U.S. House District 7
Kim Hardy, Democratic incumbent
Career: Associate professor of social work, former school social worker
Education: Bachelors of Social Work and PhD in Social Work, Morgan State University; Master of Social Work, Ohio State University
Q: What qualifies you to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives?
A: I am a mom, social worker, and educator who has lived in the current District 7 for over a decade. Social workers are professional problem solvers, trained to connect people with the resources and opportunities they need to be successful. I now teach these same skills to university students here in our district.
As part of my community involvement, I conducted a 30-county listening tour of Eastern North Carolina. Meeting people across our district and how much we all need a representative who shows up and stays engaged with our communities’ needs is what convinced me to run. In the summers of 2025 and 2026 I did “eight county in eight day” listening sessions, something I will continue to do if elected.
Q. Would you vote to increase IDEA funding to schools? Historically, Congress has only been funding the program at 13% when it’s supposed to be 40%.
A: Our public schools play a vital, important role in making sure every child receives a free education. There isn’t an exception or escape clause when it comes to children with disabilities—nor should there be. Yes, I would absolutely vote to increase IDEA funding to our schools.
I will add: the nonpartisan websiteLostFunds.org has identified over $7 billion in federal funding that the Trump administration and Mr. Rouzer have prevented from coming to North Carolina. Included in these cuts? Over $5 million that was going to help mothers and their babies live through pregnancy and child birth.
Q: Would you work to pass legislation on expanding or limiting money spent on political campaigns?
A: Just 20 people—including Elon Musk—have already spent a combined $1.2 billion on the upcoming election. In the past, Mr. Rouzer has had to explain the timing of meetings he’s had with Chemours and checks he’s taken from Dupont’s PAC.
This might be old fashioned of me, but I believe that members of Congress should fight for the people of their district, not the companies that filled their campaign wallets. I do not think it is a coincidence that there has not been any increase in the minimum wage since the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision.
And I believe that change starts at home. I told my team right from the start: I do not take money from corporate PACs.
So, yes, I will fight for legislation that limits the amount of corporate money that can be spent on political campaigns.
Q: PFAS is in the water of millions of Americans; what do you think Congress should do to protect them? Would you change the Clean Water Act?
A: I am grateful for the recent GenX settlement announced by the NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson. PFAS is an issue that is very important to all of us who live, work, and recreate in southeast North Carolina.
I would love to see more federal action to cleanup and prevent PFAS contamination in a common-sense way. I actually like the “Healthy H2O Act” that helps rural families test their water and purchase filtration equipment. It’s a great start, but unfortunately, the House folded it into a version of the Farm Bill that locks in billions in cuts to food assistance for hungry families.
What to do about the Clean Water Act is where we disagree. Mr. Rouzer is very proud of his various bills to weaken the Clean Water Act; he touts the support they’ve received from such groups as the National Mining Association. While we do need to speed up permitting for bonafide clean energy projects, the people of North Carolina deserve to know when pesticides are being sprayed on our streams, rivers, and lakes. And we should bring the latest science on PFAS into any updates to the Clean Water Act so we can better protect our water.
Q: The federal government has committed more than $242 million in grant funding to the replacement of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. How big a priority would you make securing additional federal money for this project?
A: Securing more federal money for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement is a very high priority for me, as is asking for additional study on what kind of replacement would be appropriate, given ongoing changes in Wilmington’s local economy from industry to tourism.
I am against a toll. Tolls are the kind of game politicians play when they don’t want to explain where our tax money went. It would put most of the burden on working people and people on fixed incomes in Wilmington and nearby counties.
The Cape Fear Memorial Bridge is important to our state, it is important for our national security. We all pay gas taxes and fees on electric vehicles; replacing bridges that need it is exactly the kind of basic thing our public dollars should go to supporting.
And let’s be clear: David Rouzer voted against the bill that provided this grant funding, then allowed the grant to be put on hold for months, and didn’t bother to show up for the recent public hearings on the future of the bridge hosted by the NC Department of Transportation. That’s not fighting for southeast NC.
Q: The Trump Administration has sought approval from the courts to have the U.S. Postal Service impose tougher restrictions on sending mail-in ballots to voters that have requested them. Do you favor these federal restrictions?
A: No, and especially not trying to push these restrictions through right before an election.
Voting by mail is a secure, fair process, and it is very popular in states such as Florida and Utah.
Q: What, if any, adjustments would you make to the tax rates, including the corporate rate, and taxes on personal income, stock assets, inheritance, and financial transactions?
A: I’m in favor of the Working Americans Tax Cut Act, which eliminates the income tax on people making under $46,000/year by providing a cost-of-living exemption. I would pay for this cut by putting a tiered surtax on incomes over $1 million/year. To make our tax code more fair, we should also equalize tax rates for capital gains and ordinary income over $1 million—an approach that protects small investors while otherwise making sure we aren’t giving more tax breaks to passive income than we are to workers.
If large corporations—those with a gross revenue of over $30 million/year—are not paying their workers a living wage, they should have to pay an excise tax to make up for the indirect subsidies we are giving them through the social safety net.
Q: There has been a lot of attention to shifting funding to states from the federal level, such as FEMA and the Department of Education. Where do you stand the matter?
A: There are times when we are 50 states and there are times when we are one country. Natural disasters, such as stepping up when hurricanes like Florence or Helene hit our state, is a prime example of when we should be one country.
It is also very important to remember that the US Department of Education does not make decisions on the curriculum taught in our schools; its main role in K-12 is to protect the civil rights of every student—including students with disabilities; to provide grants to help schools serve their communities better; and to share information about successful approaches to teaching. For some reason, this work upsets Mr. Rouzer so much he has filed multiple bills to abolish the Department of Education. To this day, he continues to back eliminating this Department.
Q: From tariffs to ICE, we’ve heard criticisms that Congress has abdicated its oversight power. What role would you like to see Congress have in exercising its Constitutional power?
A: We should use it.
We’re months into an “engagement” in Iran that is driving the cost of gas and — importantly — diesel higher and higher. We should be demanding Secretary Hegseth answer questions about his management, about the damages to our bases. We should be looking into the mistakes that led to ICE killing American citizens, to immigration agencies hiring members of MS-13.
The framers of the Constitution were right to create the system of checks and balances, to put Congress first and to give it “the power of the purse.” One of the biggest problems in our politics? Members of Congress who put a bigger priority on serving the leader of their party instead of fighting for the people of their district.
Congress could have ended the tariffs, kept the administration from dragging on the release of the Epstein files, and blocked expensive, rash actions like paying billions in kill fees to clean energy projects. It just takes courage.
Q: When it comes to foreign policy, what would you like to see Congress do in terms of our support for Israel and Ukraine, our participation in NATO and other international bodies? Would you push for the administration to get Congressional approval for continued military action in Iran?
A: Yes, absolutely, the administration needs Congressional approval for continued military action in Iran. They’re breaking existing law because they don’t want to admit the ways they have messed up, how they’re in over their heads, and are clueless on how exactly they can extract us from this dangerous and illegal action.
There is one time in history NATO has used Article V — that an attack on one is an attack on all. It was after Al-Qaeda attacked us on September 11, 2001. We are stronger when we work with our partners. We should hold our allies accountable, make sure they’re doing their part and keeping their word, but going along is foolish and puts our military service members more at risk.