Project 2025

[Jamie_B]

Going to make this a whole thread as I find things. This stuff can not be put into legislation. It needs to be defeated.

 

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

The MAGA Plan to End Free Weather Reports

[T-Dub]

Don't forget selling off the national parks and making trans people illegal.

 

Fuck these fascist scum.

[Homer_Rice]

Should at least provide a link to the actual document. It's 900+ pages; click "Read the Mandate" for a pdf.

 

Things to keep in mind:

 

1) It's a Heritage Foundation document and the Heritage Foundation, while influential, is not the entire Rep. party.

 

2) A lot of effort and thought went into this, and poo-pooing it away won't be an effectual counter. That was also the point of my posting the Bannon comment. Note the prep work and effort put into preparing a vision of the future they desire. As well as doing the groundwork to build an apparatus to implement that vision. As someone who has done a lot of organizing over the course of my life, it's impressive, regardless of one's agreement or disagreement with the content. It's precisely why I quit dealing with the Dem party, especially since I moved here back to this part of the country. I can't speak for the republicans, but the Democratic party is in shambles. Hell, even the "hard left" types out here are a bunch of ineffectual, well-intended, people, who mostly couldn't organize their way out of a wet paper bag.

 

3) The Democratic party and it's affiliates do not really have a corresponding kind of vision. It's one of the reasons they have been, and continue to be, fucked as an organization these past few decades. The current sitrep of the party ought to be a reminder that the Democratic party isn't truly democratic. It's a collection of factions which mostly exclude regular people. Why has the working class abandoned the Democratic party since the advent of the Third Way takeover of the party? It's because the party abandoned the working class, as most recently demonstrated by the party's vicious treatment of the Sanders faction--which in truth, is mostly just the remnants of the old New Deal faction of the party and not some overweening socialist menace as so many Republicans and Democratic party functionaries would have you believe. And, as I suggested, this isn't new, it is decades old and for me personally, one of the reasons that there is a special corner of hatred in my heart for the Clinton faction (and now the Obama faction.) The Biden grifters are just a continuation of al this crap, only as shadows who, when you get down to it, are just more unstable than their predecessors.

 

[Jamie_B]

Fair should have included a link to the pdf.

 

Same reasons I hate Clinton and am disappointed by Obama. 

 

For me Biden, who I expected nothing from, has given me more than I expected. Maybe not what we would have gotten from Bernie, but there is some stuff I have liked. And some thing that bother me deeply.

[T-Dub]

4 hours ago, Homer_Rice said:

Should at least provide a link to the actual document. It's 900+ pages; click "Read the Mandate" for a pdf.

 

Things to keep in mind:

 

1) It's a Heritage Foundation document and the Heritage Foundation, while influential, is not the entire Rep. party.

 

2) A lot of effort and thought went into this, and poo-pooing it away won't be an effectual counter. That was also the point of my posting the Bannon comment. Note the prep work and effort put into preparing a vision of the future they desire. As well as doing the groundwork to build an apparatus to implement that vision. As someone who has done a lot of organizing over the course of my life, it's impressive, regardless of one's agreement or disagreement with the content. It's precisely why I quit dealing with the Dem party, especially since I moved here back to this part of the country. I can't speak for the republicans, but the Democratic party is in shambles. Hell, even the "hard left" types out here are a bunch of ineffectual, well-intended, people, who mostly couldn't organize their way out of a wet paper bag.

 

3) The Democratic party and it's affiliates do not really have a corresponding kind of vision. It's one of the reasons they have been, and continue to be, fucked as an organization these past few decades. The current sitrep of the party ought to be a reminder that the Democratic party isn't truly democratic. It's a collection of factions which mostly exclude regular people. Why has the working class abandoned the Democratic party since the advent of the Third Way takeover of the party? It's because the party abandoned the working class, as most recently demonstrated by the party's vicious treatment of the Sanders faction--which in truth, is mostly just the remnants of the old New Deal faction of the party and not some overweening socialist menace as so many Republicans and Democratic party functionaries would have you believe. And, as I suggested, this isn't new, it is decades old and for me personally, one of the reasons that there is a special corner of hatred in my heart for the Clinton faction (and now the Obama faction.) The Biden grifters are just a continuation of al this crap, only as shadows who, when you get down to it, are just more unstable than their predecessors.

 

 

Agree entirely re: the feckless Dems, however to your first point I think it's important not to let Trump weasel out of his full support and involvement with Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation. He's spoken at several of their events, including giving keynote speeches, and according to them worked closeley on developing policy. 

 

The lying sack of shit clearly knows exactly what P2025 is, but as usual his cult don't care if he lies constantly about everything. They'll religiously insist up is down and the moon is projected on a giant bedsheet if that's what it takes to support his bullshit. There's no room in their worldview for Dear Leader to be wrong about anything, ever.

 

Because it's a cult.

