PDF Summary:Project 2025, by Gabriel C. Pierce

Project 2025 represents a policy agenda aimed at restructuring federal government operations and expanding executive power. In Project 2025, Gabriel C. Pierce outlines proposals rooted in the Unitary Executive Theory, which seeks to centralize presidential authority over federal agencies and personnel. The plan includes reclassifying thousands of civil service positions to political appointments, reducing regulatory oversight, eliminating federal departments like Education, and implementing substantial tax cuts.

Pierce presents the rationale behind these proposals—from trade policy reforms and military strategies to education decentralization and judicial appointments favoring originalist interpretation. The summary also examines potential consequences, including concerns about democratic checks and balances, impacts on social programs and civil rights protections, and questions about fiscal sustainability. This guide provides a straightforward overview of Project 2025's mechanisms, policy proposals, and the debates surrounding its implementation.

(continued)...

(Shortform note: Abolishing the U.S. Education Department and decentralizing education-related funding and policy could exacerbate disparities in educational quality between wealthy and poor communities. Without federal oversight, states with fewer resources may struggle to provide adequate education, deepening the gap between affluent and underprivileged areas. This could lead to unequal educational opportunities and outcomes, undermining the principle of equal access to quality education for all students.)

Strategies for Law and Its Implementation

Project 2025 aims to ensure the judiciary adheres to originalist principles. This approach requires judges to apply the Constitution according to its meaning when it was written. Pierce argues that this will stop judicial activism, preventing judges from overstepping by creating laws rather than interpreting them.

(Shortform note: This goal is part of a broader originalist movement in constitutional interpretation. Justice Antonin Scalia’s book A Matter of Interpretation popularized originalism as a structured alternative to the “living Constitution” approach. Scalia argued that judges should interpret laws based on their original public meaning, not evolving societal values. This philosophy has influenced many conservative legal thinkers and judges.)

Proposed Policy Shifts and Outcomes

We’ll explore Project 2025’s core policy proposals and possible consequences.

Core Policy Proposals

Project 2025 proposes a new method for handling trade agreements and tariffs. Pierce suggests renegotiating existing agreements to benefit the US, focusing on eliminating trade imbalances and securing better terms for U.S. employees and companies. The plan also calls for new trade agreements to expand markets for U.S. products and services, especially in regions with growing economies like Africa and countries in the Americas and Asia. Moreover, the plan proposes using tariffs to protect American industries from unfair competition, such as dumping, subsidies, and the theft of intellectual property. It emphasizes collaborating with trade organizations such as the World Trade Organization to resolve disputes and enforce trade rules.

(Shortform note: The use of tariffs and trade agreements has a long history in the United States. Since the late nineteenth century, political movements have used import taxes and commercial treaties to build coalitions and address economic concerns. These tools have been used to protect domestic industries, promote economic growth, and respond to changing global economic conditions. The current proposals to renegotiate trade agreements, establish new ones, and use tariffs alongside World Trade Organization processes reflect a continuation of this historical pattern. They demonstrate how economic policy can be used to address contemporary concerns about global competition and national sovereignty.)

Supporters argue that to protect US economic interests, we must take a more assertive stance on tariffs and international trade pacts. They believe that by ensuring equitable trade and securing favorable terms, the US can fortify its industrial foundation, create high-quality jobs, and maintain its technological advantage. Critics, however, warn that relying too heavily on tariffs could lead to trade wars and harm businesses and consumers. They also caution against isolationism, advocating for increased collaboration and transparency in global commerce.

(Shortform note: A more assertive stance on tariffs and international trade pacts can have a significant impact on the global economy, as it can influence the behavior of trading partners and shape the terms of trade agreements. By leveraging tariffs and trade negotiations, the US can potentially secure more favorable terms that protect its domestic industries and promote economic growth. However, this approach also carries risks, as it can lead to trade wars and disrupt global supply chains, potentially harming businesses and consumers.)

Pierce also emphasizes advancing democracy and rights for all people. Project 2025's international policy structure focuses on advancing these principles, recognizing that they contribute to global security and peace. The agenda's core focus is on helping with democratic transitions and reinforcing democratic achievements worldwide. To reach these objectives, the project uses diplomatic efforts, financial aid, and strategic partnerships to strengthen communities, promote free and fair voting, and ensure government accountability. It calls for increased financial support to community-based movements and NGOs to provide the resources needed to effect change.

