restructuring of the middleman economy (PBM reform, price transparency, access rules); agencies can enforce, but the industry's structure is law.
• Agriculture program overhaul — farm bills, subsidies and crop insurance are acts of Congress on five-year cycles.
• Vehicle weight and state pharmacy regulations — the regulations he has actually fought are state rules, outside presidential reach entirely.
• Balancing the budget as a promise — revenue law belongs to the House and Senate.

03 Days 2-30: reorienting the executive branch

An Austin administration's theory of the bureaucracy would come from the pharmacist's side of the counter: regulation as a cost that gets passed to the consumer, and regulators as an interest group of their own. His February 28, 2026 appearance at the Montana Department of Labor Board of Pharmacy — challenging overreach, defending small businesses and consumer access — is the template; the federal version starts with HHS, FDA and the small-business-facing agencies.

• HHS, FDA and FTC. Enforcement-priority memos on PBM practices, drug pricing and consumer access barriers; a review of rules that burden independent pharmacies and rural providers — all within existing authority.
• OMB and the spending apparatus. The DOGE thesis begins as directives — hiring controls, program cost audits, a public spending dashboard — while the substance waits on Congress.
• USDA and agricultural agencies. A Hi-Line farmer who fought the vehicle-weight rules and I-141 would likely direct early attention to agricultural regulations that disadvantage small producers, within existing rules.
• Small-business-facing regulators generally. The SBA and independent-agencies review is implied by his record, not published as a federal program.

His stated personnel instinct is anti-establishment in a specific way: he left a major party because “the fighting in Washington has turned voters off” and wants “business instead of political theater” — suggesting appointees chosen for operational credentials (owners, operators, practitioners) over campaign pedigree. There is not enough public evidence to determine Austin's approach to the Department of Defense, the State Department, the intelligence community or the Department of Education; this analysis flags the gaps rather than filling them with the Libertarian Party's national platform, which is the party's document, not automatically his position.

04 Days 30-60: the first legislative package

Austin has not published federal bill text; what he has published is a priority stack — spending, taxes, health care, agriculture, gun rights — and the legislative package follows that stack, labeled by how much evidence the record actually supports.

High evidence

• A spending-cut and tax-reduction act. “We need to DOGE the government on a federal level... to cut government spending so we can lower taxes” is his self-declared number-one priority, repeated across interviews; the bill is appropriations and revenue law, and it would arrive with an executive-branch cost audit already in hand.
• A health-care middleman act. “Healthcare 2.0” — from a pharmacist who cites “corruption related to the healthcare industry” and frames his Senate run around health-care reform — implies PBM reform, price transparency and consumer-access protections; the label is published, the text is not, and the evidence is the candidate's professional record.

Moderate evidence

• A small-business regulatory relief act. His Board of Pharmacy fight and small-business ownership imply a federal review-and-relief bill for independent operators; consistent with the record, not yet published as policy.
• An agricultural producers act. His documented advocacy — the vehicle-weight changes, the I-141 fight, the family farm — implies a bill prioritizing small producers in farm-program redesign; the next farm bill would be the vehicle.

Low evidence: an Austin immigration bill, an Austin defense bill, an Austin education bill — he has not detailed federal positions on any of these, and no such items are inferred here. His Second Amendment position (“unrestricted access to bear arms” for every American) is a stated principle, but he has not proposed federal legislation on it.

05 Days 60-100: where governing meets reality

The structural problem an Austin presidency would hit on Day 60 is the one his own campaign accidentally demonstrates: the DOGE thesis is a theory of Congress. A president can freeze hiring, audit costs, and put every agency on notice, but the spending that makes government big is appropriated law — and the tax cuts that would follow the cuts are revenue law. The most a first 100 days can deliver is the audit and the theater of restraint; the substance is a budget process that takes years and majorities.

Health care is the more interesting case, because part of it is genuinely executive. PBM and pricing enforcement, FDA access priorities and rural-provider directives can move in weeks; the structural middleman reforms — the ones a pharmacist-president would actually want — are statutes with a concentrated, well-funded industry on the other side. The same applies to agricultural regulation: rule-level relief can be administrative, farm-program redesign is a five-year congressional cycle.

What is genuinely fast: the regulatory review, enforcement-priority memos, hiring controls and the public cost audit. What is years-long: every appropriations item, every tax change, every statutory restructuring of the health-care industry. A president elected on “stop voting for the party” would also discover that a president with no party has no whip operation — the cross-party appeal that powers his campaign is a coalition liability in a chamber organized by party. An Austin first 100 days would be a cost audit and an enforcement turn, in front of a Congress that owns the agenda he is best known for.

06 The policy record in detail

Health Care

His most substantive area, and the one he has lived: a pharmacist and pharmacy owner (Pharm406, Billings) who “understands the healthcare issues and corruption related to the healthcare industry,” campaigns on “Healthcare 2.0,” and has fought the Montana Board of Pharmacy over regulatory overreach to defend small businesses and consumer access rights. He frames his Senate run as a chance to bring health-care reform to Washington with “fewer middlemen and more common sense.” No bill text is published — the professional record is the evidence.

Fiscal Policy and Government Size

His top priority: small government. “Our government has gotten so big and it has gotten so costly to the Montana families... our taxes are out of control. Our cost of living is out of control... we need to DOGE the government on a federal level and even on the state level; to cut government spending so we can lower taxes.” He ties the size of government directly to cost-of-living pressure on families.

