Latest news with #MandateforLeadership:TheConservativePromise
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Project 2025 Architect Denies Far-Right Master Plan Is Guiding Trump's Decisions
With President Donald Trump's radical rehaul of America well underway, right-wing policy engineer Russell Vought wants you to believe Project 2025 was never meant to be his roadmap. During Sunday's episode of 'State of the Union,' CNN moderator Dana Bash got an icy answer when she asked Vought if the overlap between Trump's agenda and the hyper-conservative political program meant that Project 2025 was coming to fruition. Though the president repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 during his campaign, second-term Trump achievements like eliminating DEI, banning transgender troops and sending the military to crack down on the southern border were all detailed in the far-right policy wishlist, which Vought served on the advisory board for. But Vought, who is now Trump's director of the Office of Management and Budget, shot down the idea that the Heritage Foundation-helmed initiative inspired any of the president's actions. Claiming Trump was 'very public' about his plans during his campaign, the political operative told Bash it is 'delusional' to think the president was not the sole architect of his executive strategy. 'I'm not suggesting that he's not in charge,' Bash countered. 'I'm just saying that now it's pretty clear that what he wants to do and what you planned are dovetailing.' Vought still refused to acknowledge the influence of Project 2025, which also laid out tactics for shuttering the Department of Education, banning abortion medication and imposing work requirements for Medicaid recipients in a 900-plus page blueprint titled 'Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise.' 'I think the president was very clear with his agenda and he is going forward with that agenda and he has been at the helm and the originator of all of these ideas,' he told Bash. 'What's on the agenda is what the president has put on the agenda, most of which he ran on,' Vought continued. 'And you will continue to see the things that he's interested in doing and those people like me will be executing that vision.' Though Trump's policies seem to be in sync with what was outlined by Project 2025, he told voters during his campaign he had 'nothing to do' with the program. 'I haven't read it. I don't want to read it purposely. I'm not going to read it,' he claimed during his first and only debate with Democratic candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris. Senate Confirms Project 2025 Architect As Trump's Budget Director Bradley Whitford Spots Exactly Why 'Handmaid's Tale' Is 'Terribly Relevant' In 2025 This GOP Bill, Straight Out Of Project 2025, Would Make Pornography A Federal Crime
Asia Times
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Asia Times
Forget Musk. Russ Vought is the real power behind Trump
While Elon Musk has clearly been a major influence on the Trump administration, the less well-known, but arguably more influential, power behind the presidency is Russell (usually Russ) Vought. Vought is the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – the nerve center of the administration's sweeping changes. Vought is also rumoured to be about to take over running the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from Musk. Unlike Musk, Vought acts mostly outside the media spotlight. He is fully committed to a radical overhaul of the way the US presidency works – and his deep religious convictions have led him to believe there should be more Christianity embedded in government and public life. He has vowed to 'be the person that crushes the Deep State', and was part of the first Trump administration, where he held the position of OMB deputy director – and, briefly, director. Vought worked with Trump in his first term on Executive Order 13957, which aimed to reclassify thousands of policy jobs within the federal government. This was designed to allow the White House to quickly change who was employed in these roles. This was subsequently revoked by the Biden administration. But Trump issued a similar executive order 14171 in January, which will implement quicker hiring and firing procedures. The Office of Personnel Management estimates that this could affect 50,000 federal roles. In an interview with conservative commentator and podcaster Tucker Carlson, Vought said that this was necessary for the White House to 'retain control' of the agencies under its command. Without it, he claimed, ideological 'opponents' within the agencies had the power to diminish the efficiency of White House initiatives. And his role as head of the OMB, he argued, was 'to tame the bureaucracy, the administrative state.' During the Biden presidency, Vought was one of the main authors – credited as the key architect – of the Heritage Foundation's influential Project 2025, widely seen as the blueprint for Trump's second term of office. The 900-page document, whose full title is Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, was a major talking point during last year's presidential election campaign. Throughout the campaign, Trump strenuously denied Democrat accusations of having any connection to Project 2025. But a large number of his appointees contributed to the Heritage Foundation's publication, and numerous Project 2025's recommendations have quickly been put into action. These include Trump's high trade tariffs and DOGE's cost-cutting initiatives. Russ Vought talking to Tucker Carlson. During his confirmation hearing in the US Senate, Vought