(Shortform note: In Aiding Democracy Abroad, Thomas Carothers explores the post–Cold War era's democracy-promotion agenda, which aimed to reshape the political landscapes of other countries. He argues that this agenda was driven by a belief in the universal appeal of democracy and the West's responsibility to spread it. He explains that this agenda led to the creation of a large democracy-assistance industry, with governments and private foundations funding programs to support elections, build institutions, and strengthen civil society. Carothers argues that this industry often operated with a sense of overconfidence and a lack of understanding of local contexts, leading to mixed results.)

The policy also stresses the importance of employing diplomacy to advance human rights. This involves leveraging both global and country-to-country relationships to promote democratic norms and hold regimes accountable for violating them. The US should serve as a model by using its influence in international bodies, such as the UN, to promote stronger protections for people's rights and support resolutions condemning violations. Economic tools are crucial to the strategy, including targeted sanctions against those who breach human rights, along with incentives for countries that advance democratization.

(Shortform note: The policy doesn’t explain how diplomatic pressure and targeted sanctions would hold regimes accountable for human rights violations. In practice, such sanctions often work by cutting off access to the US dollar, which is the world’s reserve currency. Many authoritarian leaders and their business networks rely on the dollar to protect and grow their personal wealth. By targeting these financial interests, the US can create pressure points that make it more costly for regimes to engage in human rights abuses.)

Providing economic assistance is considered crucial for creating programs that bolster democratic institutions, promote good governance, and enhance legal order. Supporting freedom of the press and expression is another crucial part of the strategy. The project calls for initiatives to protect journalists, combat censorship, and help disseminate unbiased and accurate information. Advocates argue that these efforts are essential for fostering greater stability and justice in the world. They claim that by upholding its core principles, the US also addresses the root causes of instability and conflict through its advocacy for democratic values and civil liberties. Yet detractors caution against adopting a too-strong position, arguing that it can lead to unforeseen consequences like political instability or backlash against alleged outside meddling. They stress the importance of a nuanced approach tailored to each situation, respecting the sovereignty of nations and considering regional traditions and contexts.

The Evolution of US Political Aid

The US has a long history of using economic assistance to reinforce political systems abroad, but the combination of economic aid with initiatives supporting journalists and media outlets is a more recent development. In Promoting Polyarchy, William I. Robinson argues that from the early 1980s onward, US foreign policy entered a new phase in which what he calls “polyarchy promotion” was institutionalized through bodies such as the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and allied private foundations, which openly directed political aid to parties, labor and business organizations, civic and human-rights associations, research centers, and a variety of independent communication and information initiatives in targeted countries, with the explicit aim of managing political transitions so that they produced stable, elite-dominated, pro-capitalist regimes rather than deep, popular democratization that might threaten US hegemony. Robinson traces this shift to the US’s changing approach to managing political transitions in the developing world. He explains that in the 1950s and 1960s, Washington relied on coups, covert operations, and support for authoritarian regimes to maintain its influence. However, by the late 1970s, this approach was increasingly seen as counterproductive, especially as popular movements for democracy gained momentum globally. The US began to recognize that supporting certain forms of political liberalization could better serve its interests by creating more stable, pro-Western governments. This led to the creation of new institutions and strategies focused on shaping civil society, political parties, and media landscapes in target countries.

Project 2025 also suggests reforms to the American education system. Pierce proposes reverting to traditional academic standards, expanding parental options, and decentralizing education. He suggests eliminating the Department of Education, and he wants states and local communities to be responsible for establishing education policy. This decentralization aims to make educational programs more adaptable and tailored to the specific needs of various communities.

The project stresses promoting options for schools, supporting measures such as ESAs, voucher programs, and charter institutions. These systems empower parents to choose the most appropriate educational environment for their children, whether it's homeschooling, charter schools, public schooling, or another educational model. The concept is that competition among schools will improve education as institutions work to retain and attract students. The initiative additionally supports focusing on conventional academic subjects such as literacy, mathematics, and science in the curriculum.

The Importance of Empirical Evidence in the School Choice Debate

In Learning from School Choice, Paul E. Peterson and Bryan C. Hassel argue that debates over school choice must ultimately be settled by careful empirical evaluation. They contend that ideological arguments alone can't resolve the complex questions surrounding alternative schooling arrangements. Instead, they advocate for rigorous, locally grounded research that examines how different educational options affect student learning, long-term outcomes, and overall system performance. By focusing on evidence rather than abstract principles, Peterson and Hassel believe policymakers and parents can make more informed decisions about which educational models best serve students' needs.

