The Shocking Reality of Project 2025

Summary

Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation initiative, is often misconstrued as a blueprint for authoritarianism. Contrary to sensationalist claims, it's a collection of policy recommendations for a potential Republican administration, similar to those provided since Reagan's era. The real focus is reforming the administrative state to ensure a more efficient and responsive government. Despite critics' fears, the project doesn't aim to undermine democracy but rather to address the entrenched bureaucracy that can hinder policy implementation, regardless of the party in power.

Takeaways

• 🗳️ Project 2025 is a plan by the Heritage Foundation to provide policy recommendations and a roster of potential appointees for the next Republican administration.
• 📚 The 'Mandate for Leadership' is a 1,000-page document outlining conservative policy suggestions, but it is not an official Trump campaign document.
• 🔄 Despite claims, the 'Mandate for Leadership' is a recurring publication by the Heritage Foundation since the Reagan era and is not a new phenomenon.
• 🤔 The central goal of Project 2025 is to reform the administrative state by providing a list of skilled and loyal appointees for a Republican administration.
• 😲 The script suggests that the administrative state, filled with unelected bureaucrats, can act as a roadblock to presidential policies and needs reform.
• 🇺🇸 The idea of reforming the administrative state is not a new concept and has been a concern for both Republicans and Democrats.
• 🔄 The script points out that executive power has varied historically in the United States, with periods of strong and weak executive power.
• 📉 The administrative state has grown increasingly disconnected from the electorate and has become less efficient and harder to hold accountable.
• 🔱 Project 2025 aims to make the next Republican administration more effective by preparing a roster of trained staffers and proposing reforms to the administrative state.
• 🚫 There is no evidence in the script to suggest that Project 2025 is a plan for establishing a dictatorship or a theocracy.

Q & A

What is Project 2025 and why has it generated controversy?

Project 2025 is a plan by the Heritage Foundation to provide a list of policy recommendations and a roster of skilled, loyalist appointees for the next Republican Administration. It has generated controversy because some perceive it as an attempt to establish a dictatorship, abolish constitutional rights, or even establish a theocracy.

What is the 'Mandate for Leadership' and how is it related to Project 2025?

The 'Mandate for Leadership' is a 1,000-page guide developed by the Heritage Foundation that outlines plans, studies, and justifications for various conservative policies. It is related to Project 2025 as it is a part of the policy recommendations provided by the Heritage Foundation, but it is not the central focus of Project 2025.

Why has the 'Mandate for Leadership' been a point of concern for some?

The 'Mandate for Leadership' has been a point of concern because it includes policy suggestions that some view as radical, such as greater restrictions on abortion, crackdowns on DEI and gender programs, and rolling back business regulations. Critics worry these could be alarming if implemented.

Is there an official connection between the Trump campaign and the 'Mandate for Leadership'?

No, there is no official connection between the Trump campaign and the 'Mandate for Leadership'. The Heritage Foundation has produced these guides regularly since the Reagan Administration, and while Trump may have some overlap with the positions, he is not obliged to follow them.

What is the main goal of Project 2025, according to the video?

The main goal of Project 2025 is to gut the administrative state and provide the next Republican Administration with a catalog of skilled, loyalist appointees who can effectively carry out the administration's agenda.

What is the administrative state and why is it a concern for conservatives?

The administrative state refers to unelected government officials or bureaucrats who manage daily governance and often wield significant influence. It is a concern for conservatives because they believe it can undermine the president's agenda and lead to inefficiencies and a lack of accountability.

How has the role of executive power in the United States changed over time?

Executive power in the United States has varied widely, with periods of strong executives like FDR and Lincoln, and more restrained executives like Thomas Jefferson. In recent history, there has been a trend towards weaker executive power, but the Trump and Biden administrations have marked a shift back towards a more activist executive.

What is the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 and why was it significant?

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 was an attempt to modernize federal employment practices and improve the efficiency of the government workforce. However, it weakened the merit-based standards established under the Pendleton Act, making it more difficult to hold civil servants accountable and leading to a stagnation in the civil service.

What are some proposals for reforming the administrative state mentioned in the video?