reiterated his belief that the White House has authority over federal spending, not Congress. This contradicts Article I, Section 8, of the US Constitution, which grants Congress the power to tax and spend for the general welfare of the country. For the majority of constitutional experts, the executive (the president) may propose a budget, but it is Congress that authorizes it. Concerned by this, Democrats on the Senate budget committee attempted a boycott of Vought's confirmation vote, which failed when all 11 Republican members voted in favor. And when the call came on the Senate floor to confirm his appointment, all 47 Democratic senators held an all-night debate in protest. Democrat and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has called Vought the 'most radical nominee' with 'the most extreme agenda' and said that Americans needed to understand the danger he poses to them in their daily lives. When asked to compare the Trump administration's policies to Project 2025, Paul Dans, who was the director of Project 2025 until he stepped down during the Trump campaign, said that the administration's policies were 'beyond my wildest dreams.' According to one website tracking the agenda, of the 313 suggested policy objectives in Project 2025, 101 have been implemented, while another 64 are in progress. A significant number of Project 2025's recommendations have been implemented by the Elon Musk-led DOGE. And Vought has been described by one journalist as 'the glue between Musk and the Republicans.' Vought and Musk have forged a strange but effective relationship in executing DOGE's cost-cutting initiatives. According to reports quoting former Trump administration officials, Musk's DOGE has used data to identify what he considers to be overspending, while Vought's OMB has confirmed DOGE's findings, recommending how to deal with them. 'What's needed is a specific theory about the case and what can be done,' Vought said. It was part of an effort to help the government 'balance its books', he added. When asked by Tucker Carlson what he thought of DOGE, Vought replied: 'I think they're bringing an exhilarating rush … of creativity, outside-the-box thinking, comfortability with risk and leverage.' The process to crush the so-called 'Deep State' conducted by MAGA Republicans in Congress and DOGE in the White House has been expertly coordinated by Vought. As one reporter wrote, he has experience working on Capitol Hill and is on good terms with the Freedom Caucus, which is the group of conservative Republicans that advocates for limited government, fiscal restraint and strict adherence to a constitutional, right-wing agenda. After the caucus was instrumental in defining the terms of support for Mike McCarthy as Speaker of the House in 2023, Vought called the members of Freedom House 'the lions that have been through battle and won.' He knows the capabilities of the OMB – and is just as anti-establishment as Musk. According to independent researchers tracking Project 2025, a number of departments still have more than half of the project's objectives to be completed. The administration will need to work quickly, however. Historically, the party that occupies the White House fares badly in the midterms. The Republicans could lose control of the House or the Senate, both of which they currently control. Should this happen, the administration may find it more difficult to implement the changes they wish. But it is highly unlikely that this will deter Vought and his drive for reforms of presidential powers. He, along with the majority of the Trump White House, believes in the unitary executive theory. This essentially argues that the president has control over all executive branch officials and operations, and that Congress cannot limit that control, even through legislation. If Vought does carry on and Congress challenges his decisions, the issue could end up in the Supreme Court – a court dominated by Trump appointees. Any judgment made by the court would be seismic in its importance of future interpretations of the constitution and where power really lies in the federal government. For Vought and other Project 2025 authors in the administration, a ruling in their favor would be vindication of their work. Dafydd Townley is teaching fellow in US politics and international security, University of Portsmouth This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Irish Examiner
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Project 2025 co-author Russ Vought is the power behind Trump presidency
While Elon Musk has clearly been a major influence on the Trump administration, the less well known, but arguably more influential, power behind the presidency is Russell (usually Russ) Vought. Vought is the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) — the nerve centre of the administration's sweeping changes. Vought is also rumoured to be about to take over running the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) from Musk. He is fully committed to a radical overhaul of the way the US presidency works — and his deep religious convictions have led him to believe there should be more Christianity embedded in government and public life. He has vowed to 'be the person that crushes the deep state', and was part of the first Trump administration, where he held the position of OMB deputy director — and, briefly, director. Vought worked with Trump in his first term on executive order 13957, which aimed to reclassify thousands of policy jobs within the federal government. This was designed to allow the White House to quickly change who was employed in these