Project 25 and Agenda 47

Project 2025 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Project 2025 (also known as the 2025 Presidential Transition Project)[3] is a political initiative to reshape the federal government of the United States and consolidate executive power in favor of right-wing policies. The plan was published in April 2023 by The Heritage Foundation, an American conservative think tank, in anticipation of Donald Trump winning the 2024 presidential election.[4][5] The ninth iteration of the Heritage Foundation's Mandate for Leadership series, Project 2025 is based on a controversial interpretation of the unitary executive theory that states that the entire executive branch is under the complete control of the president.[6][7] The project's proponents say it would dismantle a government bureaucracy they say is unaccountable and mostly liberal.[8] Critics have called it an authoritarian, Christian nationalist plan[9][10][11] that would steer the U.S. toward autocracy.[12] Legal experts say it would undermine the rule of law,[13] separation of powers,[5] separation of church and state,[12] and civil liberties.[5][13][14] The project calls for merit-based federal civil service workers to be replaced by people loyal to Trump and to take partisan control of key government agencies, including the Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Commerce (DOC), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC).[15] Other agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Education (ED), would be dismantled or abolished.[16] It calls for reducing environmental regulations to favor fossil fuels and proposes making the National Institutes of Health (NIH) less independent while defunding its stem cell research.[17] The blueprint seeks to reduce taxes on corporations, institute a flat income tax on individuals,[18] cut Medicare and Medicaid,[19][20] and reverse as many of President Joe Biden's policies as possible.[21][22] It proposes criminalizing pornography,[23] removing legal protections against anti-LGBT discrimination,[24][25] and ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs[5][25] while having the DOJ prosecute anti-white racism instead.[26] The project recommends the arrest, detention, and mass deportation of illegal immigrants,[27][28] and deploying the U.S. Armed Forces for domestic law enforcement.[29] The plan also proposes enacting laws supported by the Christian right,[9][30] such as criminalizing those who send and receive abortion and birth control medications[31][32][33] and eliminating coverage of emergency contraception.[19] Most of Project 2025's writers and contributors worked in either Trump's first administration (2017−2021) or his 2024 election campaign.[a] Several Trump campaign officials maintained contact with Project 2025, seeing its goals as aligned with their Agenda 47 program.[8][39][40][41] Trump later attempted to distance himself from the plan.[b] After he won the 2024 election, he nominated several of the plan's architects and supporters to positions in his second administration.[49][50] Four days into his second term, analysis by Time found that nearly two-thirds of Trump's executive actions "mirror or partially mirror" proposals from Project 2025.[51] ...Project 2025 was established in 2022 with Paul Dans as director to provide the 2024 Republican presidential nominee with a personnel database and ideological framework.[62][40] According to the Johnson Amendment, 501c3 organizations like Heritage cannot explicitly promote a particular election candidate.[63] The Heritage Foundation spent $22 million preparing staffing recommendations for a conservative government in 2025. This was much more than what the group typically does for its staffing recommendations because President Trump said he had terrible staff during his first term.[62] Citing the Reagan-era maxim that "personnel is policy", some political commentators have argued that personnel is the most important aspect of Project 2025.[64][65] The Mandate for Leadership series has had updated editions released in parallel with United States presidential elections since 1981.[67] Heritage calls its Mandate a "policy bible",[67] claiming that the implementation of almost two-thirds of the policies in its 1981 Mandate was attempted by Ronald Reagan,[68] and similarly, the implementation of nearly two-thirds of the policies of its 2015 Mandate was attempted by Trump.[68][69] In April 2023, the Heritage Foundation published the 920-page Mandate, written by hundreds of conservatives.[21] Nearly half of the project's collaborating organizations have received dark money contributions from a network of fundraising groups linked to Leonard Leo, a major conservative donor and key figure in guiding the selection of Trump's federal judicial nominees.[70] The 2024 Trump campaign said no outside group speaks for Trump and that Agenda 47 is the only official plan for a second Trump presidency.[71][72][73] Policy suggestions from groups in Project 2025 reflected Trump's own words. His campaign said it appreciated these groups' policy suggestions.[74][68] On July 5, 2024, Trump denied any knowledge of Project 2025.[75] Political commentators including Robert Reich, Michael Steele, and Olivia Troye dismissed Trump's denial.[76][77][78]. Heritage briefed other 2024 Republican presidential primaries candidates on the project, but focused on policies Trump could implement. Project 2025 is not the only conservative program with a database of prospective recruits for a potential Republican administration, though these initiatives' leaders all have connections to Trump.[79][39] In general, these initiatives seek to help Trump avoid the mistakes of his first term, when he arrived at the White House unprepared.[80] By reclassifying tens of thousands of merit-based federal civil service workers as political appointees in order to replace them with Trump loyalists,[15][37] some fear they would be willing to bend or break protocol, or in some cases violate laws, to achieve his goals.[8] On July 2, 2024, Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts created controversy by saying, "we are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be."[75][100] Shortly afterward, the Foundation released a statement adding, "Unfortunately, they have a well established record of instigating the opposite."[101] .... Project 2025 released a statement on July 5 saying the project "does not speak for any candidate or campaign" and that it is up to "the next conservative president" to decide which of its recommendations to implement.[69] In July 2024, Trump reiterated his disavowal of Project 2025,[102][103][104] but in the same month Project 2025 Director Paul Dans confirmed that his team had ongoing connections with Trump's campaign.[40] During the week of July 29, Dans told Project staff that he would step down as director in August to focus on the election campaign.[105][106] Kevin Roberts assumed leadership of the project.[107] Roger Severino is vice president of domestic policy at The Heritage Foundation. He, Roberts, and Dans wrote much of the Mandate.[32][95][108] ...Dans, also an editor of the project's guiding document, described Project 2025 as preparing a staff of conservatives to fight the deep state with their training from partner organizations.[111][112] He wrote that Project 2025 has four pillars:[95]: xiv  The Mandate for Leadership A personnel database, open to submissions from the public that Heritage can share with Trump's team The Presidential Administration Academy, an online educational system A secret playbook for creating teams and plans to activate in case the president says "so help me God".[95]: xiv Economy See also: Foreign trade of the United States and United States energy independence Project 2025 provides a range of options for economic reform that vary in their degree of radicalism. It is critical of the Federal Reserve, which it blames for the business cycle, and proposes abolishing it; it advocates instead that the dollar be backed by a commodity like gold.[108] It recommends eliminating full employment from the Federal Reserve's mandate, instead focusing solely on targeting inflation.[95]: 740 [114] The Project envisions eventually moving from an income tax to a consumption tax, such as a national sales tax.[115] In the interim, the Project seeks to extend the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA).[116] It further recommends simplifying individual income taxes to two flat tax rates: 15% on incomes up to the Social Security Wage Base ($168,600 in 2024), and 30% above that. An unspecified standard deduction would be included, but most deductions, credits and exclusions would be eliminated.[115] The proposal would likely increase taxes significantly for millions of low- and middle-income households.[117] It aims to reduce the corporate tax rate from 21% to 18% because the Mandate authors see it as the most harmful tax. The 2017 TCJA cut the rate from 35% to 21%.[18] It proposes reducing the capital gains rate for high earners to 15% from the 2024 level of 20%.[117] After these reforms are implemented, it recommends that a three-fifths vote threshold be required to pass legislation that increases individual or corporate income tax.[95]: 698 [118] The constitutionality of such "legislative entrenchment" is debated, but most legal scholars agree it is not allowed.[119]: 28  The project proposes merging the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Census Bureau, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics into a single organization, and aligning its mission with conservative principles. It recommends maximizing the hiring of political appointees in statistical analysis positions.[115] It also recommends that Congress abolish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.