Project 2025: Key Conservative Blueprint in Harris-Trump Debate

Project 2025 has emerged as a key point of contention in the current political discourse, especially ahead of the upcoming debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. Although Trump has distanced himself from the initiative, Democrats, including the Harris campaign, have repeatedly attacked the blueprint, portraying it as a dangerous vision for a potential second Trump term. The plan, crafted by the conservative Heritage Foundation alongside over 100 other right-wing organizations, lays out sweeping changes to government operations and policies across various sectors.

At its core, Project 2025 is designed to serve as a roadmap for the next conservative administration, with a particular focus on a Trump presidency. It offers a detailed strategy to shape the executive branch by creating a LinkedIn-style database for presidential personnel candidates, along with training programs for prospective executive branch employees. One of its most discussed elements is the “Mandate for Leadership,” a 900-page document proposing a conservative policy agenda that aims to reverse many policies established under Democratic administrations.

Despite Trump’s attempts to distance himself from the project, it has drawn attention for its connection to figures from his previous administration. Many former Trump officials contributed to the plan, and it is supported by a coalition of conservative organizations and leaders. Trump has praised Heritage’s past policy work, further muddying the waters of his true involvement with Project 2025.

Among its most controversial proposals is a radical restructuring of the federal government. Project 2025 calls for reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy and eliminating entire agencies, including the Department of Education, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and even parts of the Department of Homeland Security. The plan proposes privatizing or folding these responsibilities into other government bodies, while advocating for placing more political appointees who align ideologically with the president into key government roles. This would shift control away from nonpartisan career civil servants, significantly altering the current makeup of the federal workforce.

Project 2025 also addresses several hot-button social issues, aligning itself with conservative positions on topics like transgender rights, diversity initiatives, and climate change. It seeks to reverse policies related to gender identity, including reinstating a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military and restricting the use of gender-affirming care. It also proposes eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs across the federal government and universities, favoring a model that promotes “nuclear families” and traditional values.

The project takes a firm stance against climate action, advocating for withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and dismantling federal efforts to promote sustainability. It emphasizes increasing reliance on oil and gas while deprioritizing green energy sources. Furthermore, it calls for reshaping federal agencies like the Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture to remove climate-related research and sustainability initiatives.

On abortion, Project 2025 does not directly call for a national ban but suggests several measures that would make access to the procedure more difficult. This includes pushing the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to revoke its approval of the abortion drug mifepristone and invoking the Comstock Act to block abortion-related materials from being mailed. The project also recommends defunding healthcare programs that cover abortion services and requiring states to report abortions to the federal government.

Education is another area where the blueprint proposes sweeping changes. It supports school choice, which would allow public funds to be used for private and religious education. It also calls for the prohibition of critical race theory in federally funded schools and proposes legislation allowing parents to sue schools that teach controversial subjects or infringe on religious rights.

The project extends its reforms to the tech industry and higher education. It advocates banning TikTok and overhauling Section 230 protections for social media platforms. In addition, it seeks to abolish federal student loan forgiveness programs, eliminating options for income-driven repayment and public service loan forgiveness.

On matters of national security and foreign relations, Project 2025 prioritizes a tough stance on China, labeling the nation a “totalitarian enemy” and urging the U.S. to withdraw from international organizations like the World Health Organization when their missions conflict with U.S. interests. Domestically, the plan calls for an overhaul of the Department of Justice and the FBI, replacing what it terms “radical left ideologues” with appointees more aligned with the president’s agenda.

The tax policies outlined in Project 2025 advocate for a simplified tax system, introducing a 15% flat tax for earners below the Social Security wage base and a 30% tax for higher incomes. Corporate taxes would also be reduced to 18%. Additionally, the project targets the Federal Reserve, proposing reforms that would either diminish the government’s role in monetary policy or return to the gold standard.

Critics argue that if implemented, Project 2025 could have far-reaching consequences for the structure and operations of the U.S. government. Some experts warn that its language around executive power hints at an erosion of checks and balances, suggesting that the president could override decisions by the Supreme Court or Congress. This centralization of power could fundamentally alter the relationship between the executive branch and the other arms of government.

As the debate between Harris and Trump approaches, the Democratic campaign is positioning Project 2025 as a key point of contrast between the candidates. Harris is expected to critique the project as an extremist agenda, aligning it with the broader Democratic strategy to discredit Trump’s second-term vision. Trump’s disavowal of the plan, despite its connections to his former staff, has fueled speculation and skepticism about his true position. Whether or not he adopts any of its proposals if reelected remains to be seen, but its ambitious goals and the involvement of key Trump allies suggest that elements of Project 2025 could shape the policy landscape of a future conservative administration.