roles. This was revoked by the Biden administration. But Trump issued a similar executive order 14171 in January, which will implement quicker hiring and firing procedures; this could affect up to 50,000 federal roles. White House 'retaining control' of agencies under its command In an interview with conservative commentator and podcaster Tucker Carlson, Vought said this was necessary for the White House to 'retain control' of the agencies under its command. Without it, he claimed, ideological 'opponents' within the agencies had the power to diminish the efficiency of White House initiatives. And his role as head of the OMB was 'to tame the bureaucracy, the administrative state'. During the Biden presidency, Vought was one of the main authors — credited as the key architect — of the Heritage Foundation's influential Project 2025, widely seen as the blueprint for Trump's second term of office. The 900-page document, whose full title is Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, was a major talking point during the presidential election campaign. Throughout the campaign, Trump strenuously denied Democrat accusations of having any connection to Project 2025. But a large number of his appointees contributed to the Heritage Foundation's publication, and numerous Project 2025's recommendations have quickly been put into action. These include Trump's high trade tariffs and Doge's cost-cutting initiatives. US president Donald Trump strenuously denied Democrat accusations of having any connection to Project 2025 throughout the presidential election campaign File picture: Alex Brandon/ AP During his confirmation hearing in the US Senate, Vought reiterated his belief that the White House has authority over federal spending, not Congress. This contradicts article I, section 8, of the US Constitution, which grants Congress the power to tax and spend for the general welfare of the country. For the majority of constitutional experts, the executive (the president) may propose a budget, but it is Congress that authorises it. Concerned by this, Democrats on the Senate budget committee attempted a boycott of Vought's confirmation vote, which failed when all 11 Repubican members voted in favour. Democrat and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has called Vought the 'most radical nominee' with 'the most extreme agenda' and said that Americans needed to understand the danger he poses to them in their daily lives. When asked to compare the Trump administration's policies to Project 2025, Paul Dans, who was the director of Project 2025 until he stepped down during the Trump campaign, said that the administration's policies were 'beyond my wildest dreams'. According to one website tracking the agenda, of the 313 suggested policy objectives in Project 2025, 101 have been implemented, while another 64 are in progress. A significant number of Project 2025's recommendations have been implemented by the Elon Musk-led Doge. And Vought has been described by one journalist as 'the glue between Musk and the Republicans'. Relationship between Vought and Musk Vought and Musk have forged a strange but effective relationship in executing Doge's cost-cutting initiatives. According to reports, Musk's Doge has used data to identify what he considers to be overspending while Vought's OMB has confirmed Doge's findings recommending how to deal with them. 'What's needed is a specific theory about the case and what can be done,' Vought said. It was part of an effort to help the government 'balance its books', he added. When asked what he thought of Doge, Vought replied: 'I think they're bringing an exhilarating rush … of creativity, outside the box thinking, comfortability with risk and leverage.' The process to crush the so-called 'deep state' conducted by Maga Republicans in Congress and Doge in the White House has been expertly coordinated by Vought. As one reporter wrote, he has experience of working on Capitol Hill and is on good terms with the Freedom Caucus who are the group of conservative Republicans that advocates for limited government, fiscal restraint, and strict adherence to a constitutional, right-wing agenda. After the caucus was instrumental in defining the terms of support for Mike McCarthy as Speaker of the House in 2023, Vought called the members of Freedom House 'the lions that have been through battle and won'. He knows the capabilities of the OMB, and is just as anti-establishment as Musk. According to independent researchers tracking Project 2025, a number of departments still have more than half of the project's objectives to be completed. The administration will need to work quickly, however. Historically, the party that occupies the White House fares badly in the midterms. The Republicans could lose control of the House or the Senate. Should this happen, the administration may find it more difficult to implement changes. But it is highly unlikely this will deter Vought and his drive for reforms of presidential powers. He, along with the majority of the Trump White House, believe in the unitary executive theory: that the president has control over all executive branch officials and operations, and that Congress cannot limit that control, even through legislation. If Vought does carry on and Congress challenges his decisions, the issue could end up in the Supreme Court — a court dominated by Trump appointees. Any judgment made by the court would be seismic in its importance of future interpretations of the constitution and where power really lies in the federal government. For Vought and other Project 2025 authors in the administration, a ruling in their favour would be vindication of their work. Dafydd Townley is a teaching fellow in US politics and international security, University of Portsmouth. The Conversation Read More Trump's Qatari 747 may need fighter escorts to serve as Air Force One
