Project 2025

Araf Karsh Hamid

20 min readAug 16, 2024

The onset of the decline of American liberal democracy.

Let me begin by referencing Abraham Lincoln’s iconic words from his Gettysburg Address in 1863:

Government

Of the people — The government is elected by the people and is accountable to them.
By the people — In a democracy, people have the right to express their views, participate in the decision-making process, and hold their leaders accountable.
For the people — The government should work towards improving society by providing basic amenities, social welfare, and economic development. The government should ensure that the people’s basic needs, such as food, shelter, and healthcare, are met.

Project 2025

The Project 2025 Presidential Transition Project is a heavily financed initiative, backed by an eight-figure budget, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation in collaboration with over 100 organizations. Its goal is to empower a potential future administration with authoritarian tendencies to enact swift, far-right policies that could slash wages for workers, dismantle essential social safety net programs, roll back decades of advancements in civil rights, and fundamentally alter the structure of American society, while potentially destabilizing the economy.

A cornerstone of Project 2025 is the “Mandate for Leadership,” an extensive policy blueprint spanning over 922 pages, authored by former Trump administration officials and other staunch conservatives. This document presents an extreme vision for the nation and serves as a comprehensive guide for enacting these radical transformations. — Source: The People’s Guide to Project 2025.

Brief History — Oil Crisis / Stagflation of the 1970s

The oil crises of the 1970s, triggered by geopolitical events such as the Yom Kippur War and the Iranian Revolution (1978–79), led to massive increases in oil prices. This caused widespread inflation and economic stagnation in Western economies. Economists like Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics criticized Keynesian economics, arguing that it failed to account for the role of money supply in controlling inflation.

In the winter of 1980, the fledgling Heritage Foundation presented President-elect Ronald Reagan with the first edition of the Mandate for Leadership. This comprehensive policy guide, crafted by conservative thought leaders and experienced former government officials — many of whom were not affiliated with Heritage — outlined detailed policy recommendations for each federal agency. The book played a pivotal role in aligning the conservative movement with Reagan’s administration, setting the stage for the transformative changes that followed, a revolution that might not have occurred without the dedication and efforts of these committed volunteer activists. Source: Project 2025 p. xiii
“Mandate for Leadership” was published in January 1981 — the same month Ronald Reagan was sworn into his presidency. By the end of that year, more than 60 percent of its recommendations had become policy — and Reagan was on his way to ending stagflation, reviving American confidence and prosperity, and winning the Cold War. Source: Project 2025 p. 2

Neo-liberalism emerged as an alternative to Keynesian economics, emphasizing free markets, deregulation, privatization, and a reduced role for the state in economic affairs. It argued that economic efficiency and growth were best achieved through competition and the self-regulating market rather than government intervention.

The Reagan era, alongside Margaret Thatcher’s leadership in the UK, signalled the decline of Keynesian Economics and the emergence of Neo-Liberalism. As President of the United States from 1981 to 1989, Reagan played a crucial role in advancing Neo-liberalism. His administration implemented a series of policies known as “Reaganomics,” including significant tax cuts, deregulation of industries, and reduced government spending on social programs. Margaret Thatcher, who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990, was a key figure in promoting Neo-liberalism globally. Thatcher’s government pursued policies of privatization, deregulation, and a reduction in the power of trade unions.

Over the course of 40 to 50 years, this ideological shift played a significant role in exacerbating economic inequality, driving it to unprecedented levels. From 1980 to 2008 — a span of 28 years — the world witnessed a devastating economic collapse, epitomized by the subprime mortgage crisis. What factors led to this collapse? And how does it compare to the economic downturn of 1929?

Both the 2008 financial crisis and the 1929 stock market crash bear notable similarities, particularly in the unchecked speculation and the absence of sufficient regulatory oversight that preceded them. The 1929 collapse was driven by a speculative bubble in the stock market, fueled largely by margin trading. Similarly, the 2008 crisis was primarily triggered by the housing market bubble and the widespread use of complex financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities. At their core, margin trading and mortgage-backed securities share the same underlying issue: excessive risk-taking without adequate safeguards. Both events vividly illustrate the dangers of unregulated financial markets and the devastating impact such crises can have on global economies.