[120] It plans to abolish the FTC, which is responsible for enforcing antitrust laws, and shrink the role of the National Labor Relations Board, which protects employees' ability to organize and fight unfair labor practices.[121] Some of the authors worked for Amazon, Meta, and Bitcoin companies directly or as lobbyists.[122] One expert claimed inconsistencies in the plan are designed for fund-raising from certain industries or donors that would benefit.[121] Project 2025 suggests abolishing the Economic Development Administration (EDA) at the Department of Commerce, and, if that proves impossible, having the EDA instead assist "rural communities destroyed by the Biden administration's attack on domestic energy production".[95]: 683  Project 2025 also seeks to facilitate innovations in the civilian nuclear industry.[27]: 9 [123] The project declares that "God ordained the Sabbath as a day of rest" and recommends legislation requiring that Americans be paid more for working on Sunday.[95]: 589  It also aims to institute work requirements for people reliant on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which issues food stamps.[14] It recommends that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration be more lenient on small businesses and that the overtime exception threshold be kept low enough not to burden businesses in rural areas.[124] Project 2025 is split on the issue of foreign trade.[108] Mandate author Peter Navarro advocates what he calls a fair trade policy of reciprocal, higher tariffs on the European Union, China, and India, to achieve a balance of trade, though not all U.S. levies are lower than those of its major trading partners.[125] On the other hand, Mandate author Kent Lassman of the Competitive Enterprise Institute promotes a free trade policy of lowering or eliminating tariffs to cut costs for consumers, and calls for more free trade agreements.[125] He argues that Trump's and Biden's tariffs have undermined not just the American economy, but also the nation's international alliances.[116] Regarding banking regulation, Mandate recommends combining the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and parts of the Federal Reserve that perform regulatory and fiscal supervision.[95]: 705  The document says deposit insurance undermines bank depositors' incentive to monitor their banks' balance sheet.[95]: 743  Education and research See also: 2025 United States government data removals, Education in the United States, and Common Core A major concern of Project 2025 is what it calls "woke propaganda" in public schools.[108] In response, it envisions a significant reduction of the federal government's role in education, and the elevation of school choice and parental rights.[16] To achieve that goal, it proposes closing the Department of Education, and giving states control over education funding and policy.[14] Programs under the Individuals with Disabilities' Education Act (IDEA) would be administered instead by the Department of Health and Human Services. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) would become part of the Census Bureau.[16] The federal government, according to Project 2025, should be no more than a statistics-keeping organization when it comes to education. Federal enforcement of civil rights in schools should be significantly curtailed, and such responsibilities should be transferred to the Department of Justice, which would then be able to enforce the law only through litigation. The federal government should no longer investigate schools for signs of disparate impacts of disciplinary measures on the basis of race or ethnicity. Project 2025 blames federal government overreach for schools prioritizing "racial parity in school discipline indicators—such as detentions, suspensions, and expulsions—over student safety".[16] Project 2025 further advocates that Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 be allowed to expire, removing $18 billion in federal funds for schools in low-income areas.[16] Public funds for education should be available as school vouchers with no strings attached, even for parents sending their children to private or religious schools.[16] Cuts should be made to the funding for free school meals. The Head Start program that provides services to children of low-income families should be ended. Roger Severino claimed the program does not provide value, but never provided evidence for his claims.[126] For the project's backers, education is a private rather than a public good.[16] Project 2025 criticizes any programs to forgive student loans.[127] Project 2025 encourages the president to ensure that "any research conducted with taxpayer dollars serves the national interest in a concrete way in line with conservative principles".[95]: 686  For example, research in climatology should receive considerably less funding, in line with Project 2025's views on climate change.[128] Project 2025 hopes to work with Congress to create legislation that would prohibit the Department of Education from using any funds or to enforce any regulations under Title IX guidance from the previous administration. It also would ask that there be a new rulemaking process that would rescind the Biden administrations Title IX policies, and restore the previous regulations of Title IX from the previous Trump administration. Additionally, Project 2025 seeks to work with Congress to amend Title IX due process requirements, change the definition of “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth, and to strengthen protections for faith-based educational institutions. [129] Just after President Trump was sworn into office, he signed an executive order that will change how the federal government enforces Title IX, and is believed to be a part of a broader effort to restrict the rights of transgender people. This could impact how institutions of higher education protect transgender or non-gender conforming students.[130] Environment and climate See also: Climate change in the United States, Environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration, Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States, United States offshore drilling debate, and NOAA under the second presidency of Donald Trump Mandate's climate section was written by several people, including Mandy Gunasekara, whom Trump previously chose as the EPA's chief of staff, and Bernard McNamee, whom Trump appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.[131] Four of the report's top authors have publicly engaged in climate change denial.[132][21] McNamee dismisses climate change mitigation as progressive policy.[21] Gunasekara acknowledges the reality of human-made climate change but considers it politicized and overstated.[133] She claimed to have been an instrumental advocate for the United States withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in 2017. On the other hand, project director Paul Dans accepts only that climate change is real, not that human activity causes it.[132] The manifesto advises the president to go further than merely nullifying Biden's executive orders on climate change, to "eradicate climate change references from absolutely everywhere".[21][134] It proposes abandoning strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change, including by repealing regulations that curb emissions, and abolishing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which the project calls "one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry".[132][135][131][136] One scientific expert said these policies would endanger lives, are shooting the messenger, and serve the climate change denial movement.[46][137] The Inflation Reduction Act increased the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office's loan budget from $40 billion to $400 billion.[138] Project 2025 supports repealing the Inflation Reduction Act and closing the Loan Programs Office. McNamee advocates that the DOE reorient funding at the national labs it sponsors from climate change and renewable energy research to making energy more affordable.[132] He advocates entrenching these changes by closing the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations.[21] Project 2025 advocates downsizing the EPA.[131][21] In particular, it seeks to close the EPA's Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights.[139][21][140] Heritage Foundation energy and climate director Diana Furchtgott-Roth has suggested that the EPA support the consumption of more natural gas, despite climatologists' concern that this would increase leaks of methane (CH4), a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2) in the short term.[132] Project 2025 wants to reverse a 2009 EPA finding that carbon dioxide emissions are harmful to human health, preventing the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.[132][21] It also advocates preventing the EPA from using private health data to determine the effects of pollution. Under its blueprint, the expansion of the national electrical grid would be blocked, the transition to renewable energy stymied, and funding for the DOE's Grid Deployment Office curtailed. Nonpartisan experts said renewable energy projects will have to slow down if the electrical grid is not expanded.[21] The project further advocates that states be prevented from adopting stricter regulations on vehicular emissions, as the state of California has,[132] and that regulations on the fossil fuel industry be relaxed.[128] For example, restrictions on oil drilling imposed by the Bureau of Land Management could be removed.[131] Project 2025's manifesto includes eliminating climate change mitigation from the National Security Council's agenda and encouraging allied nations to use fossil fuels.[132] It declares that the federal government has an "obligation to develop vast oil and gas and coal resources" and supports Arctic drilling.