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kansas public broadcasting stations would suffer crushing setback under Trump order
A protester holds a sign in support of funding for public media during a May 1, 2025, rally at the Kansas Statehouse in Topeka as part of a 50501 national day of action. (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector) In May 1993, Kansas Sen. Bob Dole addressed the annual public radio conference at an early morning session, introduced as 'one of the toughest critics of public broadcasting.' Saying he shouldn't be thought of as an enemy, Dole then gave the crowd a dose of the sardonic wit for which he was well known: 'I've already had breakfast. And by the way, Big Bird never tasted better.' When he ran for president three years later, Dole's campaign issued a position paper including his stance on public broadcasting: Dole 'opposed the establishment of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting as well as the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities and supports their elimination.' Although he didn't succeed in his presidential bid, Dole's position was perfectly in line with the Republican Party. 'Every Republican President since Richard Nixon has tried to strip the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) of taxpayer funding.' That quote comes from the 'Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,' also known as Project 2025. It calls for the elimination of this 'tyrannical situation' in which 'PBS and NPR do not even bother to run programming that would attract conservatives.' Project 2025 calls for 'the 47th President' to use their bully pulpit to persuade Congress — especially members of their own party — to support the total elimination of funding for public broadcasting: 'CPB receives advance appropriations that provide them with funding two years ahead of time, which insulates the agency from Congress's power of the purse and oversight. This special budgetary treatment is unjustified and should be ended.' To be clear, CPB is not a government agency. It's a private, nonprofit corporation created by an act of Congress in 1967 during the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson. The advance funding approach is intended to insulate public broadcasters from partisan politics. It's not surprising that President Donald Trump would follow through on Project 2025's plan to eliminate funding from the budget, but as with many other actions he has taken recently, he chose to issue an executive order to accomplish the goal expeditiously. His order gives the CPB board until the end of June to revise its community service grants in a way that would 'prohibit direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS,' contending that 'neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.' Signed May 1, the order 'Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media' also calls for the immediate cancellation of funding, ignoring the advanced funding formula intended to shield public media from political pressures. The leaders of PBS (the Public Broadcasting Service) and NPR (National Public Radio) were quick to respond. Katharine Meyer, NPR president and CEO, issued a statement the next morning: 'The President's order is an affront to the First Amendment rights of NPR and locally owned and operated stations throughout America to produce and air programming that meets the needs of their communities.' Her counterpart at PBS, Paula Kerger, released a more terse statement referring to it as a 'blatantly unlawful Executive Order, issued in the middle of the night.' She noted that PBS is exploring all options to continue with its mission. While challenges to this executive order, which may well be overruled by the courts, are playing out, managers of local public broadcasting stations must consider how to deal with the potential loss of revenue. Stations receive grants directly from CPB and pass much of the money along to PBS and NPR to cover the cost of the national programming as well as to cover the cost of local productions and broadcast transmissions. In a letter addressed to listeners of Kansas Public Radio, based at the University of Kansas in Lawrence, director Feloniz Lovato-Winston notes that federal funding amounts to 10% of the station's budget. 'Critical funding for Kansas Public Radio is just steps away from being eliminated,' she writes, 'and could result in a loss of approximately $244,000 per year.' At KTWU, the PBS station licensed to Washburn University in Topeka, that figure is significantly higher at approximately $865,000, which is about 30% of the station's budget, according to general manager Val VanDerSluis. Stations in western Kansas, located in a less densely populated region, face even more challenging circumstances. From her office in Bunker Hill, Betsy Schwien, general manager of Smoky Hills PBS, which serves western Kansas, reports that federal funding accounts for about 48-49% of its annual budget. At High Plains Public Radio, with offices in Garden City and Amarillo, Texas, the current annual operating grant of $222,000 from CPB amounts to about 15% of its annual budget. 