Some proposals for reforming the administrative state include reclassifying jobs to make them more easily replaceable, placing them under the jurisdiction of an efficiency commission, and shrinking the size of the executive branch while giving the president more direct control over its functions.

How does the video suggest the Democratic party has reacted to Project 2025?

The video suggests that organizations aligned with the Democratic party have demonized Project 2025 as something much worse than it actually is, possibly out of fear that the strategies used by the Heritage Foundation could lead to significant changes in Republican favor.

Outlines

00:00

🔍 Investigating Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation's Role

The video script begins by addressing the public's concern over Project 2025, a plan that has been sensationalized as a potential blueprint for establishing a dictatorship. The narrator, Mr. Z, delves into the Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership,' a comprehensive guide for conservative policies. Despite the sensationalism, the narrator clarifies that the 'Mandate for Leadership' is a regular publication by the Heritage Foundation since the Reagan era and is not directly tied to Trump's campaign. The video aims to provide a deeper understanding of Project 2025 and its actual implications, focusing on the Heritage Foundation's role and the nature of the 'Mandate for Leadership.'

05:01

📚 The Heritage Foundation's Mandate for Leadership: Misunderstandings and Context

Paragraph two discusses the misunderstandings surrounding the Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership.' It clarifies that the document is a set of policy recommendations for Republican administrations, not an official agenda. The narrator points out that while Trump has acknowledged facing resistance from the administrative state, the 'Mandate for Leadership' is not a direct reflection of his campaign promises. The paragraph also touches on the history of executive power in the United States, highlighting the fluctuating strength of the executive branch and the role of the administrative state in shaping national policy.

10:01

🏛️ The Administrative State: A Historical Overview and Current Concerns

Paragraph three provides a historical overview of the administrative state, explaining its growth during FDR's New Deal era and the subsequent concerns about its efficiency and accountability. The narrator discusses the impact of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 on the merit-based standards of the civil service, leading to a less efficient and more entrenched bureaucracy. The paragraph emphasizes the need for reform in the administrative state, which has become a significant force in the U.S. government, often operating with little oversight and influence over national policies.

15:02

🛠️ Project 2025's Focus on Reforming the Administrative State

The final paragraph summarizes the core focus of Project 2025, which is to reform the administrative state and provide a trained roster of loyal appointees for the next Republican administration. It contrasts the sensationalized views of Project 2025 with the actual goals of the project, which include making the executive branch more effective and responsive to the president's agenda. The narrator also addresses the criticisms and comparisons with similar efforts by Democratic-aligned organizations, emphasizing that the need for administrative state reform is a bipartisan issue.

Keywords

💡Project 2025

Project 2025 refers to a plan by the Heritage Foundation to provide policy recommendations and a roster of potential appointees for a future Republican administration. In the video, it is discussed as a central focus, with concerns about its potential to establish a dictatorship or theocracy being debunked. The video explains that while the project has been sensationalized, its main goal is to reform the administrative state and provide a list of skilled, loyal appointees for the next Republican president.

💡Heritage Foundation

The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank that plays a significant role in shaping Republican policy. In the video, it is mentioned as the organization behind Project 2025 and the 'Mandate for Leadership,' a document that outlines policy recommendations for the next Republican administration. The video clarifies that while the Heritage Foundation's suggestions are influential, they are not binding and are part of a tradition of providing policy advice to Republican administrations.

💡Administrative State

The administrative state refers to the network of unelected government officials or bureaucrats who manage daily governance and implement national policies. The video discusses concerns about the administrative state's efficiency and accountability, suggesting that it has become a roadblock to policymaking and needs reform. Project 2025 aims to address this by providing a roster of appointees who could potentially 'gut' the administrative state and make it more responsive to the president's agenda.

💡Mandate for Leadership

The 'Mandate for Leadership' is a document produced by the Heritage Foundation that outlines a comprehensive guide of policy recommendations for a Republican administration. The video explains that while this document has been sensationalized as Trump's blueprint, it is not a new phenomenon and has been produced for every Republican administration since Reagan's. The video also points out that the document's suggestions are not necessarily indicative of Trump's actual policy intentions.

