‘An economic disaster’: The U.S. president drags Project 2025 while calling out its potential consequences
The president-elect’s oscillating relationship with Project 2025 exemplifies a concerning pattern of misdirection regarding the controversial Heritage Foundation blueprint that may reshape American governance.
President Biden warns of dire consequences. “I pray to God that the president-elect throws away Project 2025. I think it would be an economic disaster,” Biden posted on social media. “I believe the only way for a president to lead America is to lead all of America.”
In July, Donald Trump declared, or lied, on Truth Social: “I know nothing about Project 2025…some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” Yet, like clockwork, his tune has changed dramatically by November, telling TIME magazine parts were “very conservative and very good.”
This reversal, which could be seen a light-year of miles away, comes as Trump fills key administration positions with Project 2025 architects. His nominations include Russell Vought for Office of Management and Budget director and Brendan Carr to lead the Federal Communications Commission—both significant contributors to the 920-page document.
The $22 million Heritage Foundation’s theonomous/reconstructionist far-right initiative proposes sweeping changes: eliminating the Department of Education, restructuring federal agencies under direct presidential control, and implementing policies based on Christian religious principles—which is already starting to trickle into the system. Economic proposals—that would be constitutionally difficult to accomplish, to say the least, without a fully compliant Congress—include potentially abolishing the Federal Reserve, reforming the tax system by transitioning to a consumption tax, and significantly reducing corporate tax rates from 21% to 18%. Each of these things separately would be headline news; all of these occurring at the same time would be devastating to America’s economic future.
“I didn’t want to read it because it wasn’t under my auspices,” Trump told TIME, despite the document featuring extensive contributions from his former officials and allies. The project’s scope suggests he’s pulling the wool over people’s eyes—over 100 conservative organizations participated in crafting proposals that closely align with Trump’s stated agenda.
Transition team co-chair Howard Lutnick previously vowed to “blacklist” anyone involved with Project 2025 from serving in the administration, calling Heritage “radioactive.” This stance contrasts sharply with recent nominations of project contributors, including Tom Homan as “border czar” and John Ratcliffe as CIA director.
Legal experts question the feasibility of implementing such dramatic changes within a single term. Many proposals would face significant constitutional challenges and require congressional approval, which they are unlikely to receive, even if Trump has the Supreme Court in his pocket. The project’s economic recommendations, including major regulatory rollbacks and agency eliminations, could particularly impact working-class Americans, the immigrants he’s trying to push out, and other marginalized communities. Frankly, it will be the economics that trip Trump, given it was a significant reason for his election. If his voters’ finances are further harmed in any direction, there will be trouble given there is no longer a readymade scapegoat to blame.
The blueprint suggests dramatic reforms to Medicare and Medicaid, including caps on federal funding and stricter work requirements for beneficiaries. It also proposes eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (or “woke”) programs across federal agencies while redirecting the Department of Justice to combat what it ridiculously terms “anti-white racism.”
Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts stirred controversy by describing the initiative as “the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.” This rhetoric, combined with proposals to reclassify tens of thousands of rank-and-file federal workers as political appointees, has raised obvious concerns about the project’s broader implications for democratic institutions.
The Heritage Foundation maintains the project serves as a conservative governance roadmap. However, critics argue its policies disproportionately benefit wealthy, white, Christian Americans while potentially dismantling protections for minority groups, including proposals to restrict gender-affirming care and eliminate insurance coverage for emergency contraception.
Trump’s shifting stance on Project 2025’s world-bending program—from complete denial to qualified embrace in less than six weeks—illuminates concerns about the evident opacity of his upcoming administration. Very simply, it is difficult to know which way is up, but it is clear whatever way is chosen will have deleterious effects on everyone not in the in-group. As more project contributors receive nominations for key positions, questions persist about the true extent of its influence on future American policy.
Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com