Current World Scenario — Impact of Neoliberalism

Let’s shift our focus to the present to examine the current global socio-economic landscape. The rise of China as a formidable economic power, with an $18 trillion economy, now the second largest in the world, has reshaped global dynamics.

In October 2022, Josep Borrell, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, underscored the severe challenges facing Europe’s economic, political, and security landscape. Before the onset of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia was Europe’s primary supplier of coal, gas, and oil products, providing the continent with inexpensive and seemingly reliable energy. Europe’s prosperity had long been built on this affordable energy from Russia, alongside cheap labor from China and access to the vast Chinese market. Borrell’s remarks highlighted the precariousness of Europe’s dependence on these external sources for its economic stability.

Concurrently, escalating conflicts in the Middle East continue to impact global stability, while the BRICS nations are increasingly asserting their influence in the economic arena. Notably, the end of the petrodollar era looms as Saudi Arabia has opted not to renew its 50-year-old petrodollar agreement with the United States, signaling a potential shift in global financial power structures.

Saudi Arabia has joined Project mBridge, a collaborative initiative focused on developing a digital currency platform for central and commercial banks. This project, which began in 2021, seeks to enable instantaneous cross-border payments and foreign exchange transactions using distributed ledger technology. Involving several major central banks and global institutions, Project mBridge represents a significant step towards modernizing financial infrastructure and enhancing global payment systems. Eventually, mBridge is poised to emerge as an alternative to SWIFT, a system that the United States has utilized as a geopolitical tool on multiple occasions. Source: Project mBridge reaches minimum viable product stage.

mBridge Transaction Types

Project 2025 — Deep Dive

Understanding the current global geopolitical landscape is crucial for grasping the rise of right-wing movements in the U.S., Europe, and India, and their efforts to shift the political and social direction of these regions. In this context, the Heritage Foundation has introduced Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint that harks back to the 1970s. This initiative proposes a range of controversial measures, including reforms in taxation, labor laws, and government restructuring. Project 2025 is part of a broader trend of reassessing and reshaping policy frameworks in response to the evolving global order, reflecting the growing influence of conservative ideologies in response to contemporary challenges.

This volume “Mandate for Leadership” — The Conservative Promise — is the opening salvo of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project, launched by The Heritage Foundation and our many partners in April 2022. Its 30 chapters lay out hundreds of clear and concrete policy recommendations for White House offices, Cabinet departments, Congress, and agencies, commissions, and boards. Source: Project 2025 p. 2

Here is a quick look before we get into the details.

1. Taxation:

Tax Brackets: The current seven tax brackets would be reduced to two, set at 15% and 30%. Source: Project 2025 p. 696
Middle-Class Impact: Middle-class taxpayers could see an increased tax liability by around $2,600, while families earning over $10 million might receive tax cuts up to $1.5 million. Source: Project 2025 p. 696
Corporate Tax: The corporate tax rate, reduced from 35% to 21% under Trump, would further decrease to 18%. Source: Project 2025 p. 696
Capital Gains Tax: The tax on income from stocks would decrease from 20% to 15%. Source: Project 2025 p. 696
Business Tax Incentive: Special business tax preferences, such as a special deduction for energy-efficient commercial building properties, should be eliminated. Source: Project 2025 p. 697

The chart below clearly illustrates that the tax burden is disproportionately heavier on the poor, while the wealthy enjoy lower tax rates. It’s a stark example of a system that seems to offer socialism for the rich!

2. Healthcare Costs:

Medical Plans: The average cost of a medical plan is projected to rise by $5,000, reaching around $17,000.