💡Partisanship

Partisanship refers to strong political bias in favor of a particular political party. The video script mentions the 'turbulent torrent of accusations and partisanship' during election cycles, highlighting how Project 2025 has been caught in the crossfire of political bias. The term is used to illustrate the polarized reactions to the project, with different parties interpreting its implications through their own lenses.

💡Deep State

The term 'deep state' is used to describe an alleged secret network of influential individuals within government agencies who operate outside the democratic system. In the video, it is mentioned as a concern for conservatives, including the Heritage Foundation, who worry about the potential for the deep state to undermine a Republican administration. The video suggests that Project 2025 is partly a response to this concern, aiming to provide a counterbalance by staffing the administration with loyal appointees.

💡Executive Power

Executive power refers to the authority exercised by the president and other executive branch officials. The video discusses the historical variation in executive power, from strong executives like FDR to more restrained ones. It also touches on the current trend of a more activist executive, suggesting that Project 2025 and the potential for a more powerful executive are not unprecedented in U.S. history.

💡Civil Service Reform Act of 1978

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 is a piece of legislation that aimed to modernize federal employment practices. The video discusses how this act weakened the merit-based standards of the civil service, making it more difficult to hold civil servants accountable and contributing to the current issues with the administrative state.

💡Transition Project

A transition project refers to the process of preparing a new administration to take office. In the context of the video, Project 2025 is described as a transition project that includes training and recruiting potential appointees for a future Republican administration. This is seen as a way to ensure that the new administration can effectively implement its policy agenda.

💡Policy Blueprints

Policy blueprints are comprehensive plans outlining policy recommendations for a political party or administration. The video mentions that both the Heritage Foundation and organizations aligned with the Democratic Party create policy blueprints for their respective administrations. These blueprints serve as guides for policy-making and are a standard practice in U.S. politics.

Highlights

Project 2025 has been sensationalized as a blueprint for establishing a dictatorship or theocracy, but a deeper look reveals different intentions.

The Heritage Foundation's 'Mandate for Leadership' is a guide for conservative policies, not a direct Trump agenda.

The 'Mandate for Leadership' has been a regular publication by the Heritage Foundation since Reagan's era, not a new phenomenon.

Project 2025's central goal is to provide a catalog of skilled, loyalist appointees for the next Republican administration.

The administrative state, with its unelected bureaucrats, can undermine presidential policies and needs reform.

Presidential power has varied historically, with periods of strong and weak executive power in the United States.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 contributed to the current issues within the administrative state by weakening merit-based standards.

Project 2025 aims to reform the administrative state to make the government more efficient and responsive to the electorate.

The Heritage Foundation and organizations aligned with the Democratic party both create policy blueprints and transition projects.

Critics argue that Project 2025 is an attempt to consolidate power within the executive branch, but this is not unprecedented.

The real concern for Democrats may be the effectiveness of a Republican administration empowered by Project 2025's transition project.

Project 2025 is not an authoritarian plan but a push for government efficiency and accountability.

Reforming the administrative state is a bipartisan issue, with both parties recognizing the need for change.

The video concludes that Project 2025 is about improving government representation and policy implementation, not authoritarianism.

