In the previous post kicking off our analysis of Project 2025, we introduced it as the plan to drastically reshape government in the United States. We discussed how Project 2025 has been meticulously “crafted” over more than 3 years to function as a detailed 900-page blueprint for transforming government on every level of American Life. We talked about how, if you wanted to understand its real meaning, you had to realize that it exists to rectify the defining mistake of the first Trump Administration, that of not being prepared to implement their plans. The architects want to be ready this time. Project 2025 is American conservatism’s detailed and systematic attempt to bring about these changes in a second Trump administration or another Republican administration.
Estimated reading time: 1 minute
This is post#2 in the Project 2025 series. To read post #1 click here.
Who Are The People Behind Project 2025?
Understanding who created Project 2025 is one key to grasping its significance. It’s not just the product of a single think tank or a few policy wonks—it’s a highly coordinated effort involving some of the most powerful and influential conservative organizations in the United States with ongoing contributions from key figures who were deeply involved in the Trump administration.
Donald Trump might insist that he knows nothing about it and is not involved with any of the ideas. But as we decide how seriously to take his protests and whatever grains of truth we think are contained in those denials, we should weigh them against what we know about the people behind the Project.
Project 2025’s Primary Authors: The Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation, founded towards the end of the Nixon administration, is the primary architect of Project 2025. Its purpose was to influence Republican administrations and lawmakers toward enacting conservative policies.
The Heritage Foundation itself is very familiar to conservatives for several reasons.
First, one of its founders, Paul Weyrich, is one of the most influential political conservatives in our lifetime. He was primarily responsible for convincing the Republican Party to frame abortion as the country’s leading social problem in the run-up to the 1980 presidential election. Those who grew up in the Evangelical church in the 80s and 90s assumed that abortion had always been regarded as the country’s primary evil after Roe versus Wade. But history shows that this is a flawed recollection.
For most of the 1970s, Protestant denominations rarely spoke out against abortion. The nation’s largest Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, held that abortion was morally permissible in several circumstances, including the health and welfare of the mother, not just the life of the mother. Billy Graham had a similar position for much of his career before 1980. Jerry Falwell Sr, the architect of the Moral Majority, never made a public statement on abortion until 1975 and did not preach a single sermon on abortion until 1978, more than 5 years after Roe v. Wade.
What changed was the 1980 presidential election between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter. Falwell had spent years insisting that Christians should not be involved in politics as their sole responsibility was to preach the gospel and win souls for Christ and that the government should not interfere with school integration. At the same time, Falwell was railing against the government interfering in society by telling people they had to send their white children to school with black children. He was running his own private schools that were informally known as ‘segregation academies’ because they admitted virtually no black students.
It was Paul Weyrich who convinced both the Republican party and Evangelical Christian groups like the Moral Majority that segregation was a dead political issue, and if they wanted to grab political power, they needed instead to focus on abortion as the Great Social Evil.
I think anyone who knows recent political history will agree that the Republican Party’s shift on abortion was one of the critical decisions that enabled them to consolidate their political party for decades to come. The founder of the Heritage Foundation, Paul Weyrich, was the mastermind behind it.
The second reason the Heritage Foundation is so well known and influential among conservatives and Republicans is that it was the key conservative think tank that influenced Ronald Reagan’s Reaganomics. In 1981, the Heritage Foundation published an early version of its ‘Mandate For Leadership’ document containing the basic policy recommendations that Reagan adopted, leading to the development of his trickle-down economics theory turned policy. The Heritage Foundation gets primary credit for that. Or blame, depending on which way you look at it.
Donald Trump and The Heritage Foundation: Connected Or Not?
Whenever someone talks about the various conservative groups behind Project 2025, questions arise about how strong the connections are between Donald Trump, the Trump campaign, and The Heritage Foundation.
Donald Trump and his campaign surrogates will insist that they have nothing to do with the plans in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, nor do they know anything about them.
The progressive opposition will insist that the opposite is true—that the Trump campaign and Project 2025 are one and the same in spirit—or, if not that exact equivalency, something close enough.
Indeed, the Heritage Foundation has never been the same as the Trump Campaign, and I don’t think anyone says it is.
While Donald Trump denies knowing anything about what Project 2025 proposes to do, we should remember that despite any protests to the contrary, Donald Trump is indeed very familiar with the Heritage Foundation. Donald Trump is familiar enough with them that, just last year, he and the Heritage Foundation’s president, Kevin Roberts, took the foundation’s private jet to the Heritage Foundation’s 50th Anniversary Leadership Summit in Maryland, where Trump was a keynote speaker. In his remarks at the Summit, Trump talked about how the Heritage Foundation was putting together the road map for action in his next administration. Was he referring to parts of Project 2025? As Trump says, “some people say that. All the best people.”
Other Project 2025 Partners
Regardless of any relationship between the Heritage Foundation and Donald Trump, the Heritage Foundation hasn’t been putting all this together alone. Over 100 conservative organizations have joined forces in the construction of Project 2025. Some of the most notable include the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), America First Legal, Turning Point USA (if you’ve heard of Charlie Kirk, it’s his group), the National Rifle Association (NRA), and Teneo.
Regardless of how much Trump knows about or is on board with the policy ideas for Project 2025, what seems more important than the involvement of groups like Turning Point USA are the substantial roles that individual figures from Trump’s own presidential administration have played.
More than 400 individuals who had roles in the first Trump administration have worked on Project 2025. Granted, they’re not all former cabinet members, and it would be intellectually dishonest to imply that because the “executive assistant to the second deputy undersecretary for procurement of kitchen wares” contributed, it somehow proves that Project 2025 and the plans of the Trump Campaign are one and the same.