Regulation and Small Business

A small-business owner running against regulatory burden: the February 28, 2026 Board of Pharmacy appearance to “challenge regulatory overreach and defend small businesses and consumer access rights” is the documented action; “honest government” and anti-corruption framing run through his campaign materials.

Agriculture and Rural Communities

Born and raised on the Hi-Line, owner of his grandfather's farm (wheat, barley, canola west of Havre), winner of Boys State's highest award, initiator of vehicle-weight regulation changes that benefited agricultural communities, and an opponent of the public initiative I-141, which he calls corrupt, for hurting the ag industry. He “understands the stress, the challenges, and the problems our American farmers and ranchers face” — biography as policy, with program detail unpublished.

Second Amendment

A gun owner and hunter who “understands the importance of gun rights in America” and believes “every American should [have] un-restricted access to bear arms,” per his campaign platform — a stated principle without proposed legislation.

Governing Style and Political Reform

Anti-party, person-over-party: a former Republican (2022 and 2024 U.S. House runs he calls a dress rehearsal) who switched parties over dysfunction in both majors, still holds conservative views, urges voters to judge “a candidate's background and what they can offer, not just the label next to their name,” and has issued an open public debate invitation to every federal candidate in the race.

There is not enough public evidence to determine Austin's positions on foreign policy and defense, immigration, abortion, education, criminal justice, surveillance or environmental policy. His rural-health-care concern is documented; a federal rural-health program is not.

07 What could not happen alone — and what could

What President Austin Could Not Do Alone

• Cut government spending at scale or lower taxes — appropriations and revenue law belong to Congress; the DOGE program is a legislative project.
• Restructure the health-care middleman economy — PBM and pricing reform is statute; agencies can enforce, Congress rewrites.
• Redesign agricultural programs — the farm bill is a five-year congressional cycle.
• Guarantee “unrestricted access to bear arms” — existing federal firearms law would need repeal or replacement by Congress.
• Reform state regulatory regimes — pharmacy boards and vehicle-weight rules are state law, the terrain he has actually fought on.
• Eliminate “political theater” or national party dysfunction — how Congress organizes itself is Congress's business.
• Fix the national debt without a budget — Article I again.
• Deliver his cost-of-living promise directly — most of its levers are fiscal, monetary and statutory.

What Could Change Within 100 Days

• A government-wide regulatory review with a small-business impact test, and a freeze on new major rules pending audit.
• FDA and FTC enforcement-priority memos on PBM practices, drug pricing and consumer access barriers.
• Federal hiring controls, a public program-cost audit and a spending dashboard — the executive half of DOGE.
• USDA directives prioritizing rural health access and small agricultural producers within existing programs.
• A bully-pulpit cost-of-living campaign tying federal spending to family budgets — the argument he already makes, from a bigger podium.

Potential Coalition Partners

The spending-audit agenda has a natural majority in the fiscal-hawk wings of both parties — the DOGE framing itself borrowed a Republican administration's label, and program-evaluation instincts draw Senate support across the aisle. PBM and drug-pricing reform is one of the few genuinely bipartisan health-care causes, with pharmacists' groups, rural providers and consumer advocates aligned. Small-business regulatory relief pairs with Main Street Republicans and independent-business Democrats. His person-over-party message gives him transactional reach with both caucuses — and his conservative instincts, which he says he still holds, make the Republican side the path of least resistance.

Areas of Likely Conflict

Appropriators of both parties on program cuts — every cut has a constituency. The health-care industry's middleman layer, which is well funded and well defended. Agricultural-subsidency interests if small-producer priority means small-producer preference. And his own party's purists: a nominee who says he still holds conservative views, ran twice as a Republican, and dismissed other Libertarians as not “serious about trying to win elections” during the primary has already documented friction with the Libertarian base — friction his general-election outreach to conservative voters would deepen.

08 The 100-day scorecard and what the record tells us

The scorecard grades the documented record, and Austin's is a practitioner's record: the strongest evidence sits exactly where his professional life sits — health care, small-business regulation and the size of government — and thins beyond it into the traditional federal agenda, which this analysis leaves undetermined.

The clearest priority would be the one he names as number one: cut federal spending to lower taxes and cost of living. The structural finding is that his signature agenda is the least presidential item on his list — a president Austin could audit, freeze and publicize, but the cuts and the tax reductions are Congress's to legislate, and a candidate with no party behind him would be asking a party-run Congress to do it.

What moves fast is the practitioner's half: the regulatory review, the enforcement turn at FDA and FTC, rural-health and agricultural directives. These are executable because they run on existing authority and existing law — the same terrain, scaled up, where he has already operated: one pharmacy, one board, one rule at a time.

Where the record is thin is the honest limit of the scenario: on defense, foreign policy, immigration and the rest of the traditional presidency, there is no documented position, and the difference between Austin and both major-party candidates is not a policy list but a theory — that government's cost is the central problem, and that the people who have paid it (a pharmacist, a farmer, an owner) are the ones who should be running it.

The honest conclusion of the record: the first 100 days of an Austin presidency would be a cost audit, a regulatory review and a health-care enforcement turn — the pharmacist's agenda applied to the executive branch — with the DOGE program, the tax cuts and the health-care restructuring queued behind a Congress that owns every expensive and every inexpensive item on his list.