'Without this funding,' says executive director Quentin Hope, 'HPPR would be hard pressed to continue its current levels of service, including operating transmitters reaching the most rural areas of the High Plains.' Such broadcasts to rural areas in Kansas can be traced to the early 1920s, when professors from Kansas State Agricultural College (now Kansas State University) drove over to Milford to present lectures on KFKB, a radio station operated by 'the Goat Gland Doctor' — J.R. Brinkley. In 1924, K-State launched its own station, KSAC, broadcasting educational programming to listeners across Kansas and beyond. When the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 was taking shape, the general manager of KSAC, Jack Burke, served as chairman of the National Association of Educational Broadcasters. He played a key role in a lobbying effort to include radio in the legislation in addition to TV. Ralph Titus, an announcer for KSAC (later identified as KKSU), joined the committee that determined how NPR would function. When the first edition of 'All Things Considered' premiered on NPR in 1971, Titus was on air locally to welcome it. A timeline of KSAC's history credits the station with providing more stories than any other in the nation during NPR's first decade. I should note that I used to be employed by public broadcasting in Kansas, serving as a producer and host of the 'Sunflower Journeys' series as well as producing documentaries (like 'Goat Gland Doctor,' narrated by Titus) and community affairs programs. I still produce documentaries that appear on public television occasionally, but I left my position at KTWU 10 years ago this month to return to my roots as an independent producer. The effort to defund public broadcasting seems particularly alarming and sinister to me, as does the elimination of funding for institutions such as the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts, not to mention other draconian cuts that have been made in the name of 'government efficiency.' It raises serious questions about the objectives of those initiating these actions. Is this really only a matter of conservatives following through with their vision of America and making good on their promises to restore 'family values' and the like? Trump has denigrated and demonized journalists since he began campaigning, calling us 'enemies of the people' and speaking of 'witch hunts' and 'fake news.' His executive order related to public broadcasting must be viewed in the broader context of his attacks on other media outlets, all of which suggests he's following an 'authoritarian playbook' to circumvent the Constitution and the safeguards built in to our system of democracy. Will our congressional representatives take any actions to protect us? It doesn't look very likely. However, I did come across a series called 'The Open Mind' featuring an extended interview with Sen. Jerry Moran that was distributed to PBS stations across the nation last year. Following a conversation over lunch at a small cafe in Hays, the host travels with Moran to Plainville, the small town where he grew up. The conversation continues as they walk through the stacks of the Plainville Memorial Library, where Moran recalls the time when he worked at the library as a teenager, helping organize its collection according to the Dewey Decimal System. He obviously has an appreciation for libraries, which makes one curious about how he felt when Trump issued the executive order directed at the federal agency that provides grants to libraries and museums: the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). I also wonder what he thinks about how the director of the Library of Congress, Carla Hayden — the first woman and person of color to lead the world's largest library — was summarily dismissed for no apparent reason, leaving the impression that it most likely relates to the administration's fervor in eliminating any ostensible DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) hires. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt basically said as much: 'There were quite concerning things she had done at the Library of Congress in pursuit of DEI.' One of the recent additions to the vast archives of the Library of Congress during Hayden's tenure did indeed have a considerable amount of content related to diversity and inclusion as well as equity. I can attest to that fact because I produced some of it. In partnership with the American Archive of Public Broadcasting, the LOC has become a repository for selected locally produced programming. I received notification from Rochelle Miller, the archives project manager, last spring that our local series about Kansas history and culture has been included: 'Early seasons of 'Sunflower Journeys' are now preserved and stored by the Library of Congress for future generations.' I contacted Moran's office in Washington, D.C., to ask about his response to the recent order involving public broadcasting. Although an aide indicated that I might expect to receive a response for this piece, I had yet to receive one Tuesday. The same is true for an inquiry I made of my U.S. representative, Derek Schmidt, who continues to revel in what he sees as great accomplishments of Trump, whose 'first 100 days have been success after success — and he's just getting started.' That assessment is listed on a special page of the White House website, along with those of most other Republicans in Congress, including Sen. Roger Marshall, who echoes Schmidt's assessment: 'The President's first 100 days is a return to American greatness.' Do you suppose they also agree with and support Trump's characterization of those employed by PBS and NPR as he posted on his Truth Social platform? 'RADICAL LEFT 'MONSTERS' THAT SO BADLY HURT OUR COUNTRY!' The only monster I've encountered in my years with public broadcasting is one who's obsessed with cookies! Dave Kendall served as producer and host of the 'Sunflower Journeys' series on public television for its first 27 seasons and continues to produce documentary videos through his own company, Prairie Hollow Productions. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