We’ll take a look at the economic and regulatory pillars of this plan.

Economic and Rule-Making Pillars

Project 2025 focuses on cutting taxes and reforming regulations to bolster the economy. Pierce outlines a fiscal plan that seeks to reduce the tax burden on individuals and businesses by overhauling taxes and notably cutting corporate taxes to enhance the global competitiveness of American companies. By lowering these rates, the project aims to boost jobs, attract foreign investments, and support the expansion of local businesses. The objective of the Project 2025 income tax reductions is to increase the disposable income of American households, encouraging consumer spending and propelling economic expansion. The initiative also aims to decrease companies' costs of compliance by removing regulations, especially those related to labor and the environment.

(Shortform note: If policymakers remove regulations, especially those related to labor and the environment, to decrease companies' costs of compliance, they can incur larger long-run economic losses from worsening health and climate-related damages. For example, the US Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 will yield $2 trillion in benefits by 2020, including reduced health care costs and increased worker productivity, far outweighing the $65 billion in compliance costs. Similarly, the World Health Organization reports that every dollar invested in water and sanitation generates an economic return of $4.30.)

This relief is expected to additionally stimulate economic activity by allowing companies to dedicate more resources to expanding and innovating instead of complying with regulations. Pierce acknowledges the substantial financial impacts of these tax cuts. Opponents argue that significantly reducing tax rates might cause federal revenue to fall considerably, which would increase the national deficit and debt. Project 2025 proposes offsetting these concerns by reducing government spending. The plan involves decreasing what the initiative deems unnecessary governmental expenses to offset the funds lost due to reduced taxes. This involves carefully reviewing federal programs to identify and eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse, aiming to use public funds more efficiently.

(Shortform note: While Project 2025 proposes offsetting the revenue lost from tax cuts by reducing what it deems unnecessary governmental expenses, this approach may not be sufficient to balance the budget. Analyses of past US budgets show that the savings from eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse in federal programs are relatively small compared to the revenue lost from significant tax cuts. For example, the Congressional Budget Office has found that even aggressive efforts to reduce waste typically yield savings of less than 1% of total federal spending, while major tax cuts can reduce revenues by hundreds of billions of dollars annually.)

The project anticipates that the dynamic impact of tax cuts—including quicker economic growth and more jobs—will ultimately lead to increased tax revenue. Since increased income and corporate earnings boost total revenue, despite reduced rates, advocates argue that an enhanced economy will lead to a broader tax base. Supply-side economics suggests that initial revenue declines will be balanced by the economic growth that tax cuts produce.

(Shortform note: Christina D. Romer and David H. Romer, economists at the University of California, Berkeley, have conducted extensive research on the effects of tax changes on economic growth and government revenue. Their findings suggest that while tax cuts can stimulate economic activity, the resulting growth is typically not sufficient to offset the initial loss in revenue.)

Critical Evaluations and Concerns

Impacts on Social Equity and Freedoms

The plan could negatively impact social equity and rights, especially for LGBTQ+ individuals and groups. Pierce explains that the plan would abolish legal protections based on gender identity and sexual orientation, including the ones established by Bostock v. Clayton County. It would also limit the availability of gender-affirming care and take transgender healthcare coverage out of Medicaid and Medicare.

Additionally, Project 2025 would eliminate DEI initiatives and affirmative action, which have played an essential role in promoting equal opportunity and combating entrenched bias. The plan would concentrate police power within the executive branch, a move that critics argue is authoritarian and threatens freedoms like free speech and peaceful assembly.

The Role of Quantification in Social Justice

In The Seductions of Quantification, Sally Engle Merry explains that the process of quantifying social issues—like gender-based violence, racial discrimination, and human rights abuses—plays a crucial role in making these problems visible and actionable. She argues that systems of indicators, audits, and reports are not neutral technical tools; they are regulatory mechanisms that define what counts as a violation, compel states and institutions to produce data about their conduct, and thereby create the evidentiary basis for advocacy, accountability, and legal redress. When these systems of quantification are weak, absent, or dismantled, abuses that are not systematically recorded become statistically invisible, and what is not rendered into numbers is far harder to recognize publicly, to debate politically, or to challenge through law and policy.