|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Paul Bean
In the latest episode of “The Vermont Podcast,” I had the opportunity to sit down with Zak Harvey, the Representative for Rutland-3 in the Vermont House, to discuss his political journey, the current state of the Vermont Republican Party, and the upcoming 2026 election. Zak is a sixth-generation Vermonter with a background in financial services, including stints at the New York Stock Exchange and Wall Street.
We discussed Harvey’s transition from Wall Street to State Street, a move driven by his deep connection and love for Vermont. He shared insights into the @VTGOP’s efforts to build momentum in a state where they have often been the underdogs. Harvey’s analysis of the political landscape was both candid and forward-looking, touching on the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the party.
A significant portion of our discussion focused on the 2026 election, with Harvey outlining potential issues that could shape the outcome. He emphasized the importance of addressing Vermont’s specific needs through innovative policies. His commitment to grassroots engagement and the role of young leaders in Vermont’s political future was particularly compelling.
VT House Representative Zak Harvey (Rutland-3)
- Who is Zak Harvey? (02:42)
- Differences amongst VT Republicans (06:59)
- Thoughts on the new Ed Bill (13:00)
- Affordability in Vermont and being on the Judiciary Committee (16:50)
- The biggest challenge for VT Republicans (22:30) Vermont’s shift to the right in 2024 (29:30)
- What’s Vermont’s biggest challenge going forward? (37:09)What does Zak Harvey do for fun? (42:00)
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Video










Excellent interview. The divide in the Republican party may be whether the governor is leading the state in a positive direction or simply on a slower path than Democrats and Progressives to full tyranny. The compromise on the education bill, which centralizes state power, restricts access to private schools, and with no clear cost savings, initiated by the governor, suggests the later. There needs to be a reduction of the tax burden, not simply holding the line.