[132] Project 2025 recommends incentives for members of the general public "to identify scientific flaws and research misconduct" and to legally challenge climatology research.[21] Republican climate advocates have disagreed with Project 2025's climate policy. Joseph Rainey Center for Public Policy president Sarah E. Hunt[141] considered the Inflation Reduction Act crucial, and U.S. Representative (now U.S. Senator) John Curtis said it was vital that Republicans "engage in supporting good energy and climate policy". American Conservation Coalition founder Benji Backer noted growing consensus among younger Republicans that human activity causes climate change, and called the project wrongheaded.[132] The project abandons the habitat conservation goal of 30 by 30,[46] and advocates that the National Flood Insurance Program be replaced by private insurers.[142] The League of Conservation Voters has criticized this as a giveaway to private industry.[142] Expansion of presidential powers Project 2025 seeks to place the federal government's entire executive branch under direct presidential control, eliminating the independence of the DOJ,[143] the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and other agencies.[4][62] The plan is based on a controversial interpretation of unitary executive theory, "an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to centralize greater control over the government in the White House."[144][35][145][146][147] Kevin Roberts said that all federal employees should answer to the president.[4] Since the Reagan administration, the Supreme Court has embraced a stronger unitary executive led by conservative justices, the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundation, and overturned some precedents limiting Project 2025's vision of executive power.[6][7][148] Project 2025 advocates for all Department of State employees in leadership roles to be dismissed before January 20, 2025.[149] It explicitly recommends replacing these executive branch positions with ideologically vetted State Department leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation.[150] Kiron Skinner, who wrote the State Department chapter of Project 2025, ran the department's office of policy planning for less than a year during the Trump administration before being forced out of the department. She considers most State Department employees too left-wing and wants them replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When asked by Peter Bergen in June 2024 if she could name a time when State Department employees obstructed Trump policy, she said she could not.[149][151] If Project 2025 were implemented, Congressional approval would not be required for the sale of military equipment and ammunition to a foreign nation,[5] unless "unanimous congressional support is guaranteed".[citation needed] In 2019, Trump said that Article Two of the U.S. Constitution grants him the "right to do whatever as president", a common claim among supporters of the unitary executive theory. Similarly, in 2018, Trump claimed he could fire special counsel Robert Mueller.[62] Trump is not the first president to consider policies related to the unitary executive theory.[152][153] The idea has seen a resurgence and popularization within the Republican Party since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001.[154] In 2023, Stephen Miller proposed immediately mobilizing the military at the start of second Trump administration for domestic law and immigration enforcement under the Insurrection Act of 1807.[28] Jeffrey Clark, a senior fellow at CRA and Project 2025 contributor, has investigated using the Insurrection Act for other purposes, including suppressing protests like the George Floyd protests.[29] The Heritage Foundation denied Project 2025 planned to use the Insurrection Act, but Mandate has a single line that says it is possible to use the Insurrection Act to secure the southern border.[155][156] Russell Vought said the CRA was working to keep legal and defense communities from preventing use of the Insurrection Act.[157] Clark also promoted making the Department of Justice less independent of the president in order to let Trump prosecute his political rivals.[143][158] For his alleged acts while working at the DOJ during the end of Trump's term, Clark has become a co-defendant in the Georgia election racketeering prosecution and an unnamed co-conspirator in the federal prosecution of Trump for alleged election obstruction.[29][159] Heritage said Project 2025 contains no plans to prosecute political enemies.[citation needed] Media Matters reported that several Project 2025 partners praised the 2024 Supreme Court decision Trump v. United States, which grants broad immunity from prosecution for acts committed in the course of a president's official duties.[160][better source needed] Democracy experts, political scholars, and other commentators have described the project as dangerous,[79] risking authoritarianism,[161] and apocalyptic.[127][5] Many legal experts have said it would undermine the rule of law,[13] the separation of powers,[5] the separation of church and state,[12] and civil liberties.[5][13][14] Political experts have said Project 2025 represents significant executive aggrandizement,[79][162] a type of democratic backsliding involving government institutional changes made by elected executives that has been seen in Russia, Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela.[163][164] Cornell University political scientist Rachel Beatty Riedl says this global phenomenon represents threats to democratic rule not from violence but rather from using democratic institutions to consolidate executive power. She has said, "if Project 2025 is implemented, what it means is a dramatic decrease in American citizens' ability to engage in public life based on the kind of principles of liberty, freedom and representation that are accorded in a democracy."[162] Phillip Wallach, a senior fellow studying separation of powers at the American Enterprise Institute, characterized the project as visions that bleed into authoritarian fantasies.[165] Donald B. Ayer, the deputy attorney general under George H. W. Bush, said, Project 2025 seems to be full of a whole array of ideas that are designed to let Donald Trump function as a dictator, by completely eviscerating many of the restraints built into our system. He really wants to destroy any notion of a rule of law in this country ... The reports about Donald Trump's Project 2025 suggest that he is now preparing to do a bunch of things totally contrary to the basic values we have always lived by. If Trump were to be elected and implement some of the ideas he is apparently considering, no one in this country would be safe.[13] Federal staffing See also: Spoils system and Schedule F appointment Project 2025 proposes reclassifying tens of thousands of federal civil service workers as political appointees in order to replace them with Trump loyalists.[8] It established a personnel database shaped by the ideology of Donald Trump. Throughout his first term, Trump was accused of removing people he considered disloyal, regardless of their ideological conviction, such as former attorney general William Barr. In 2020, White House Presidential Personnel Office employees James Bacon and John McEntee developed a questionnaire to test potential government employees' commitment to Trumpism. Bacon and McEntee joined Project 2025 in May 2023.[99] The project uses a similar questionnaire to screen potential recruits for adherence to its agenda.[2][166] For Trump's second term the project recommends that a White House Counsel be selected who is "deeply committed" to the president's "America First" agenda.[5][62] In 2020, Trump established the Schedule F job classification by executive order. Biden rescinded this classification at the beginning of his presidency. Russell Vought, who worked on Schedule F during Trump's first term, joined Project 2025.[62] He said that Trump's second term would destroy the administrative state and fire and traumatize federal workers.[5][157] He advocated reviving Schedule F during Trump's second term. Kevin Roberts said: "People will lose their jobs. Hopefully their lives are able to flourish in spite of that. Buildings will be shut down. Hopefully they can be repurposed for private industry."[167] On January 20, 2025, Trump signed an executive order to that effect.[168] In response to Schedule F's reinstatement, several unions sued and took other protective measures to prevent its full implementation.[169][170][better source needed] At the end of Biden's term, about 4,000 government positions were deemed political appointments.[5][62] If fully implemented, Schedule F will affect tens of thousands of professional federal civil servants who have spent many years working under both Democratic and Republican administrations.[5][62] According to Georgetown University professor of public policy Donald Moynihan, while apolitical and meritocratic selection of public servants is vital to administrative functioning, the Republican Party increasingly views them and public sector unions as threats, or resources to be controlled.[171] Political scientist Francis Fukuyama has said that while the federal bureaucracy is in dire need of reform, Schedule F would "dangerously undermine" the government's functionality.[172] The Heritage Foundation planned to have 20,000 personnel in its database by the end of 2024.[62][173][better source needed][needs update] Project 2025 encourages Congress to require federal contractors to be 70% U.S. citizens, ultimately raising the limit to 95%.[95]: 612  It also calls for the president to reinstate Executive Orders 13836, 13837 and 13839, which relate to how federal agencies address labor unions, grievances, and seniority.