Yahoo
22-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Project 2025: The radical blueprint that forecast Trump's biggest moves
Project 2025, a radical plan for conservative government produced by the Heritage Foundation, was one of the most controversial topics during Donald Trump's campaign for re-election last year. Critics claimed the prominent Washington think tank's 922-page document, whose authors included many of Trump's closest allies, was being used as a 'blueprint' by his campaign. It presented a drastic change of ideological direction for America, in which executive power was centralised, regulation was slashed and government agencies were brought into line through the appointment of loyalists in key positions. Among its more extreme positions were banning pornography, excluding the morning-after pill from the Affordable Care Act, and preventing same-sex couples from marrying or adopting. Trump's Democratic opponent Kamala Harris called it an 'assault on democracy'. Polls indicated that 63 per cent of voters 'strongly opposed' the document's contents. By July, Project 2025 was perceived as enough of an electoral liability that Trump distanced himself from it. He called its contents 'ridiculous and abysmal' and repeatedly disavowed it. 'I know nothing about Project 2025,' Trump posted on Truth Social, his social media site. 'I have no idea who is behind it.' During the presidential debate with Harris in September, Trump said: 'I haven't read it – I don't want to read it purposely. I'm not going to read it.' Since Trump retook office, however, Project 2025 appears to have had a significant impact on his administration. He has appointed many of the key personnel involved with it to government positions. And from immigration to healthcare to tariffs, great swathes of Project 2025's suggestions are becoming policy, in some cases almost verbatim. On Thursday, Trump announced he was abolishing the Department of Education by executive order, a key reform called for by the document, formally entitled Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise. For supporters, it is evidence of a renewed focus on bringing about meaningful change during his second term. 'It's actually way beyond my wildest dreams,' said Paul Dans, the former director of Project 2025 who resigned at the height of the political backlash last year, in an interview with Politico this week. 'It's not going to be the easiest road to hoe going forward. The deep state is going to get its breath back. But the way [Trump's team] have been able to move and upset the orthodoxy, and at the same time really capture the imagination of the people, I think portends a great four years.' Although Project 2025 was one of several conservative policy platforms, which also included the America First Policy Institute, it attracted the most controversy. For some on the Right, this was because it dared to express what the Maga base was really thinking. '[M]uch of Project 2025 is the backbone of what the movement believes, and so will continue to have impact whether [opponents] like it or not,' says Raheem Kassam, a former Nigel Farage staffer and Trump insider. But critics fear that the changes are so drastic as to be unconstitutional, and might portend even more alarming developments down the line. Adrienne Cobb, an independent journalist, started Keep Track, a social media account, primarily on Reddit, to keep a running tally of how many Project 2025 ideas have been implemented. Already, more than a third of the proposals have been put into motion, she says. 'I started the tracker to help people understand what the Trump administration plans to do,' she says. 'My hope is that it will help us organise to oppose the administration's anti-democratic actions as well. We know what they're going to do next, they told us plain as day in Project 2025.' Fears of possible overreach were heightened earlier this week when Steve Bannon, a key Trump ally, said he was 'a firm believer that President Trump will run again in 2028', and that people were 'working on' a solution to the problem that the constitution forbids anyone to serve more than two terms. His intervention came as a federal judge in Maryland ruled against Trump's cuts to USAid – a core component of Project 2025 – finding that they were probably unconstitutional. Looking sector by sector, it is clear how influential the document has been. Project 2025 advocated two possible paths to economic success: one advocated free trade, another protectionism. The latter, a pro-tariff policy to redress America's trade deficits, was written by Peter Navarro, a longtime loyalist who served four months in prison last year in connection to the January 6 2021 attacks on the capital. 'Trade policy can and must play an essential role in an American manufacturing and defense industrial base renaissance,' Navarro writes, but two forces 'are pushing America in the opposite direction.' The World Trade Organisation's (WTO) 'most favoured nation' rules encourage America's trade partners to adopt high tariffs, which have caused America's 'chronic' trade deficits and made it 'the globe's biggest trade loser and victim of unfair, unbalanced, and non-reciprocal trade.' Of particular concern was economic aggression from China. Trump has chosen the way of the tariff, and appointed Navarro to be his senior counsel on trade and engineering. He immediately introduced a 25 per cent tariff on all steel and aluminium imports, as well as 25 per cent tariffs on other imports from Mexico and Canada and a 20 per cent tariff on Chinese imports. He has also threatened 200 per cent tariffs on alcohol from the EU. 