Transcripts

by now you've probably heard about

project 2025 with the election coming up

there's been a lot of Hysteria

surrounding the plan that some have

called Trump's blueprint for

establishing a dictatorship abolishing

constitutional rights or even

establishing a theocracy obviously

there's going to be some sensationalism

in hyperbole but still could project

2025 really be that bad with election

Cycles being the turbulent Torance of

accusations and partisanship that they

are I thought it worthwhile to actually

do some deeper digging on the project to

see what it was really all about what I

found was genuinely shocking and I think

you're all going to want to stick around

for the truth behind project 2025 hello

audience Mr Z here with another video

for you if you're new to the channel

welcome we have videos like this every

week where we talk about history and

politics so be sure to subscribe leave

us a comment about what you'd like to

see next and stay tuned for more if

you'd like to join the community we do

have a public Discord server Linked In

the description along with a community

made subreddit loaded with memes charts

maps and more and of course if you'd

like to help support the channel

directly consider becoming a channel

member or donating to us on patreon

having dealt with censorship and

demonetization in the past especially

when covering more sensitive topics your

support really goes a long way to

keeping the channel going all members do

gain access to a separate membersonly

Discord server where you can speak with

me directly now let's get back to our

regularly scheduled program now of

course I wanted to see what it was

everybody was talking about with this

what it was everybody was concentrating

on that was so crazy the central star of

the project 2025 discussion repeatedly

appeared to be the Heritage foundation's

lengthy 1,000 page mandate for

leadership it's an extensive guide or

more of a textbook developed by experts

gathered by the foundation for the

purpose of laying out plans studies and

justifications for various conservative

policies for the next Republican

Administration in short it's meant to be

a huge list of policy recommendations

for the next Republican who takes office

skimming through the book it's

understandable why left Wingers would be

alarmed by some of the policy

suggestions laid out here from placing

greater restrictions on aard cracking

down on Dei and gender programs and

rolling back regulation on business

practices it's definitely a pretty

hardcore Republican agenda but here's

the kicker the Mandate for leadership

isn't actually Central to project 2025

at all heck it's more of a red herring

than anything else the Mandate for

leadership is nothing new for the

Heritage Foundation they've actually

made these regularly since the Reagan

Administration in 1981 and Trump even

had an addition of this back in 2016

sometimes presidents implement the

suggested policy sometimes they don't

most only use about half of what's

actually in these if they use it at all

the claim that this book represents

everything Trump officially wants to do

however is false now officially there's

no connection whatsoever between the

Trump campaign and the Heritage

Foundation who put the book together but

of course Trump knows people who work at

the Heritage Foundation many people in

politics do tend to know each other

especially when they belong to the same

party or faction and of course the

Heritage Foundation has communicated

with Republican campaigns in the past

Trump's included but the fact is that

the Mandate for leadership is not

Trump's agenda these are a bunch of

suggestions Heritage is making and Trump

while he has spoken positively about

Heritage in the past and probably has

some overlap with these positions he

could genuinely do nothing from the

Mandate if he really chooses to it's not

a list of his campaign promises and

there's actually reason to believe that

he might disregard this altogether he's

been open about a lot of his policy and

some of it even conflicts with the

policy suggestions in the book like the

part about raising defense spending and

maintaining a strong military stance

against Russia China Iran and North

Korea when Trump himself has repeatedly

emphasized his desire to end foreign

interventionism the Mandate for

leadership is nothing new it's a lot

less impactful than we think and it's

not even the point of project 2025 from

what I heard actually reaching out to

the Heritage Foundation to answer some

questions it was kind of just tacked on

at the last minute since they already

give one of these to the Republican

presidents anyway okay so if the Mandate

doesn't matter what the heck is the

point of project 2025 it's actually

something that just about everyone seems

to be overlooking or not giving much

attention to and that is the training

and talent roster or the right-wing

LinkedIn as some people have called it

project 2025 is first and foremost about

gutting the administrative State and

providing the next Republican

Administration with a catalog of skilled

loyalist appointees that is the central

goal and purpose of the project but why

a major concern that the Heritage

Foundation and many American

conservatives have for that matter is

that that even if Trump were to win

re-election what's going to stop the

so-called deep State specifically in

this case the hundreds of unelected

bureaucrats operating several agencies

which directly influence and shape

National policy with little to no

scrutiny what's stopping them from just

sabotaging the next potential Republican

Administration during Trump's first term

he faced Massive Resistance from the