[95]: 81  By June 2024, the American Accountability Foundation, a conservative opposition research organization led by former Senate aide Tom Jones, was researching certain key high-ranking federal civil servants' backgrounds. Called Project Sovereignty 2025, the undertaking received a $100,000 grant from Heritage. Its objective was to post online the names of 100 people who might oppose Trump's agenda. Announcing the grant in May 2024, Heritage wrote that the research's purpose was "to alert Congress, a conservative administration, and the American people to the presence of anti-American bad actors burrowed into the administrative state and ensure appropriate action is taken." Some found Project Sovereignty 2025 reminiscent of McCarthyism, when many Americans were persecuted and blacklisted as alleged communists.[174][175][176] Max Stier of the Partnership for Public Service voiced concern the project would revive the early-American spoils-and-patronage system that awarded government jobs to those loyal to a party or elected official rather than by merit. The Pendleton Act of 1883 mandated that federal jobs be awarded by merit.[177] Former Trump campaign and presidency senior advisor Steve Bannon has advocated for the plan on his War Room podcast, hosting Jeffrey Clark and others working on the project.[13] Healthcare and public health Roger Severino wrote Mandate's chapter on health care. He accuses the Biden administration of undermining the traditional nuclear family, and wants to reform the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to promote this household structure.[19] According to Project 2025, the federal government should prohibit Medicare from negotiating drug prices[19] and promote the Medicare Advantage program, which consists of private insurance plans.[178] Federal healthcare providers should deny transgender people gender-affirming care.[19] Project 2025 suggests a number of ways to cut funding for Medicaid, such as caps on federal funding, limits on lifetime benefits per capita, and letting state governments impose stricter work requirements on beneficiaries of the program.[20][179] Other proposals include limiting state use of provider taxes, eliminating preexisting federal beneficiary protections and requirements, increasing eligibility determinations and asset test determinations to make it harder to enroll in, apply for, and renew Medicaid, providing an option to turn Medicaid into a voucher program, and eliminating federal oversight of state Medicaid programs.[20] The project also advocates cutting funding to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).[180] Project 2025 aims to alter the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by making it easier to fire employees and to remove DEI programs. The agency would also be stopped from funding research with embryonic stem cells or promoting equal participation by women.[citation needed] Conservatives consider the NIH corrupt and politically biased.[181] Severino says the CDC should not publish health advice, because it is inherently political.[178] Related: https://www.project2025.org/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/04/project-2025-top-goal/682142/ “Freedom is a fragile thing, and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction,” Ronald Reagan said in 1967, in his inaugural address as governor of California. Kevin D. Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, approvingly quotes the speech in his foreword to Project 2025, the conservative think tank’s blueprint for the Trump administration. Roberts writes that the plan has four goals for protecting its vision of freedom: restoring the family “as the centerpiece of American life”; dismantling the federal bureaucracy; defending U.S. “sovereignty, borders, and bounty”; and securing “our God-given individual rights to live freely.” Project 2025 has proved to be a good road map for understanding the first months of Donald Trump’s second term, but most of the focus has been on efforts to dismantle the federal government as we know it. The effort to restore traditional families has been less prominent so far, but it could reshape the everyday lives of all Americans in fundamental ways. Its place atop the list of priorities is no accident—it reflects the most deeply held views of many of the contributors—though the destruction of the administrative state might end up imperiling the Trump team’s ability to actually carry out the changes the authors want. Agenda 47 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_47 Agenda 47 (styled by the Trump campaign as Agenda47) is the campaign manifesto of President Donald Trump, which details policies that would be implemented upon his election as the 47th president of the United States.[a] Agenda 47 is a collection of formal policy plans of Donald Trump,[1][2] many of which would rely on executive orders and significantly expand executive power.[3] The platform has been criticized for its approach to climate change[4] and public health;[5] its legality and feasibility;[6][7] and the risk that it will increase inflation. Some columnists have described it as fascist[8][9] or authoritarian.[10][11] In September 2024, Trump's campaign launched a tour called "Team Trump Agenda 47 Policy Tour" to promote Agenda 47.[12][13] In 2023, Trump campaign officials acknowledged the Project 2025 aligned well with Agenda 47;[19] however, Trump repeatedly disclaimed it in 2024.[20] As of June 2024, Project 2025 had reportedly caused some annoyance in the Trump campaign which had historically preferred fewer and more vague policy proposals to limit opportunities for criticism and maintain flexibility.[16] Some commentators have argued that Project 2025 is the most detailed look at what a Trump administration would look like.[16] Agenda 47 and Project 2025 share many themes and policies, including expanding presidential power such as through reissuing Schedule F,[21]: min.00:14 [22] cuts to the Department of Education, mass deportations of illegal immigrants,[23] the death penalty for drug dealers, and using the US National Guard in liberal cities with high crime rates or those that are "disorderly".[24][25][26] The plans include constructing "freedom cities" on empty federal land, investing in flying car manufacturing, introducing baby bonuses to encourage a baby boom, implementing protectionist trade policies, and over forty others. Seventeen of the policies that Trump says he will implement if elected would require congressional approval. Some of his plans are legally controversial, such as ending birthright citizenship, and may require amending the U.S. Constitution.[27][15][28] Many of the proposals are contentious. One Agenda 47 proposal would impose the death penalty on drug dealers and human traffickers, as well as placing Mexican cartels on the United States list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.[26] The campaign website's layout has changed.[2] As of September 2024, there is a new section called "Platform," where a synthesis of the main policies can be found.[29][b] Policies in detail As of September 2024, the policies are detailed in 46 videos, the first one uploaded on December 15, 2022, and the last one on December 22, 2023.[31][16][c][d] The videos are usually accompanied by a transcription and often by complementary material regarding the policy in question, as exemplified by the proposition Agenda47: Rescuing America's Auto Industry from Joe Biden's Disastrous Job-Killing Policies,[34] which contains links to reports and articles from entities such as the America First Policy Institute,[35] The Heritage Foundation,[36] and The Harris Poll,[37] news articles from entities like Reuters,[38][39] The American Oil & Gas Reporter,[40] and Fox Business,[41] and related propositions in the campaign website.[original research?] Economy Propositions relating to the economy include: Restrictions on Chinese ownership of infrastructure in the United States, including energy, technology, telecommunications, farmland, natural resources, medical supplies, and other strategic national assets, preventing all future Chinese purchases, and forcing the Chinese to sell any current holdings.[42][43] Ending "Joe Biden's war on American energy" and deregulating domestic production, getting out of the Paris Agreement, and issuing fast approvals to every oil infrastructure project presented to his administration.[44][45] Universal baseline tariffs on most foreign products, which will increase incrementally if other countries manipulate their currency or "otherwise engage in unfair trading practices", and lowering taxes. Revoking China's Most Favored Nation trade status, gradually stopping all Chinese imports of essential goods, stopping American companies from investing in China, and banning federal contracts for any company that outsources to China.[46][47] Decreasing trade deficits, especially with China.[48][49] Not bailing out failing banks, but "unleash[ing] energy production, slash[ing] regulations", and repealing "Biden's tax hikes", to reduce inflation.[50][51] Passing the "Trump Reciprocal Trade Act". If any country applies a certain percent tariff on American-made goods, the same tariff will be applied on theirs; the other countries "will have two choices – they'll get rid of their tariffs on us, or they will pay us hundreds of billions of dollars, and the United States will make an absolute FORTUNE." This is meant to help agricultural states and manufacturers.