The strongest case for a connection between Trump and Project 2025 is the number of key architects who have had Trump’s ear in the past and likely communicate with him to this day.
– Paul Dans: Former Chief of Staff at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under Trump, Dans now serves as the Director of Project 2025.
– Russell Vought: Vought served as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during the Trump administration, where he played a pivotal role in shaping fiscal policy and implementing executive orders. He is one of the lead authors of Project 2025.
– Stephen Miller: in Trump’s innermost circle of advisors and perhaps the key architect for several of Donald Trump’s immigration policies, including the disastrous Trump Administration policy that called for forcibly separating children from accompanying adults and intentionally sending them to different states. These separations resulted in the loss of hundreds of children who still haven’t been found because the administration did not keep sufficient records of where the children were going. Stephen Miller is one of the key individuals working on Project 2025 policy suggestions on immigration.
– Mark Meadows: Former White House Chief of Staff, is involved in strategic planning for the Project.
– Larry Kudlow: Former Director of the National Economic Council, contributing to economic policy proposals for the Project.
– John Ratcliffe: Former Director of National Intelligence, working on the Project’s national security and intelligence strategies.
– Spencer Chretien: Former Special Assistant to the President and now the Associate Director of Project 2025.
– John McEntee: Trump’s former Director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, who contributed to developing the Project’s proposals concerning federal employees and personnel.
– Andrew Bremberg: Bremberg served as Trump’s Domestic Policy Council Director and later as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, making him well-versed in developing domestic and international policy.
Those looking for a speech where Donald Trump admits Project 2025 was all his idea will never find that because the connections between Trump and the Project center on following the breadcrumbs.
Key individuals from the Trump administration have spent the last 3 years helping to draft Project 2025’s plans, making the Trump Campaign’s stance that they know nothing about any of this implausible, considering the involvement of close Trump personnel such as Mark Meadows and Stephen Miller.
Protests of deniability would ask us to believe that Donald Trump’s former chief of staff and his closest political advisor from his previous administration spent 3 years helping to draft the most comprehensive set of policy proposals ever attempted…while keeping the entire thing a complete secret from the very person the Project explicitly states is to bring it to fruition.
But that seems to be what these denials would have us believe.
What Is The Significance Of Having These Individuals And Groups Involved? Why Does This Matter?
On one level, one could say that having the NRA and Trump’s former chief of staff involved in the creation of hundreds of pages of policy intended to transform the American government is merely a coincidence of some sort. However, this is most likely about something more significant, and it comes back to the reason Project 2025 exists in the first place – to enact transformative policy change.
The organizations and individuals behind Project 2025 have a proven track record of influencing American politics and policy. It’s one thing for someone to develop ideas they think should be implemented to change the government. It’s another entirely to have the ability, expertise, and will to make those changes a reality by working with like-minded others and creating a comprehensive and actionable plan to transform government.
Let’s go back to Stephen Miller. We’ve already described Miller as one of Trump’s inner circle of advisors. Aside from Kellyanne Conway, it’s reasonable to pick Miller as the political advisor who was most influential to Donald Trump during his administration. Miller’s area of focus was immigration. Not only was he the prime driver behind the Family Separation Policy, but Miller was also the primary architect or major influencer behind several other key Trump administration policies: the Travel Ban and the Public Charge Rule, for example.
Miller played a significant role in drafting and defending the executive order that banned travel from several Muslim-majority countries. This rule is a provision in U.S. immigration law that allows the government to deny visas or green cards to immigrants deemed likely to become dependent on government assistance. It assesses whether an individual might rely on public benefits such as Medicaid, housing assistance, or food stamps in the future. Due to Miller’s influence in the Trump administration, the rule was expanded in 2019 to make it more restrictive, making it more difficult for lower-income immigrants to obtain legal status.
Why bring these examples up?
Stephen Miller is a key Project 2025 contributor on proposals to change immigration policy and has a track record of influencing President Trump on some significant policy changes that were very controversial. Just ask the hundreds of children sent off to different states what they think if you can find them. The Trump administration didn’t track where the children were sent; many are still missing.
Miller is a prime example of why people link Donald Trump to Project 2025. If Trump wins re-election in November 2024, there’s a greater chance of the NFL not showing Taylor Swift attending a Chief’s game than of Stephen Miller not being heavily involved in the 2nd Trump Administration. What do we think that will mean for enacting as many controversial Project 2025 policy suggestions as possible? Miller has already had the former president’s ear once. There’s no good reason to think Stephen Miller won’t have it again.
Fast Track To Cementing A Conservative Governmental Structure
By pooling their resources and expertise, the parties and individuals comprising Project 2025 aim to ensure that the next Republican administration can quickly and effectively implement a comprehensive conservative agenda. The policies outlined in Project 2025 are not just the theoretical spitballing of academics holed up in a back office somewhere—they have the backing of powerful institutions and experienced individuals who know how to turn ideas into action because they’ve done it before.
Remember, the Heritage Foundation was the group most responsible for Reagan’s policies and the political theory behind the significant welfare reforms signed into law by President Clinton. The foundation has the experience, knowledge, connections, and an established track record of influencing presidential administrations. Project 2025 is the vehicle they aim to employ next.
The next post will begin examining the core goals of Project 2025 by explaining the four pillars as stated in the Project’s introduction:
- Restoring the Family: Focusing on traditional family structures and opposition to LGBTQ rights.
- Dismantling the Administrative State: Reducing the federal government’s regulatory role and increasing presidential power.
- Defending Sovereignty: Strengthening borders, reducing international commitments.
- Securing Individual Rights: Framing conservative views on freedom, such as promoting gun rights and limiting LGBTQ and reproductive rights.
Image: Pamela Reynoso
About Post Author