'Tariffs are easy, they're fast, they're efficient, and they bring fairness,' Trump has said, adding that other presidents, including Republican hero Ronald Reagan, had not used this 'powerful weapon' because they were 'dishonest, stupid or paid off in some other form.' Project 2025 said that the government's role in education should be limited to 'that of a statistics-gathering agency that disseminates information to the states'. The author of the chapter on education, Lindsey Burke, writes that 'families and students should be free to choose from a diverse set of school options and learning environments' and that the Department of Education should be eliminated. Trump shut the Department of Education by executive order on Thursday evening. 'My administration will take all lawful steps to shut down the department,' he said. 'We're going to shut it down and shut it down as quickly as possible. It's doing us no good.' His government had already taken measures to halve the department's workforce and cancel dozens of programmes. In the blueprint, Russell Vought, a former director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), wrote: 'The next conservative Administration will have a unique opportunity to realign U.S. foreign assistance with American national interests,' and lamented the 'gross misuse of foreign aid by the current Administration to promote a radical ideology that is politically divisive at home and harms our global standing.' One of Trump's first acts in government was to freeze all USAid. Earlier this week Vought, whom Trump has reinstated as the director of the OMB, masterminded a questionnaire sent to several of the world's largest aid organisations, including those at the UN and the International Red Cross. Questions included some apparently designed to make it impossible for a large aid organisation to answer in the negative. 'Does this project reinforce U.S. sovereignty by limiting reliance on international organisations or global governance structures (e.g. UN, WHO)?' read one. Another asked aid agencies to confirm that no project included any elements of DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). There have been challenges to the aid cuts. On Tuesday, Maryland federal Judge Theodore D. Chuang ruled that they were unconstitutional. But it seems the 'America first' tone set out by Project 2025 will continue to inform policy. China is one of Project 2025's key strategic focuses, with recommended measures on defence, the economy, aid and social media all intended to weaken Chinese competition. It argues that the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) needs to 'address TikTok's threat to national security'. It also advocates reforming the 'vast, intricate bureaucracy' of intelligence agencies, and argues the government 'needs to use these intelligence authorities aggressively to anticipate and thwart our adversaries, including Russia, Iran, North Korea, and especially China, while maintaining counterterrorism tools that have demonstrated their effectiveness'. Trump was quick with his tariffs on China. One of the questions sent to aid agencies was 'Can you confirm that your organisation has not received any funding from the People's Republic of China?' He appointed Brendan Carr, another Project 2025 contributor and TikTok hawk, to run the FCC. But he paused the TikTok ban with an executive order on his first day in office, pending a possible agreed sale to an American entity. Despite his belligerent rhetoric, there were reports this week that Trump is seeking a meeting with China's president Xi Jinping, who he said will visit Washington in the 'not too distant future.' The blueprint argued that 'the United States must be prepared to take appropriate steps in response, up to and including withdrawal,' from organisations that were not serving the US interest. It singled out the World Health Organisation (WHO), stating that the 'manifest failure and corruption of the World Health Organization during the COVID-19 pandemic is an example of the danger that international organizations pose to U.S. citizens and interests.' One of Trump's first acts on day one of his presidency was to withdraw the US from the WHO. 'The United States intends to withdraw from the WHO,' said the White House's official statement, citing the 'organization's mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states'. Project 2025 argued that any incoming government must work to 'eliminate Marxist indoctrination and divisive critical race theory programs and abolish newly established diversity, equity, and inclusion offices and staff'. It also called for only the US flag to be flown at embassies and consulates and barred the display of Black Lives Matter and Pride flags. On January 27, Trump issued an order reiterating his commitment to 'meritocracy and to the elimination of race-based and sex-based discrimination'. As part of this, 'the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall abolish every DEI office'. He also followed the Project 2025 policy on flags. 