[52][53] To "save America's auto industry from Joe Biden's radical Green New Deal policies", by terminating all of Biden's policies regarding emission regulations, fossil fuels, and electric vehicles, specifically the "mandates designed to force Americans into expensive electric cars", subsidies for "electric cars for rich people", and "DOUBLED CAFÉ standards". Also, asking Canada and Mexico for full compliance with the terms of USMCA regarding the amount of regional auto parts content in North American cars which reduction benefited China and other countries, ending delays in federal drilling permits and leases, and restoring the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve.[34][54] He promised "higher wages for auto workers"[55][56] Tariffs were a policy in Trump's first term, centered on China, and later extended to the European Union, Canada, and Mexico.[57] They led to retaliatory tariffs imposed by the affected countries, and to a trade war with China, which "raised the price for items such as baseball hats, luggage, bicycles, TVs, sneakers, and a variety of materials used by American manufacturers." They also caused loss of jobs and hurt manufacturers and farmers.[58][59][60] Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that "those tariffs on Chinese goods have “imposed more harm on consumers and businesses” than on China."[61] Trump's new economic proposals drew criticism from 16 Nobel prize-winning economists[62][63] (Trump's campaign and supporters rebuked the laureates' critiques.[64][65]), Wharton School (Trump's alma mater),[66][67] Goldman Sachs,[68][69] and Moody's Analytics, among others.[70] Education Cutting federal funding for any school or program teaching critical race theory or "gender ideology", directing the Departments of Justice and Education to open civil rights investigations into any school district that has engaged in race-based discrimination; also, "remov[ing] the radicals who have infiltrated the federal Department of Education" and "keep[ing] men out of women's sports." Creating a new way to certify teachers based on their patriotism, giving preferential funding and treatment to states and school districts that abolish teacher tenure for grades K through 12 and adopt merit pay, cutting the number of school administrators (specifically the ones in charge of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)), and adopting direct election of school principals by the parents.[71][72] "Reclaim[ing] our once great educational institutions from the radical Left" by using the college accreditation system; firing the "radical Left accreditors" and substituting them with new ones "who will impose real standards on colleges". The standards will include "defending the American tradition and Western civilization"; protecting free speech; eliminating "wasteful" administrative positions, specifically all the ones dealing with DEI; offering accelerated and low-cost degrees; providing job placement and career services; and implementing college entrance and exit exams to prove learning quality. Also, directing the Department of Justice to pursue federal civil rights cases against schools that "engage in racial discrimination"; the ones that persist in "discrimination under the guise of equity" will have their endowment taxed, and through budget reconciliation, "I will advance a measure to have them fined up to the entire amount of their endowment." Part of the seized funds will be used as restitution "for victims of these illegal and unjust policies".[32][33][73] According to The Nation, "Many experts in higher education have begun to sound the alarm that such actions may infringe on academic freedom and institutional autonomy – two cornerstones of American higher education", whereas Trump’s National Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, "By increasing access to school choice, empowering parents to have a voice in their child's education, and supporting good teachers, President Trump will improve academic excellence for all students."[74] "Ten principles for achieving great schools that lead to great jobs", by ensuring that instead of "indoctrinating young people with inappropriate racial, sexual, and political material", schools must refocus on preparing "children to succeed in the world of work". The principles are: "Restoring Parental Rights", specifically to control the education of their children. This includes being made aware of academic standards, updating on acts of violence, inspecting "professional development materials", being notified about guest speakers, reviewing the school's budget, knowing about bullying, health and mental health concerns, "to have the right to opt out of school healthcare services", and be immediately notified if any school employee "has worked to change their children’s name, pronouns, or understanding of his or her gender". "Great Principals and Great Teachers", i.e. empowering parents and local school boards to hire and fire principals and teachers. "Knowledge and Skills, Not CRT and Gender Indoctrination", i.e. teaching "reading, writing, math, science, arithmetic, and other truly useful subjects". This includes getting "the left's 'equity' agenda out of our classrooms." "Love of Country". This includes reinstating the 1776 Commission. "Freedom to Pray", i.e. "we will support bringing back prayer to our schools". "Safe, Secure, and Drug-Free", by "immediate expulsion for any student who harms a teacher or another student". This includes sending the "out-of-control troublemakers OUT of the classroom and INTO reform schools and corrections facilities", supporting "school districts that allow highly trained teachers to carry concealed weapons at school", and supporting federal funding to hire trained gun-owners as armed guards. Also, directing the "U.S. Food and Drug Administration to convene an independent outside panel to investigate whether transgender hormone treatments and ideology increase the risk of extreme depression, aggression, and violence. He will also look at whether common psychiatric drugs, as well as genetically engineered cannabis and other narcotics, are causing psychotic breaks". Additionally, immediate suspension or expulsion for illegal drug use or possession in school. "Universal School Choice". This includes "that parents can send their children to the public, private, or religious school that best suits" them. "Project-Based Learning", "to help train [the students] for meaningful work outside the classroom". "Internships and Work Experiences" for all students. This includes implementing "funding preferences for schools that actively work to help students secure internships, part-time work, and summer jobs". "Jobs and Career Counseling", provided by all schools. Also, closing the Department of Education, and sending all education matters back to the states.[75][76] Supporting homeschooling, by allowing homeschool parents to use 529 education savings accounts to spend up to $10,000 a year per child, tax-free. Also, ensuring that every homeschooling family is "entitled to full access to the benefits available to non-homeschooled students – including participating in athletic programs, clubs, after school activities, educational trips, and more".[77][78] Endowing the American Academy with funds collected by "taxing the large endowments of private universities plagued by antisemitism" (implicitly referring to the 2024 pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses). The American Academy's mission will be to make "a truly world-class education available to every American, free of charge, and do it without adding a single dime to the federal debt", covering all subjects and trades, online, for free, also "using study groups, mentors, industry partnerships, and the latest breakthrough in computing". According to the Trump campaign, the Academy will be strictly apolitical, it will compete directly with the university system by granting degree credentials recognized by the government and federal contractors, it will award the equivalent of a bachelor's degree, and it will allow people to complete an unfinished college education.[79][80] According to Politico, "[u]sing the federal government to create an entirely new educational institution aimed at competing with the thousands of existing schools would drastically reshape American higher education", adding that this policy would likely need U.S. Congress approval, and that it targets the over "40 million Americans who have some college but never completed their degree", similarly to some of the student debt relief efforts by the Biden administration, but differing in the source for its financing.[81] Expansion of presidential powers Trump's plan to expand presidential powers is based largely on a controversial and not widely-held interpretation of the constitution known as the unitary executive theory.[82][83][84][85] The plan includes: "Dismantl[ing] the deep state and reclaim[ing] our democracy from Washington corruption", by firing government employees, reissuing Executive Order 13957 (Schedule F), "restoring the president's authority to fire rogue bureaucrats". Also, reforming FISA courts, declassifying and publishing "all documents on Deep State spying, censorship, and corruption", taking action against "government leakers", making every Inspector General's office independent and separated from the departments they oversee, establishing an independent auditing system to monitor the intelligence agencies, moving government positions out of Washington, banning federal employees from taking jobs at the companies they regulate, and "push" a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress.[21][86][87] According to the Associated Press, the proposal of moving some 10,000 federal employees from Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia: "it’s causing a lot of anxiety, a lot of discomfort within the workforce, as you are faced with these strong, negative, anti-federal worker stances and this uncertainty of what might happen to your job, your home and your livelihood." Larry Hogan, former Governor of Maryland, stated that the relocations, "would be devastating to the region, the state of Maryland and bad for the federal government." The measure is seen[by whom?] as retaliatory and damaging to the states' economy. Filipe Campante, a Bloomberg Distinguished professor at Johns Hopkins University, stated: "I think it is a positive factor for accountability that you have civil servants also operating as a check on political appointees, and this would be weakened by moving these people away from where the center of the government is, so I think from that perspective it would reduce accountability. Obviously, then, it depends on whether you think this accountability is good or not."[88] Cutting federal regulations by restoring Executive Order 13771 and asking Congress to make it permanent. Implementing a regulatory budget, aiming at reducing the federal government every year. Requiring all government regulations to be posted publicly in a central database, failing which they will be made null and void. Signing a law to "ban bureaucrats from taking any enforcement action based on informal guidance alone". Bringing the independent regulatory agencies, such as the FCC and the FTC, "back under Presidential authority". Creating "an ultra-streamlined federal regulatory framework specifically for Freedom Cities". Requiring federal employees to pass a new Civil Service test about "Constitutional limited government", including command of due process rights, equal protection, free speech, religious liberty, federalism, the Fourth Amendment, and other constitutional limits on federal power.[89][90] Stopping unnecessary government expenditure by restoring impoundment, challenging the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 in court, or getting Congress to overturn it. The consequent savings will be in the form of tax reductions, and this will stop inflation and reduce the deficit. Every federal agency will be ordered to identify the parts of their budgets that "can be saved through efficiencies and waste reduction using Impoundment". This will not include defense, Medicare, or Social Security; they will be strengthened with some of those funds.[91][92] The Washington Post has said that this policy "could upend the balance of power between the three branches of the federal government", "could provoke a dramatic constitutional showdown, with vast consequences for how the government operates", and that "legal scholars" say it "could violate the Constitution and usurp congressional authority by consolidating more power in the executive branch".[93] It also stated that "unilaterally zero[ing] out any program he doesn't like, or whose recipient has angered him, regardless of Congress's instructions" would be illegal, even if Trump gets the Impoundment Control Act repealed.[94] The New Republic called it a "fascist plan".[95] On its part, The Hill stated that, on the contrary, impounding is "common sense", and "a key tool for the president to pursue U.S. foreign policy and protect national security".[96] Foreign affairs Negotiating an end to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 24 hours.[97][98][e] Reshuffling government employees in charge of foreign policy, namely "clean[ing] house of all of the warmongers and America-Last globalists in the Deep State, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the national security industrial complex."[99][100] "The defense bureaucracy, the intelligence services, and all the rest need to be completely overhauled and reconstituted to fire the Deep Staters and put America First", and "reevaluating NATO's purpose and mission".[101] Increasing military funding, asking "Europe to reimburse us for the cost of rebuilding the stockpiles sent to Ukraine", and increasing military recruitment by restoring "the proud culture and honor traditions of America's armed forces".[102][103] During the 2024 campaign, Trump developed his propositions, adding: sending troops to Mexico to attack cartel leadership and infrastructure (with the possibility of bombing it), seeking to deport all "resident aliens" who are Hamas sympathizers, and pulling out of the Paris Agreement.[104][6] After Trump's electoral victory, the possibilities of invading Mexico,[105] annexing Canada,[106] retaking the Panama Canal,[107] and buying Greenland,[108][109] or taking them by force, were discussed.[110][111][112] Trump also declared his intent of changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America.[113][114] Healthcare and social security Keeping Medicare and Social Security intact and cutting other federal expenses such as help to foreign countries, and eliminating "mass-releases of illegal aliens ..., left-wing gender programs from our military [and] climate extremism".[115] Reinstating the ban on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investments in 401(k)s, pensions, and retirement accounts via executive order, and working with Congress to enact a permanent ban.[116][117] Establishing a commission of "independent minds who are not bought and paid for by Big Pharma" to investigate the rise in chronic illnesses and health problems, especially in children ("autism, auto-immune disorders, obesity, infertility, serious allergies, and respiratory challenges").[118][119] An increase in chronic conditions in children and youth has been observed.[120][121] Yahoo! News observed that Trump does not mention vaccines in the video discussing this policy, but it was a dog-whistle to anti-vaccine voters, as he was facing Ron DeSantis during the primaries, and the possibility of having Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as a challenger for the presidency.[122] On its part, Axios said that Trump's message could undermine public health, that its language was reminiscent of Robert Kennedy Jr., and that the mentions to Big Pharma appeared in other policies related to education, gender-affirming care, and dismantling the deep state.[123] Ever since, it was repeatedly reported that Trump said he would cut federal funds from schools with masks and vaccine mandates, raising concerns about whether he referred to COVID-19 exclusively or to all vaccines, since all 50 states and Washington, D.C. have laws requiring specific vaccines for students, including measles, rubella, chickenpox, tetanus, pertussis, and polio. Trump's spokespeople said it was only about COVID-19, for which no student vaccination mandates exist.[124][125] In July 2024, an accidentally leaked call from Trump to Kennedy showed the former president questioning the safety of childhood vaccines.[126][127][128] It was also reported that Trump and Kennedy had been in conversations about Kennedy giving his endorsement to Trump in exchange for an appointment in his cabinet.[129][130] In an interview with Chris Cuomo, Kennedy talked about having conversations with Trump, but denied that he was seeking an appointment.[131][f] On August 23, Kennedy suspended his campaign and endorsed Trump.[133][134] In a rally in Arizona on the same day, Trump presented Kennedy, and repeated his "pledge to establish a panel of top experts working with Bobby to investigate what is causing the decades-long increase in chronic health problems and childhood diseases, including auto-immune disorders, autism, obesity, infertility, and many more."[135]: min.05:53  Kennedy told how he got in contact with Trump via "safe food advocate" Calley Means,[135]: min.07:35 [136][137] and said, "Our children are now the unhealthiest, sickest children in the world. Don't you want healthy children?"[135]: min.09:23  After his electoral victory, Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be his Secretary of Health and Human Resources;[138][139] he also selected Dr. Mehmet Oz to be administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).[140][141] Attempting to reduce drug costs by signing an executive order telling "Big Pharma that we will only pay the best price they offer to foreign nations ... this will force Big Pharma to RAISE prices on foreign countries and REDUCE prices very substantially for American Patients".[142] JAMA Health Forum commented on the possible outcome of the 2024 election, saying that it "will have momentous consequences for the future of health care". After comparing the records of Trump and Biden regarding the high price of prescription drugs and health care services, it said, "[h]ow Trump would approach drug price negotiations if elected is unclear. Trump supported federal negotiation of drug prices during his 2016 campaign, however, as president, he did not pursue drug price negotiation and opposed a Democratic price negotiation plan. ... Even though Trump has been inconsistent in his positions on drug prices, his public comments suggest the possibility of bipartisan cooperation."[143][144] Ending "Joe Biden's pharmaceutical shortages", returning the manufacture of essential drugs to the United States, and phasing in tariffs and import restrictions on China.[145] Immigration reforms See also: Birthright citizenship in the United States and Immigration policy of the second Donald Trump administration "A total ban on Biden using taxpayer dollars to free illegal aliens – and criminal penalties for administrative noncompliance."[146] Signing an executive order "making clear to federal agencies that under the correct interpretation of the law, going forward, the future children of illegal aliens will not receive automatic U.S. citizenship." The order will also end "birth tourism" and consequent "chain migration". At least one parent will have to be a citizen or a legal resident for the child to qualify for citizenship. This is based on the "clear meaning of the 14th Amendment, that U.S. Citizenship extends only to those both born in AND 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States". Therefore, children of undocumented immigrants "should not be issued passports, Social Security numbers, or be eligible for certain taxpayer funded welfare benefits", nor have the right to vote.