3. Government and Labor:

OECD (Organization for Economic Co-Operation & Development): The United States provides about one-fifth of OECD’s funding. The U.S. should end its financial support and withdraw from the OECD. Source: Project 2025 p. 698
Bureaucracy: The plan proposes firing 50,000 expert bureaucrats and replacing them with loyalists.
Child Labor: It suggests eliminating certain child labor protections, allowing children to work in hazardous conditions like mines and meatpacking plants. Source: Project 2025 p. 595
Labor Laws: States would be allowed to ban labor unions, and public employee unions would be completely banned. Additionally, states could opt out of national overtime protections and minimum wage laws. Source: Project 2025 p. 599

4. Climate Change

Withdraw from Paris Agreement: The next conservative Administration should withdraw the U.S. from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. Source: Project 2025 p. 709
BBC / Science — What is Climate Change?
Climate change refers to the long-term alteration in the Earth’s average temperatures and weather patterns. Over the past decade, the global average temperature has risen by approximately 1.2°C compared to the late 19th century. This increase is primarily driven by human activities, leading to more intense heat waves and rising sea levels.
The situation is expected to deteriorate in the coming decades, but scientists emphasize that urgent action can mitigate the worst effects of climate change. It has now been confirmed that global warming exceeded 1.5°C over the 12-month period between February 2023 and January 2024. This follows 2023 being declared the warmest year on record.
This temperature rise was fueled by human-induced climate change, further intensified by the natural El Niño weather phenomenon. — Source BBC / Science, February 8, 2024

BBC — What is climate change? A really simple guide

The four key segments — Taxation, Healthcare, Government & Labor, and Climate Change — offer a clear glimpse into the overall tone and direction of Project 2025, as envisioned for the next conservative administration. Now, it’s crucial to delve deeper into Project 2025 to understand its structure and the potential impact it could have on the American people.

4 Pillars of the Project 2025

Project 2025 is structured around four main pillars, each designed to prepare and implement a conservative agenda in the United States under a potential future administration.

The Wall Street Journal — Project 2025 The radical conservation plan to reshape America under Trump

Here’s an explanation of the four pillars:

1. Pillar I: The Mandate for Leadership

Overview: This pillar represents a comprehensive policy manual that outlines the conservative agenda across various government agencies. The “Mandate for Leadership” is a detailed, over 922-page document that serves as a playbook for how the next conservative administration should govern. It includes policy recommendations and strategies for reforming federal agencies to align with conservative principles.
Purpose: To provide a clear, actionable roadmap for implementing conservative policies in every aspect of government, ensuring a unified approach across different departments. Source: Project 2025 p. xiv

2. Pillar II: Personnel Database

Overview: This pillar focuses on building a robust database of vetted, trained, and aligned individuals who can be quickly appointed to key positions within the federal government. The database is designed to streamline the staffing process by allowing candidates to build profiles and enabling coalition members to recommend individuals for roles in the administration.
Purpose: To ensure that the next administration can efficiently place committed conservatives in critical government positions, reducing delays and ensuring that personnel align with the administration’s goals from day one. Source: Project 2025 p. xiv

3. Pillar III: Presidential Administration Academy

Overview: This educational initiative provides training for future government officials. It includes an online educational system as well as in-person seminars taught by experts from the conservative coalition. The academy is designed for both newcomers and experienced professionals, offering courses on how the government functions and how to effectively implement conservative policies within the federal framework.
Purpose: To equip future appointees with the knowledge and skills necessary to govern effectively according to conservative values, ensuring they are prepared to take on their roles immediately upon appointment. Source: Project 2025 p. xiv

4. Pillar IV: The Playbook

Overview: This pillar involves forming agency-specific teams that draft detailed transition plans for each government agency. These plans are designed to be implemented as soon as the new administration takes office, enabling a rapid and coordinated effort to reshape the federal government according to conservative principles.
Purpose: To provide a strategic guide for the immediate and effective implementation of the administration’s agenda, ensuring that each agency is restructured and operates in a way that supports the conservative vision. Source: Project 2025 p. xiv

These pillars collectively aim to prepare a conservative administration to govern effectively and implement its agenda swiftly, with a strong emphasis on dismantling what they perceive as the overreach of the federal government and restoring governance according to conservative ideals.

