The following are just some partial thoughts about the new question which are too long for comments. Throughout, assume that $R_{\mathfrak{m}}$ is a UFD, $R_0$ is a field, etc...
First, let $x\in \mathfrak{m}$ be homogeneous, and irreducible in $R$; we will prove that $x$ remains irreducible in $R_{\mathfrak{m}}$. If not, then after clearing denominators we can write $(1+s)x=yz$ for some $s,y,z\in \mathfrak{m}$. Let $y_m$ and $z_n$ be the leading terms (i.e., the nonzero components of smallest grade) in $y$ and $z$ respectively. Then the homogeneity of $x$ forces $x=y_mz_n$. Since $m,n\geq 1$, we see that $y_m$ and $z_n$ are not units, which contradicts the irreducibility of $x$ in $R$.
Second, let's prove that such an $x$ is prime in $R$. Suppose that $x|(yz)$ for some $y,z\in R$, and further suppose by way of contradiction that $x$ doesn't divide $y$ nor $z$. Let $y_m$ and $z_n$ be the smallest components of $y$ and $z$ (respectively) that $x$ doesn't divide. The grade $m+n$ component of $yz$ is $\sum_{i,j\, :\, i+j=m+n}y_i z_j$. By the homogeneity of $x$, we know that it divides each component of $yz$, and in particular it divides this sum. By the minimality on $m$ and $n$, we know that it divides each term where $(i,j)\neq (m,n)$. Hence it divides $y_m z_n$. So, we reduce to the case that $y$ and $z$ are homogeneous.
Now, write $y$ and $z$ as products of irreducibles of $R$ (such factorizations exist by degree arguments), none of which is an $R$-associate of $x$. As $y$ and $z$ are homogeneous, all of these irreducibles are homogeneous. Thus, these irreducibles stay irreducible in $R_{\mathfrak{m}}$, which is a UFD. So, one of these irreducibles, say $x'$, must be $R_{\mathfrak{m}}$-associate to $x$. After clearing denominators, this means $(1+s)x=c(1+t)x'$ for some $s,t\in \mathfrak{m}$ and some $c\in R_0$. Looking at leading terms, this means $x=cx'$, contradicting the fact that $x$ and $x'$ are not $R$-associates.