[147][148] Ending "welfare for illegal immigrants and shut down Joe Biden’s abuse of parole authority". This includes reinstating the "action making illegals ineligible for public housing" and terminating "all work permits for illegal aliens". Also, demanding Congress to send a bill "blocking any future President from abusing his power to distribute welfare benefits in this manner".[149] CNN commented, "[s]hould Congress refuse to fund the operation, Trump could turn to a tactic used in his first term to secure more funding for a border wall – redirecting funds from the Pentagon, the source confirmed."[17] After describing the record of Trump's immigration policies from the standpoint of healthcare, JAMA Health Forum said, "[they] had a chilling effect on access to care and benefits among immigrants, including those lawfully present ... Trump has continued these themes in his current campaign, saying that 'welfare is a gigantic magnet drawing people from all over the world.'"[143] He has also promised mass deportations,[150][151][152] especially in the context of the Springfield pet-eating hoax.[153][154][155] Infrastructure and urban planning Holding a contest to charter up to 10 new cities ("Freedom Cities") in undeveloped federal lands. Turning "forgotten communities into hives of industry". Lowering the cost of living for families, specifically, the cost of building a home and buying a new car. Helping young parents, by asking Congress to provide "baby bonuses". Challenging the governors of all 50 states to modernize and beautify cities and public spaces, and "building towering monuments to our true American heroes".[156][157][158] CNN criticized this policy for the lack of details of how would it be financed, "what 'baby bonuses' would amount to or who would qualify", and for how these plans differ from Democratic policies like the "enhanced child tax credit" whose extension beyond 2021 was blocked by Republicans.[61][159] Investing in flying car manufacturing.[15] Repealing Biden's 2021 reversal of Trump's 2020 reversal of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing provision.[160] Celebrating the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by convening a task force called "Salute to America 250", in charge of coordinating with state and local governments to produce an entire year of festivities across the nation, starting on Memorial Day 2025 and continuing through July 4, 2026. Working with all governors to create the "Great American State Fair", a one-year exhibition featuring pavilions from all states, to be built in the Iowa State Fairgrounds. Hosting "Patriot Games", major sporting contests for high school athletes. Signing an executive order to bring back the National Garden of American Heroes, commissioning artists for the first 100 statues. Inviting international leaders and citizens to visit the United States, favoring the tourism industry. Asking American religious communities to pray for the nation and the people. "As we chart a course toward the next 250 years, let us come together and rededicate ourselves as one nation under God."[161][162] Journalism, information, and censorship "Shatter[ing] the left-wing censorship regime", i.e. labeling information as misinformation or disinformation, in the media or social networks, about subjects like the 2020 elections, Covid, and the "Biden Family's criminality". This will be achieved by banning every federal agency from performing that action, firing federal officials who have done it (and depriving them of their vote), investigating and prosecuting all parties involved, and curtailing federal economic support to universities that have done it.[163][164] During his term, Trump made false or misleading statements, which often were spread via social media,[165][166] resulting in social media banning him after the events of January 6, 2021. Contemporary academic publications discussed freedom of speech, the fake news phenomenon, disinformation, and Trump's relationship with them.[167][168][169] On August 25, 2018, PJ Media published a story reporting that 96% of Google search results for Donald Trump were left-leaning.[170][171] On March 21, 2019, Trump signed an Executive Order "aimed at improving transparency and promoting free speech on college campuses:" "Every year the federal government provides educational institutions with more than $35 billion dollars in research funding, all of that money is now at stake. That's a lot of money. They're going to have to not like your views a lot, right?" Trump said. "If a college or university does not allow you to speak, we will not give them money." The order received praise from Charlie Kirk, Sarah Ruger, then director of the toleration and free expression division of the Charles Koch Institute, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), Liberty University, and criticism from Janet Napolitano, then president of the University of California, the American Council on Education, and the American Civil Liberties Union, among others.[172] It was also reported that the Trump administration sought to censure scientific research related to climate change,[173] and that he downplayed the COVID-19 pandemic.[174] On May 15, 2019, the White House announced the launch of a "Tech Bias Reporting tool" for people to report instances of perceived social media bias,[175] that was met with criticism.[176] After Trump stated on Twitter that mail-in voting would lead to massive fraud in the 2020 presidential election, moderators marked the message with a "potentially misleading" warning, linking the post to fact-checking websites. On May 28, 2020, Trump signed the "Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship" (EO 13925), an executive order directing regulatory action at Section 230.[177] After considerable controversy, the order was later rescinded by President Biden. In July 2021, after being deplatformed by social media companies, Trump sued them arguing they had violated his First Amendment rights to speak freely. These events elicited discussion about censorship in social media.[178][179][180] In February 2022, Trump launched Truth Social, and in May, his lawsuit was dismissed.[181] Law enforcement Increasing investment in police personnel, increasing their liability protections, enforcing stop-and-frisk and existing gun laws, cracking down on the open use of illegal drugs, and cooperating with ICE to arrest and deport undocumented immigrants. Directing the DOJ to open civil rights investigations into "radical left prosecutor's offices" (Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco) to determine whether they have "engaged in race-based enforcement of the law", and giving "the victims of their Marxist policies the right to sue local officials for harm and suffering". "Dismantling of all criminal organizations." The death penalty for drug dealers and human traffickers. Sending the National Guard to restore safety in cities "where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order". Ordering the Education and Justice Departments to "overhaul federal standards on disciplining minors". Legislating concealed carry reciprocity. Increasing border controls.[182] "Waging war" on drug cartels, using Title 42 to return trafficked children to their home countries, urging Congress to "ensure that anyone caught trafficking children [and women] across our border receives the death penalty immediately", and a recommendation to watch Sound of Freedom.[183][184] Appointing 100 U.S. Attorneys who "will be the polar opposite of the Soros District Attorneys" (referring to a conspiracy theory that Alvin Bragg, the district attorney who indicted Trump in 2023, has been "bought and paid for" by George Soros.). Overhauling the Department of Justice and the FBI. Launching civil rights investigations into "Marxist local district attorneys" in Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and other cities, including "federal subpoenas of their staff, their emails, and their records to determine whether they have blatantly violated federal Civil Rights law". Launching a federal inquiry into the prosecutor of the Garret Foster case, and ordering the Department of Justice "to establish a task force on protecting the right to self-defense". Investigating the "use of police state tactics by federal authorities to arrest conservatives and Christians". Confronting the "radicalization" of law schools, reforming bar associations, and stopping "the purge of conservative lawyers from major law firms".[185] Deploying all necessary military assets to impose a full naval embargo on the cartels, ordering the "Department of Defense to make appropriate use of special forces, cyber warfare, and other overt and covert actions" against cartels, which will be designed as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, and cutting their access to global financial systems. Forging a partnership with neighboring governments, or "exposing their corruption". Asking "Congress to pass legislation ensuring that drug smugglers and human traffickers receive the Death Penalty".[186] National security Building a missile defense shield similar to Israel's Iron Dome, as a deterrent of and protection from foreign missile attacks.[187] Trump has repeatedly mentioned the idea of building an Iron Dome in his rallies, assuring it will create many jobs.[188][189] Regarding this policy, Forbes commented that it would have "limited overall utility. At least 10 Iron Dome systems make up the lower tier of Israel's multilayered air defense, designed to intercept rockets, mortars, and artillery shells at a maximum distance of under 50 miles." An American Iron Dome would require hundreds of systems to cover the continental United States and its major population centers, and it would be inadequate to intercept large intercontinental ballistic missiles. However, it could be useful for the defense of military bases (specifically the overseas ones), and critical infrastructure.