Project 2025 — The Policy Plan is divided into 5 Sections

Section 1: Taking the Reins of Government
Section 2: The Common Defense
Section 3: General Welfare
Section 4: Economy
Section 5: Independent Regulatory Agencies

Section 1: Taking the Reins of Government

This section focuses on how the incoming administration should manage the transition of power, particularly within key institutions such as the White House, the Executive Office of the President, and central personnel agencies. It outlines strategies for staffing, governance, and implementing the administration’s agenda from day one, ensuring that the new leadership can swiftly and effectively take control of government operations. Source: Project 2025 p. 19–86

Section 2: The Common Defense

This section deals with National Security and Foreign Policy, covering areas such as Defense, Homeland Security, the Department of State (DoS), Intelligence Agencies, and Media relations. It provides guidance on maintaining a strong national defense, securing borders, managing international relations, and controlling the narrative through strategic communication and media engagement. The emphasis is on bolstering America’s defense capabilities while advancing its interests globally. Source: Project 2025 p. 87–282

Section 3: General Welfare

Focused on domestic policies that affect the day-to-day lives of citizens, this section addresses sectors such as Agriculture, Education, Energy, Environment, Health, Housing, Interior, Justice, Labor, Transportation, and Veterans’ Affairs. It outlines policy recommendations aimed at promoting general welfare through reforms in these critical areas, with a strong emphasis on reducing government intervention, enhancing efficiency, and promoting conservative values in public services. Source: Project 2025 p. 283–656

Section 4: Economy

This section is dedicated to Economic Policy, covering Commerce, the Treasury, the Export-Import Bank (EXIM), the Federal Reserve, Small Business, and trade. It provides a blueprint for revitalizing the economy through tax reforms, deregulation, trade policies, and monetary strategies. The goal is to create a pro-growth environment that encourages investment, innovation, and global competitiveness, while also ensuring fiscal responsibility. Source: Project 2025 p. 657–824

Section 5: Independent Regulatory Agencies

This section focuses on the oversight and reform of independent regulatory agencies that govern critical sectors such as Finance, Communication, Elections, and Trade. It recommends strategies for reducing regulatory burdens, increasing transparency, and ensuring that these agencies operate in alignment with the administration’s broader economic and political objectives. The intent is to restore accountability and efficiency to regulatory bodies that have a significant impact on the economy and public life. Source: Project 2025 p. 825–883

These summaries provide an overview of the key focus areas and objectives of Project 2025, emphasizing a comprehensive approach to governance, national security, economic policy, and regulatory reform from a conservative perspective.

The Heritage Foundation and the 100+ organizations that make up the Project 2025 Advisory Board have mapped out exactly how they will achieve their extreme ends. They aim to carry out many of the most troubling proposals through an anti-democratic president and political loyalists installed in the executive branch, without waiting for congressional action. Source: The People’s Guide to Project 2025 p. 3

Why is it a Threat to the American People

4.3 Million People could lose overtime protection, leaving many workers vulnerable to longer hours without additional pay. Source: Project 2025 p. 592
40 Million People could have their food assistance reduced, potentially exacerbating hunger and poverty nationwide. Source: Project 2025 p. 299–300
220K American Jobs could be lost as a direct result of the policies outlined in the project. Source: Project 2025 p. 683
1 Million Children Lose Head Start Early Education Program. Source: Project 2025 p. 482
Eliminate federal loan programs that assist parents of college students, graduate students, and immigrants in affording higher education. This rollback threatens to restrict access to higher education, making it increasingly exclusive to the wealthy and well-connected. Source: Project 2025 p. 167, 354
Remove Safety Net for Farmers from subsidies and unforeseen losses, jeopardizing the livelihoods of those in the agricultural sector. Source: Project 2025 p. 297
Undermine gender equity across the government by dismantling the White House Gender Policy Council, which plays a crucial role in advancing access to contraception, preventing gender-based violence, and ensuring women’s health equity. Source: Project 2025 p. 62
Make public schools increasingly unsafe for LGBTQ+ students by directing the Secretary of Education to revoke numerous protections currently in place for these students. Source: Project 2025 p. 332–334
Worsen air quality and exacerbate climate change by weakening the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to act against environmental threats, specifically by undermining the “Endangerment Finding.” Source: Project 2025 p. 425
Restrict Access to Medical Abortion, potentially affecting women’s health rights and autonomy across the nation. Source: Project 2025 p. 459
Push People towards Private Medicare Plans. Source: Project 2025 p. 463
Relax HIPAA Regulations to access Patients Personal Information. Source: Project 2025 p. 497
Encourage racial discrimination in areas ranging from housing and education to employment. Source: Project 2025 p. 583
Facilitate discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity by misinterpreting Supreme Court rulings and expanding religious exemptions, thereby rolling back workplace protections for LGBTQ+ individuals and others. Source: Project 2025 p. 584, 586
Eliminate Funding for Public Transport, impacting citizens who depend on it for their daily commutes. Source: Project 2025 p. 635
Disabled veterans, who rely on government benefits, may see their support limited. Source: Project 2025 p. 649–650
Expand offshore oil and natural gas drilling on public lands and waters. This initiative is championed by William Perry Pendley, who has dismissed climate science as “junk science.” Source: Project 2025, p. 523
Eliminate access to vital weather, ocean, and climate data by disbanding the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which plays a crucial role in providing essential weather forecasts and conducting groundbreaking scientific research. Source: Project 2025 p. 664

