In the rapidly heating atmosphere of the presidential election stage, attention is growing around ‘Project 2025’, a controversial 922-page document of policy proposals intended to steer the next conservative administration. With more than two dozen members of Donald Trump’s administration and allies contributing to its authorship, Project 2025 has gained solid backing from over 100 additional groups, including the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation.
However, Democrats interpret Project 2025 as an ominous forecast of what a second Trump term could entail. Trump, for his part, has attempted to distance himself from the policy proposals, reportedly stating at a July 20 rally, “They are extreme, seriously extreme. I don’t know anything about it. I don’t want to know anything about it.” Regardless of this disavowal, Trump’s official campaign strategy, Agenda47, shows alignment with a number of Project 2025’s proposals.
The goal set within Project 2025 involve sweeping changes, including the dissolution of federal agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Homeland Security. The project treads a similar path to Trump in advocating for the privatization of certain agencies, such as the Transportation Security Agency.
Regarding healthcare, the proposals outlined in Project 2025 suggest drastic curtailments on reproductive rights, including withdrawing the abortion pill mifepristone from the market, and proscribing funding for healthcare centers that provide abortions. Additionally, the project posits a “biblically based, social science reinforced definition of marriage and family” should be maintained by the Department of Health and Human Services.
On the subject of climate change, the project proposes significant cuts to federal finances dedicated to research and development of renewable energy. Instead, a full-fledged endorsement of fossil fuels is advocated for, with a call toward ‘energy security’ replacing carbon-reduction goals.
Social welfare programs would face stringent restrictions and cuts under the project’s economic proposals, and eligibility requirements for Medicaid could be tightened. In the sphere of housing, there are recommendations to reverse many Biden administration policies.
In the area of education, the project is firmly in favor of increased parental control over schooling choices and limiting federal schooling accountability. More controversially, Project 2025 proposes the removal of many terms from federal legislation, including “sexual orientation,” “gender equality,” “diversity, equity, and inclusion” among others.
As the presidential race intensifies, it remains to be seen how Project 2025 will shape policy discussion in the election arena. Whether its controversial proposals will influence the election outcomes or if it will face staunch opposition from Democrats and critics of its more extreme measures is yet to be determined. However, the correlations between it and Trump’s Agenda47 may indicate potential political shifts to come in the conservative administration.