[190] Haaretz called it a "fantasy", and after mentioning similar technical issues as Forbes, concluded that "[b]eyond all this, the United States has already spent hundreds of billions in missile defense research-and-development, and any upgrades similar to the ones Trump is vowing would need congressional support – something he failed to obtain for his border wall."[191] Reinstating the initiative at the Department of Justice to target Chinese espionage in the United States, terminated by the Biden administration at the request of faculty members from the University of Pennsylvania; requesting from Congress to investigate the University's finances, its Chinese donors, the Biden Center, and the Biden family.[192][193] The China Initiative was launched in November 2018 to address Chinese economic espionage. Of the 28 prosecutions brought under it, four were against professors of Chinese descent, of whom none were convicted for espionage or theft. On January 5, 2021, APA Justice, the Brennan Center for Justice, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice sent an open letter to then president-elect Joe Biden, stating that a "consequence of these mandates has been that the FBI and federal agencies have put pressure on grant makers, universities and research institutions to participate in racial, ethnic and national origin profiling, collectively leading to discriminatory and stigmatising investigations of people of Chinese descent."[194] In September 2021, 177 Stanford University faculty members sent an open letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland calling for the termination of the initiative, stating that "these actions do not just affect the prosecuted faculty but affect the many more university researchers who are targeted, investigated and feel threatened by inquiries initiated without prior evidence of significant wrongdoing".[195] Bloomberg stated that by December 2021, "[m]ore than 1,600 scholars and administrators from more than 200 universities have petitioned Garland to end the China Initiative, saying it disproportionately targets researchers of Chinese origin."[196] In February 2022, more than 150 University of Pennsylvania faculty members addressed an open letter to Attorney General Garland, "urging the U.S. Department of Justice to overturn the 'China Initiative' which they allege disproportionately targets researchers of Chinese descent."[197] On February 23, 2022, Matthew G. Olsen, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, announced the initiative "was being cast aside largely because of perceptions that it unfairly painted Chinese Americans and U.S. residents of Chinese origin as disloyal", but he "insisted that the decision amounted to a reframing and recalibration – not an abandonment – of a muscular law enforcement response to the national security threat posed by the People’s Republic of China", and said that "department officials had concluded that the enforcement program singling out China was ill-advised and better reframed as part of a more wide-ranging effort to counter threats posed by Russia, Iran and other countries."[198] Social issues Revoking Biden's Executive Order 13985, to "eradicate any attempt to weaken America’s institutions through these harmful and discriminatory 'equity" programs". Instructing the DOJ to investigate the "unlawful domination and discrimination and civil right abuses carried out by the Biden administration". Terminating all staff, offices, and initiatives connected to the equity policies, reviewing and reversing its actions, and requesting Congress to establish a restitution fund for those "discriminated against" by that policy.[199] Commenting on the possibility of a second Trump administration, Axios said, "close allies want to dramatically change the government's interpretation of Civil Rights-era laws to focus on 'anti-white racism' rather than discrimination against people of color", and quoted Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung: "As President Trump has said, all staff, offices, and initiatives connected to Biden's un-American policy will be immediately terminated."[200] Using "every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets", by using the resources otherwise spent upon Ukraine, and "by ending mass unskilled migration". Banning urban camping wherever possible, arresting the violators, but giving them the option of rehabilitation treatment. Creating "tent cities" where the homeless can be relocated, have their problems identified, and receive either help to reintegrate into a normal life or medical treatment, including commitment to mental institutions, "with the goal of reintegrating them back into society once they are well enough to manage".[201][202] Eradicating the drug addiction crisis, by imposing a "full naval embargo on the drug cartels and deploy military assets to inflict maximum damage on cartel operations", insisting on the cooperation of neighboring governments to dismantle the trafficking networks in the region, requiring Congress that drug dealers and human traffickers receive the death penalty. Directing federal law enforcement to take down the gangs and organized street crime that distribute drugs locally. Permanently designating fentanyl as a federally controlled substance. Warning China that if they don't "clamp down" on the export of fentanyl precursors "they will pay a steep price". Also, to combat local addiction, "strengthen the pillars that give life meaning and hope for those struggling with addiction, in particular work, faith and family". Making easier for addicts to seek treatment without losing their jobs. Forging public-private partnerships to provide job opportunities and skills training to former addicts. Expanding federal support for "faith-based counseling, treatment, and recovery programs". Ensuring that if someone needs to take time to care for a relative fighting to overcome addiction, they can use a family leave program.[203] Signing an executive order to cut off funding for shelter and transport of immigrants ("nearly $1 billion to house illegal aliens and foreign migrants in expensive luxury hotels"), and redirect a large portion of the savings to provide shelter and treatment for homeless American veterans, promising to totally eradicate veterans' homelessness by the end of next term.[204] According to Snopes, the expenses for housing immigrants waiting to be expelled were $86.9 million during a period of six months in 2021. The places used were "family residential centers", "contracted shelters", and "hotels", like the "Quality Suites in San Diego; Hampton Inns in Phoenix and in McAllen and El Paso, Texas; a Comfort Suites Hotel in Miami; a Best Western in Los Angeles; and an Econo Lodge in Seattle". The funds were managed by the non-profit Endeavors, which also serves veterans. "Migrant families were similarly housed in U.S. hotels under the Obama and Trump administrations."[205] Trump made a similar claim during the debate on June 27, 2024, which was fact-checked as false.[206][207] Transgender and LGBT rights See also: Social policy of Donald Trump and LGBT rights in the United States Terminating all types of gender affirming care for minors. Instructing every federal agency to cease all programs that promote the concept of sex and gender transition "at any age", stopping federal funding for all gender-affirming procedures, and declaring that any hospital or healthcare provider participating in gender affirming care for minors will no longer meet federal health and safety standards for Medicaid and Medicare, terminating them from the program. Creating ways to sue physicians who have performed those procedures, and directing the DOJ to investigate pharmaceutical companies and hospitals to determine whether they have covered "horrific long-term side-effects of 'sex transitions' to get rich at the expense of vulnerable patients" and whether they have illegally marketed hormones and puberty blockers. The Department of Education will inform states and school districts that if anybody suggests to a child that they could be transgender, they will face potential civil rights violations cases for sex discrimination, and elimination from federal funding. Passing a bill establishing that the only genders recognized by the government are male and female, and they are assigned at birth.[208][209][210] The Advocate called these policies "devastating for LGBTQ+ Americans and other marginalized communities", adding "that [they] threaten the LGBTQ+ community, spanning across education, health care, and the military".[211] LGBTQ Nation qualified Trump's agenda as "troubling", ending with "[w]hether that agenda encompasses Project 2025 or Agenda 47 or both, the results would be disastrous."[212] Historical evaluations and public opinion Anthony Zurcher of BBC News said "some of [Trump's] pronouncements border on the fantastical" and "others are controversial."[27] Margaret Hartmann, writing in New York magazine, described some of the ideas as "unhinged".[213] Frankie Taggart, writing for Barron's, argued that Trump's plans lack coherence and that some could exacerbate existing divisions in American society. He questioned the feasibility and practicality of some ideas, such as the promise to improve cities with classical architecture and create tent cities for the homeless.[26] Prominent economists and investors criticized the economic agenda of Trump as inflationary, especially noting his proposed 10% universal tariff.[214][215][216][217][218] Some columnists have described Agenda 47's plans as fascist[8][9] or authoritarian.[10][11]