Project 2025 is considered a potential threat to American liberal democracy for several reasons, primarily related to its goals of restructuring the federal government and its emphasis on implementing a far-right conservative agenda. Here are the key concerns:

1. Erosion of Democratic Norms:

Centralization of Power: Project 2025 aims to centralize power within the executive branch by replacing a significant number of experienced bureaucrats with loyalists who are ideologically aligned with the administration’s conservative agenda. Critics argue that this could undermine the checks and balances that are essential to a healthy democracy by consolidating power in the hands of a few and reducing the independence of federal agencies.
Attack on Institutions: The project includes proposals to dismantle or significantly alter institutions that have traditionally played a role in safeguarding democratic norms, such as labor unions, public employee unions, and regulatory agencies. This could weaken the institutional framework that supports democratic governance and protects the rights of workers and other vulnerable groups.

2. Threat to Civil Rights:

Rollback of Civil Rights Protections: Project 2025 includes policies that could reverse decades of progress in civil rights, particularly for minority groups, LGBTQ+ communities, and women. For instance, it proposes eliminating protections against discrimination and rolling back affirmative action programs, which are seen as vital for promoting equality and inclusion in American society.
Authoritarian Tendencies: The project has been criticized for fostering an environment that could lead to authoritarian governance. The emphasis on appointing ideologically aligned personnel and rapidly implementing far-reaching changes is seen by some as a move toward governance that prioritizes the interests of a select group over the broader, more diverse population.

3. Economic and Social Impacts:

Economic Inequality: The proposed tax cuts, particularly those favoring the wealthy and corporations, could exacerbate economic inequality. Critics argue that these policies would benefit the rich while placing a heavier tax burden on the middle class and reducing funding for social safety net programs that support the poor and vulnerable.
Social Welfare Reductions: The project’s goal to dismantle social safety net programs could lead to increased poverty and social unrest. By reducing government support for healthcare, food assistance, and other welfare programs, Project 2025 could undermine the economic security of millions of Americans.

4. Potential for Increased Polarization:

Deepening Divisions: The radical nature of the policy proposals in Project 2025 could further polarize American society. By advancing a hardline conservative agenda, the project risks alienating large segments of the population who do not share these views, potentially leading to greater social and political conflict.

5. Undermining Public Confidence in Government:

Public Distrust: By focusing on rapid, sweeping changes that favor a particular ideological perspective, Project 2025 could erode public trust in the government’s ability to represent all citizens fairly. This distrust could weaken the legitimacy of democratic institutions and processes, making it more difficult to maintain a stable and functional democracy.

Woke / Wokeness / Wokeism

The 922-page document contains 28 mentions of the term “woke,” two references to “wokeness,” and two instances of “wokeism.” These references offer some intriguing insights into the document’s perspective and focus.