administrative State including from his

own appointees leading to presidential

policies that were never put into action

political decisions which were never

authorized by the president and a whole

lot of Deadlock now Trump himself has

personally accepted some responsibility

for this acknowledging that he entered

office without Clarity on who was

actually on his side and who actually

shared his policy Vision but more than

anything he recognized that he faced

significant challenges using executive

power from within the executive branch

okay but why gut the administrative

State isn't this just Trump trying to

seize more power for himself isn't it

good that parts of the executive branch

are able to reign in the power of the

president the reality has been

incredibly OB fiscated by the fact that

most people aren't familiar with the

history of executive power in the United

States the role of the administrative

state or Civil Service nor what the

state of civil service has become in the

modern day let's start by talking about

executive power throughout US History

executive power varied widely you had

strong Executives who maximized what the

president could do say Andrew Jackson

Abraham Lincoln Theodore Roosevelt but

you also had more restrained Executives

who prefer to adopt a more passive role

and defer to Congress the state

governments the free market Etc men such

as Thomas Jefferson Warren Harding and

Ronald Reagan the real peak of executive

power was probably FDR's Administration

some might argue Lincoln given his

wartime Powers but FDR also assumed

similar Powers once America entered

World War II and even prior to this was

given card blanch by Congress to tackle

the Great Depression as though it was a

war to be won some even proposed

granting him temporary dictatorial

powers specifically to legislate without

the need of Congress until the

Depression was solved with his decisions

only veto by a super majority vote from

Congress of course those dictatorial

Powers were never granted but FDR did

expand the abilities of the executive

branch to Greater Heights than ever

before so much so that he needed to

delegate some of those additional powers

to other members of the branch but we'll

get to that momentarily after FDR passed

his followers in the New Deal coalition

attempted to continue FDR's policies

with a similar degree of executive power

but with the depression solved in the

Second Great War One the need for a

powerful executive was waning and the US

presidents wielded it with less success

president Johnson was probably the last

major gasp of this new deal style

Executive before Nixon took office and

both intentionally and unintentionally

diminished executive power not only did

Nixon seek to cut back the role of the

Federal Government in general in the

lives of Americans but his handling of

the Watergate scandal fractured The

Prestige of the executive and saw many

cry out for greater oversight and

limitation on executive power as a

result Carter's shortcomings would

further diminish executive Prestige with

his crisis of confidence Reagan would

aim to further decentralize power and

shrink the role of the Federal

government and ever since then US

presidents have generally followed suit

operating with less and less direct

power than their predecessors with

Donald Trump and Joe Biden arguably

being the first president since Reagan

to break this trend a more powerful

executive especially one in line with

the powers demonstrated by the past

Trump and Biden administrations is

nothing out of the ordinary in US

history rather we have simply been in a

long period of relatively weak executive

power and whether it be on the left or

the right we are seeing a significant

reorientation toward a more activist

executive in the mold of past presidents

like FDR Theodore Roosevelt Taft and

McKinley now while we have lived in an

age of a relatively weak executive this

is not to mean we live in an age of

relatively small government somehow the

government of today can feel

overbearingly involved yet totally

useless at providing the basic Services

many want and expect especially when we

consider that most middle class and

lower class Americans are facing

taxation not far off from what they had

during FDR's ter Z had enjoy very few of

the same benefits provided during that

time well this is where we get into the

issue of the administrative State the

bureaucrats who in many cases are

responsible for ensuring that the Public

Services provided by the government do

what they're supposed to do are run well

and run efficiently but very obviously

are not the administrative State refers

to a collection of unelected government

officials or bureaucrats who manage

daily governance and often wield

significant influence the sector has

become a substantial force in the US

government during the New Deal era under

FDR and in response to the Great

depression the federal government

expanded dramatically new agencies like

the Social Security Administration the

Securities and Exchange Commission were

created to address economic and social

crises with this growth the

administrative state became essential to

implementing National policies and

regulations these agencies were run by

skilled officials who were loyal to

FDR's New Deal agenda and for a time

this model worked relatively well

bureaucracies were seen as key Tools in

governing the complex Machinery of the

country however over the decades as the

administrative state continued to grow

so too did concerns over its efficiency

and accountability after World War II

and especially in the 1970s faith in the

system started to erode scandals such as

Watergate feely damaged public trust in