'Starting immediately, only the United States of America flag is authorized to be flown or displayed at US facilities, both domestic and abroad, and featured in US government content,' a US Department of State memo ordained. Big tech firms, including Meta, Google and Amazon, have responded to Trump's crusade against DEI by following suit, watering down or abandoning their own policies. One of the key tenets of Project 2025 was the necessity of slashing the size of the federal workforce, reducing the 'agencies' budgets to the low end of the historical average' and 'maximising hiring of political appointees'. It also said that the 'logical place to begin would be to identify and eliminate functions and programs that are duplicated across Cabinet departments or spread across multiple agencies.' With Elon Musk running the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Trump's administration has gone above and beyond the hopes of Project 2025 in terms of cutting the federal workforce. On January 20, the White House announced plans 'to reduce the size of the Federal Government's workforce through efficiency improvements'. Since Trump took office more than 30,000 federal employees have been fired, across different departments, although more than 25,000 were reinstated this week following the judicial ruling in Maryland. A budget proposal that passed the House of Representatives last month proposed $1.5-2 trillion (£1.2-1.5 trillion) in spending cuts over the next decade. The blueprint argues for far stricter border controls, urging the government to 'adjust personnel and priorities to participate actively in the defense of America's borders, including using military personnel and hardware to prevent illegal crossings between ports of entry'. It also recommended repealing temporary protected status for some immigrants, giving more immigration authority to state and local government, pausing refugee resettlement and sanctioning countries who refused to receive deportees. Trump appointed Tom Homan, a Project 2025 contributor, to be his 'border czar'. On day one of his presidency he directed authorities to 'take all appropriate and lawful action to deploy sufficient personnel along the southern border' with Mexico. Homan and Trump have promised vast increases in deportations, providing military aircraft to facilitate this. Days after his initial pledges, Trump used the threat of tariffs to force Colombia to back down over receiving deportees. He has changed the rules to allow undocumented migrants to be deported from anywhere in the US, rather than within 100 miles of a border. He has also suspended the entry of all undocumented migrants and reinstated a controversial 'Wait in Mexico' policy from his first term, under which non-Mexican migrants have to reside in Mexico while waiting for their asylum cases to be heard. Project 2025 contains a range of measures designed to ramp up US energy production and row back on environmental regulation, including withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, blocking the enforcement of environmental justice laws, eliminating energy standards for appliances, ending subsidies for electric vehicles, and revoking Biden-era orders to put the climate at the centre of US foreign policy and use science to tackle it. 'A new Administration must immediately roll back Biden's orders, reinstate the Trump-era Energy Dominance Agenda', it says, adding it must also 'end the war on fossil fuels and domestically available minerals and facilitate their development on lands owned by Indians and Indian nations'. Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement on day one of his presidency, and issued dozens of executive orders to facilitate Project 2025 goals. One called for the US to 'fully avail itself of Alaska's vast lands and resources for the benefit of the Nation and the American citizens who call Alaska home', others revoked Biden-era subsidies for electric vehicles. Trump also put hundreds of 'environmental justice' workers on leave from the Environmental Protection Agency, echoing another Project 2025 goal, although some have since been reinstated. Trump distanced himself from Project 2025 during the campaign after vociferous opposition to its contents, particularly on abortion, tariffs and executive authority. The document did not enjoy unanimous support even within the Republican party. Polling on his blitzkrieg first months is mixed, too. According to a recent Ipsos survey, 45 per cent approve of the job he is doing, but only one in four (26 per cent) approves of Musk shutting down federal government programmes that he decides are unnecessary. There is widespread support for deporting immigrants accused of crime. For all Project 2025's apparent influence to date, many of its suggestions remain unfulfilled. They could yet become policy. These include dismantling the Department of Homeland Security, banning pornography and shutting down tech and telecoms companies that allow access to adult material. Slashing corporate and income taxes, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to the gold standard are also called for by the plan. It advocates more walls along the southern border too, while Trump's focus has been on deportations. Trump has so far been more moderate on family issues than Project 2025 – which argued the government should 'maintain a biblically based, social science-reinforced definition of marriage and family' and argued for the withdrawal of Mifepristone, an abortion drug, from the market. Despite growing judicial rumbles, Trump still has a large mandate, with Republican majorities in the popular vote, the Senate, the House and the Supreme Court. He can pass as many of Project 2025's proposals as he wants. Judging by his first two months, there may be many more to come. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