The next conservative President must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors. This starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists. Source: Project 2025 p. 4
Similarly, the Biden Administration’s climate fanaticism will need a whole-of-government unwinding. As with other federal departments and agencies, the Biden Administration’s leveraging of the federal government’s resources to further the woke agenda should be reversed and scrubbed from all policy manuals, guidance documents, and agendas, and scientific excellence and innovation should be restored as the OSTP’s top priority. Source: Project 2025 p. 60
Abolishing the Gender Policy Council would eliminate central promotion of abortion (“health services”); comprehensive sexuality education (“education”); and the new woke gender ideology, which has as a principal tenet “gender affirming care” and “sex-change” surgeries on minors. Source: Project 2025 p. 62
What’s more, NIH (National Institute of Health) has long “been at the forefront in pushing junk gender science.” The next HHS (Health & Human Services) secretary should immediately put an end to the department’s foray into woke transgender activism. Source: Project 2025 p. 284
Woke Policies. Under Francis Collins, NIH became so focused on the #MeToo movement that it refused to sponsor scientific conferences unless there were a certain number of women panelists, which violates federal civil rights law against sex discrimination. This quota practice should be ended, and the NIH Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, which pushes such unlawful actions, should be abolished. NIH has been at the forefront in pushing junk gender science. Source: Project 2025 p. 462
Department of Education (the department, or ED), discussed by Lindsey Burke in Chapter 11, is a creation of the Jimmy Carter Administration. The department is a convenient one-stop shop for the woke education cartel, which — as the COVID era showed — is not particularly concerned with children’s education. Schools should be responsive to parents, rather than to leftist advocates intent on indoctrination — and the more the federal government is involved in education, the less responsive to parents the public schools will be. Source: Project 2025 p. 285

Intelligent Design Trial, Dover, Pennsylvania, 2004

If regressive ideas begin to influence school curricula, it becomes essential to revisit the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case, widely known as the “Intelligent Design Trial.” This 2005 trial in Pennsylvania was a pivotal moment in the debate over teaching evolution versus intelligent design in public schools, setting a significant legal precedent on the separation of church and state in education.

Background:

Intelligent Design (ID): ID is a theory that posits that certain features of the universe and living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Proponents of ID argue that it is a scientific theory, while critics view it as a form of creationism.
Dover Area School District: In 2004, the Dover Area School Board in Pennsylvania mandated that a statement be read in 9th-grade biology classes suggesting that there are gaps in Darwin’s theory of evolution and recommending that students consider the ID as an alternative.

The Trial:

Plaintiffs: Eleven parents of students in the Dover Area School District filed a lawsuit against the school board, arguing that the inclusion of ID in the science curriculum violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from endorsing religion.
Defendants: The school board argued that ID was a legitimate scientific theory and that teaching it promoted critical thinking.
Ruling: Judge John E. Jones III ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that ID is not science and that its inclusion in the biology curriculum was unconstitutional because it advanced a particular religious view.

Key Points:

ID as Religion: The judge concluded that ID is essentially a religious view, not a scientific theory, and its promotion in public school science classes violated the separation of church and state.
Impact on Science Education: The ruling reinforced that evolution, as a well-established scientific theory, should be taught in public schools without the inclusion of religiously-based alternatives.

Impact:

The decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover was a significant victory for supporters of evolutionary biology and science education. It effectively barred the teaching of ID in public school science classes across the United States, setting a legal precedent that has been influential in similar cases.
The trial also sparked broader discussions about the role of religion in public education and the boundaries of science.

India’s Education Department (NCERT — National Council of Educational Research and Training) has taken a similarly regressive step by removing the topic of Evolution, Periodic Table, Challenges to Democracy from the Class X Science / Social Science curriculum. As a result, students who pursue further education in fields like Economics or Arts will graduate with little to no understanding of this fundamental scientific concept. In response, Kerala have strongly opposed this decision and have taken the initiative to include Evolution and other topics as a supplementary chapter for Class X, ensuring that students in Kerala still receive education on this critical topic.

Here is a comprehensive account of the 2004 Pennsylvania Intelligent Design Trial. Nearly two decades later, we find ourselves facing similar contentious issues, this time surrounding sexual orientation, gender, and climate change. Consider the recent tragedy in (July 30, 2024) Wayanad, Kerala, India, where over 400+ people lost their lives and more than 1,500+ were displaced due to climate change-related events.

Judgement Day — Intelligent Design Trial: Dover, Pennsylvania, 2004

Project 2025 represents a sweeping initiative that could potentially push America into a regressive era. As the nation approaches the 250th anniversary of its independence, it becomes increasingly vital to protect the future of the world’s oldest democracy from such a backward shift. The 250th anniversary, set to be celebrated on July 4, 2026, will mark a significant milestone — a quarter-millennium (250 years) since the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, a historic moment that heralded the birth of the United States as a sovereign nation.