government leading to calls for reforms

and how the executive branch and its

agencies operated Congress began

increasingly exerting control over

federal agencies often resulting in a

more fragmented system where executive

control became deluded this shift is

important because it exemplifies how the

balance of power moved toward Congress

and undermined the president's influence

over the bureaucracy this growing

tension between Congress and the

executive made the bureaucracy less

responsive to direct presidential

oversight creating more inefficiencies

over time a significant blow to the

quality of the administrative State came

with the civil service reform Act of

1978 under Jimmy Carter the intention

was to modernize federal employment

practices and improve the efficiency of

the government Workforce however in

practice the reforms made it difficult

to hold civil servants accountable the

ACT abolished the Civil Service

Commission in favor of new agencies like

the office of personnel management and

the Merit systems protection board which

in turn weakened the rigorous

merit-based standards established under

the Pendleton Act way back in 1883 which

set the standard for a professional and

meritocratic civil service and created

the unique conditions where over 90% of

federal employees were held to

merit-based standards which allowed FDR

to have the administrative State he did

but in one Fell Swoop Carter had

eradicated that as a result firing or

disciplining underperforming employees

became more difficult leading to the

stagnation of the civil service we see

today with 15 executive federal agencies

and hundreds of sub agencies below them

run by unelected officials shaping how

Commerce Justice energy housing

education defense Health transportation

agriculture and more are managed and

with little to no quality control or

ability to hold these officials

accountable this is something that

Americans should be concerned about even

more so given the fact that despite

being nested under the Executive Branch

the executive has little control over

these departments and their subp

departments whose officials would be

protected from removal to prevent a

spoil system yet are no longer held to

the merit-based criteria of the past

creating an entrenched bureaucracy which

is extremely difficult to reform and

very difficult to hold to high standards

once again thousands of unelected

officials that you've probably never

heard of are making some of the most

vital decisions shaping how life in

America works and there's very little

ensuring that they're actually doing a

good job at it further these departments

receive some $4 trillion do in funding

annually where is it all going should we

really trust this system as it runs

right now with all that money now over

time the bureaucracy has additionally

grown more disconnected from the

electorate civil servants will regularly

Outlast presidential administrations

creating a layer of governance that

remains entrenched regardless of which

party holds power this consistency and

Independence while beneficial for

long-term projects also results in the

administrative State being insulated

sluggish and unresponsive to change

including those necessary reforms and up

making it more efficient and

meritocratic if a president is doing a

lousy job you can blame him and you can

vote him out of office if a congressman

is doing a lousy job you can blame him

and vote him out of office you can't

vote members of the administrative State

out of office but that might finally

change once again project 2025 or more

specifically the Mandate for leadership

has a lot of very very partisan stuff

that's just not going to fly with the

other side it reads like a strictly

Republican agenda but the biggest

highlight something I think that most

Americans can get behind is the idea of

reforming the administrative State and

both Trump and project 2025 have

independently made different proposals

for how to tackle the issue of the

administrative State everything from

reclassifying these jobs into ones which

could be more easily replaceable to

placing them under the jurisdiction of

an efficiency commission to shrinking

the size of the executive branch while

giving the president more direct control

over the functions of these executive

departments in essence consolidating the

powers of the cabinet into the executive

himself none of these measures are

particularly radical or extreme when we

consider how much of a roadblock the

administrative state has been to

policymaking and despite what some

people have claimed this doesn't include

anything that would hinder congress's

influence over the presidency some of

the oversight that Congress would have

over those departments is going to be

rescinded just because those departments

wouldn't exist anymore or would be

Consolidated under the executive himself

but there's still going to be checks and

balances between the branches of

government the only thing that's talked

about is a consolidation within the

executive branch this isn't the

executive consolidating powers that are

typically given to Congress or to the

Supreme Court this is the executive

gaining more control over the Executive

Branch whether you are a Republican or a

Democrat you must be able to acknowledge

that we vote for our candidates because

we want them to fulfill their promises

we want them to make America better in

whatever form that might be but what

happens when they get into office try to

push that change only for it to be held

back by an unseen in manipulative body

of unelected officials we elect

representatives to represent us that's

what we signed up for not a bureaucratic

oligarchy so when people do point to

