It has become clear that Project 2025 is not a rational, actionable plan for reforming the federal government in the sense of making it more efficient or effective, or even of balancing the budget.
Nor was it probably intended to be. Project 2025 is an ideological manifesto with stated goals that are completely inconsistent with separation of church and state, relying as they do on evangelical Christian dogma.
Thus I feel justified in skimming through to the end, hitting only the most egregious points. The remaining chapters in Section 3: The General Welfare are:
Chapter 17: Department of Justice (p. 545). “The United States government and, by extension, the FBI have absolutely no business policing speech, whether in the public square, in print, or online (p. 550).” This is from the same people who want to ban pornography and prevent teachers from recognizing nontraditional family structures.
In this context, P25 chiefly wants to stop the FBI from investigating online disinformation, terrorist threats, or hate speech. They also want to comprehensively reorganize the FBI, reducing staff, preferably by firing liberals. And they want to apply an anti-obscenity law from 1872 (18 U.S.C. 1461) to not only ban printed pornography (their definition, of course), but to ban distribution through the mail of the drugs used for medication abortion (p. 562).
P25 also has plenty to say in this chapter about immigration, which we all can agree needs some taking in hand, but I think we should start by bringing all the pieces of government that handle any part of immigration under one directorate and cleaning it up from there. “The next conservative Administration must make every effort to obtain the resources to support a vast expansion of the number of appointees … (p. 569).” That’s not more efficient, y’all.
It’s true that many Americans don’t trust the federal law enforcement organizations, that transparency and cooperation with the states are poor, and that effectiveness is questionable. There are some actionable points in this chapter, worth a look by reform-minded legislators who are actually concerned with a more efficient government and who do believe in separation of church and state.
Takeaway: I’m not at all opposed to a massive restructuring and reduction of the DOJ, as long as it’s done with an eye to preserving law-abiding citizens’ civil rights and individual liberties, including the right not to be slandered and threatened online.
Chapter 18: Department of Labor and Related Agencies “The Judeo-Christian tradition, stretching back to Genesis, has always recognized fruitful work as integral to human dignity, as service to God, neighbor, and family (p. 581).” And this is relevant to a discussion of a secular government body how, exactly?
P25 predictably wants to purge these agencies, calling DEI efforts “burdensome ideological projects. (p. 582)” Pro-life views, please note, they do not consider to be ideology. I wonder if they know what the word “ideology” means. Most of pages 586-587 go to pro-life, pro-religion, and pro-family measures they want, in this discussion of employment policy.
There are a few things I agree with, such as: “Congress should incentivize on-site childcare (p. 587).”
But “God ordained the Sabbath as a day of rest, and until very recently the Judeo-Christian tradition sought to honor that mandate by moral and legal regulation of work on that day (p. 589).” They propose “to require that employers pay time and a half for hours worked on the Sabbath” (either the Jewish or the Christian Sabbath, to be determined by the employer’s religious observance, and how does that work for employees who aren’t co-religionists?). GTFO.
Then they celebrate the gig economy, doubtless because independent contractors are so very much cheaper for employers, and propose excusing small businesses from “burdensome regulations (p. 594).” Yeah, not a great idea.
They want to expand apprenticeship programs (no argument there) but include government funding to religious organizations (p. 595). That’s a NO. No tax dollars to churches, period.
The rest of the chapter covers hiring standards, federal unemployment insurance, non-union workers’ representation, union transparency, occupational licensing, public pension reform and oversight, Hire American and Buy American,
Takeaway: by the time they get done picking out all the anti-discrimination measures, there won’t be much of DOL left, since it was created mostly to protect workers from discrimination (and predatory employers).
There’s quite a lot of internal conflict in this chapter – a preferential policy stated, and then an alternative view stated. Clearly P25 doesn’t have its own story straight on the complexities of labor markets and laws. We can safely assume that the incoming administration is not in better shape. This leaves an opportunity for reform-minded progressive legislators to examine the issues, structures, and bottom lines to come up with actionable proposals to take to voters.
Chapter 19: Department of Transportation, with a budget of $142 billion, “has become a de facto grantmaking and lending organization (p. 619).” It has nine separate administrations, none of which strike me as redundant in scope, but I expect there is a great deal of redundancy in staffing. P25 thinks the states and private sector should handle the physical work: “If funding must be federal, it would be more efficient for the U.S. Congress to send transportation grants to each of the 50 states (p. 621),” which is worth some serious discussion. “It is important to remember that all funding for governmental infrastructure comes from either taxes or user fees (p. 624).” In other words, private companies building planes, trains, and automobiles use the infrastructure, they don’t pay to construct it. There are some useful notes here about public-private partnerships and contracting thereof.
Unfortunately, P25 then complains about fuel economy standards (p. 626), particularly California getting to set its own, (p. 627), and claims that electric vehicles are bad for the economy.
On page 629 they finally get to the nine administrations, complaining of mission creep, infiltration by environmental activists, and anti-competitive regulations. The FAA, ATO (Air Traffic Organization), and FRA (Federal Railroad Administration) come in for particular criticism for failure to modernize. Public transit is criticized as uneconomical and inefficient. P25 wants Maritime Administration transferred to DOD (if the Coast Guard is relocated there) or DHS.
Takeaway: quite a few rational and actionable suggestions in this chapter, despite the author’s anti-green agenda. Progressive legislators could use this as a starting point for actual reform of the department, taking a hard look at where that budget is truly spent.
Chapter 20: Department of Veterans Affairs (p. 641). P25 wants the current focus on “social equity and inclusion” to end, along with VA access to abortion services, “a medical procedure unrelated to military service (p. 642),” unless of course you’re a military veteran with a uterus who’s faced with an untimely, untenable, or unwanted pregnancy. Aren’t all medical procedures for people who are not actively serving unrelated to military service, unless the procedure directly addresses an illness or injury sustained while on active duty? Pretty sure VA benefits cover a lot more than just on-the-job stuff; it’s not a workers-comp program.
P25 calls for a veterans bill of rights, which seems reasonable, with some other suggested reforms including greater transparency, an independent audit, better management of the disability claims process, modernization, and getting rid of the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection. I’d want to know more about that last one before signing off on it.
Takeaway: this is another mostly rational and actionable chapter. I’m sure some administrative and technological changes could and should be made so that the VA operates more efficiently and effectively to provide good benefits without costing more than the private sector.