this aspect of project 2025 as a scheme

to give Trump dictatorial Powers I don't

buy it whether it was the Heritage

Foundation or the center for American

progress saying that we need to reform

the administrative State it's it's true

it's an institution that needs reform

now speaking of the center for American

progress they were among the loudest in

earliest challenges of project 2025

which is ironic considering that they

were founded as a direct rival to the

Heritage Foundation and as you might

expect from arrival they also create

Blueprints and transition projects for

Democratic administrations every

election and they essentially had their

own liberal versions of project 2025 for

Biden 2020 and Obama in 2008 it's even

been said of the organization quote not

since the Heritage Foundation helped

guide Ronald Reagan's transition in 1981

has a single outside group held so much

Sway and that it is quote the most

influential think tank of the Biden era

now Heritage as I said puts together the

so-called blueprints for Republican

administrations every election and tries

to work with the administrations if they

win but project 2025 is the first time

Heritage has actually undertaken an

effort to have pre-trained staffers

ready for the president on such a large

scale again the Mandate for leadership

is kind of Superfluous if it wasn't

alarm for it would have been raised

during past Republican administrations

who also got similar books is the

Mandate a bit extreme sure but once

again they're really just suggestions

that most presidents barely adopt half

of if any what most of these Democrat

aligned organizations are probably most

concerned about is the actual training

and transition project as well as the

plan to reform the administrative State

because it would make the next

Republican Administration actually

effective at carrying out its agenda

which again is defined by Trump not by

the Heritage Foundation and its mandate

for leadership I mean they don't even

try to hide that they do this themselves

to quote the capap sister organization

capap action quote long before the

election this team worked closely

together almost as a shadow government

to exercise cooperation work on specific

problems and develop initiatives that

would be implemented soon upon President

Obama's inauguration this model was

highly successful in ensuring critical

members of the president's staff were

prepared to work together in the best

interest of the country and the

president once they began serving in the

white house now I think you have an

instance here of democratic factions

recognizing Republican attempts to

implement simil successful strategies

they themselves have used and are

fearful that this will amount to actual

major change in Republican favor it's

not really a transition project but they

even have a project called progress 2050

which literally sounds like something

that was invented to oneup project 2025

let's summarize all of this one the

Heritage Foundation has been involved in

working with past Republican

administrations and we might expect it

to have some influence in a second Trump

Administration though Trump has

attempted to distance himself from the

organization two the foundation's

mandate for leadership though it does

contain some pretty radical republican

policy is actually nothing new since

they've literally published these every

few years to advise Republican

presidents on policy actions and somehow

the book has never raised alarm in the

past even when one was published for

Trump's 2016 presidency three Trump has

no obligation to abide by anything in

the Mandate for leadership which at

times does explicitly conflict with his

own stated agenda Trump is also much

less willing to take advice from outside

groups this time around having felt as

though he was misled during his first

term for the core of project 2025 is

actually the transition project aimed at

recruiting and training staffers in the

event of a republican Victory and

working to get the administrative State

five criticism of the administrative

state by the Heritage Foundation in all

fairness does hold weight and this is

something which does need reform six

while a consequence of gutting the

administrative state would be a more

effective executive this does not reach

anything on the scale of an American

dictatorship likely bringing executive

power back to what it had been around

the late 1800s and early 1900s but not

nearing the peak it had reached under

FDR seven organizations and groups

aligned with the Democratic party have

incentive to demonize project 2025 as

something much worse than it actually is

when in reality it is nearly identical

to much of what those organizations do

for the Democratic party already from

drafting a policy blueprints overseeing

Transitions and recruiting staffers to

ensure a more effective Administration

altogether I don't think project 2025 is

the terrifying and authoritarian plan

many people have made it out to be and

while I doubt Trump is going to do

anything with the Mandate for leadership

if he wins I do think it's good that one

of the overlaps between his agenda and

the agenda Heritage put forward

reforming the administrative state in

one way or another has remained a key

part of his platform as government

inefficiency has been a massive issue

plaguing the US for years and being able

to have a government actually

representative of the country and

interested in pushing the policy that

people vote for should be fundamental to

how our system works but those are just

my thoughts let me know what you think

in the comments below like the video If

you enjoyed it and subscribe for more Mr

Mr Z out