 

https://www.heritage.org/press/president-donald-trump-deliver-keynote-speech-heritage-event-florida

[Jamie_B]

https://www.vox.com/politics/360318/project-2025-trump-policies-abortion-divorce

 

 

Project 2025’s proposals to achieve that goal include:

 

1) Concentrating power in the presidency: Trump’s allies believe that his first term failed because he couldn’t get enough “loyal” appointees in place and because the “deep state” bureaucracy sabotaged him. So a main recurring theme of Project 2025 is how to bend the executive branch to a conservative president’s will.

“A President today assumes office to find a sprawling federal bureaucracy that all too often is carrying out its own policy plans and preferences — or, worse yet, the policy plans and preferences of a radical, supposedly “woke” faction of the country,” Vought, Trump’s former OMB director, writes in one chapter. “The modern conservative President’s task is to limit, control, and direct the executive branch on behalf of the American people.”

• The “Schedule F” plan to reclassify tens of thousands of civil servants as political appointees, so they could be fired and replaced with Trump cronies. (Trump issued this order in late 2020 but left office before it could be implemented, and Biden rescinded it.)
• Reconsidering the traditional separation between the White House and the Justice Department (something that could give the president more direct control over criminal investigations)
• Installing a “vast expansion” of political appointees at the DOJ in particular
• Expanding performance-based pay for the civil service (which sounds fine in theory, unless the performance evaluations are politicized)
• Letting political appointees apportion federal funds (currently civil servants do this, and proposals that the government do otherwise have been met with fears of politicization)
• Expanding White House review of military promotions to ensure promoted officers aren’t too focused on “climate change” or “manufactured extremism” (that is, domestic right-wing extremism)

 

2) Longtime conservative priorities: The vast majority of Project 2025’s policy plan is focused on longstanding conservative priorities — with some tweaking and elisions for the Trump era. Though some are indeed quite extreme, they’re not all that new or specifically tied to Trump.

There are far too many to list here, but just as a flavor:

• Education: Eliminate the Department of Education, give every parent a voucher-like option they could use to send their child to private school, zero out federal funding to low-income schools over the next decade, greatly cut “wasteful” school meal programs, and end Biden’s student loan forgiveness programs
• Energy and environment: Deprioritize fighting climate change, repeal Biden’s clean energy subsidies, further unleash oil and natural gas production, roll back various environmental regulations
• Health care: Majorly cut and overhaul Medicaid, roll back the recent law banning surprise medical billing
• Immigration: Deny loan access to students at “schools that provide in-state tuition to illegal aliens,” ban non-citizens from living in federally assisted housing (even if they live with a citizen), reinstate and expand the horseback-mounted Border Patrol

On a few issues — trade, antitrust, the Export-Import Bank — the plan states that the conservative movement is divided, and lays out the thinking of two different sides on each issue. On the question of Social Security and Medicare, which Heritage has long supported overhauling but Trump does not, the document is basically silent.

 

3) A hardline religious-right agenda: There are also parts of Project 2025 that, while not exactly surprising for conservatives, are quite extreme in ways that are politically problematic for Trump. The plan calls for:

• Revoking FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, which is used in about half of US abortions (“Abortion pills pose the single greatest threat to unborn children in a post-Roe world,” the document states)
• Using an old law known as the Comstock Act to prosecute people who send abortion pills through the mail
• Ending the mandate for insurance to cover the “week-after” contraceptive pill Ella (which the document argues is a “potential abortifacient”)
• Crack down on “abortion tourism” in liberal states by requiring states to report where women seeking abortions live and cutting federal funds if they refuse
• Ending subsidies for stem cell or fetal cell research

[Jamie_B]

https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/project-2025-tax-overhaul-blueprint

 

 

Income tax rates

Changing to two income tax rates: 15% and 30%

Currently, there are seven different income tax rates: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35%, and 37%. These marginal rates are tied to inflation-adjusted federal income tax brackets. 

Chapter 25 of the project's “Mandate for Leadership,” states, “The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions.”

The Project 2025 playbook suggests that the 30% tax rate should begin “at or near the Social Security wage base,” currently $168,600.

• Critics contend that such a drastic tax rate simplification might not account for varied individual financial situations. 
• There are also concerns that two tax rates and eliminating deductions and credits would be less fair, increasing the tax burden on middle-income earners. 

Some question whether a two-rate system would lead to a loss of federal revenue.

Capital gains tax rate

Imposing a 15% tax on capital gains and dividends

Advocates suggest this would incentivize investment and entrepreneurship. However, those opposed argue a 15% capital gains tax rate is too low. This is tied to existing concerns that lower capital gains rates disproportionately benefit the wealthy and that cutting capital gains tax rates can lead to a loss of government revenue. 

Additionally, some argue that maintaining a separate capital gains tax rate alongside ordinary income rates works against simplifying the tax code.

'Trump tax cuts'

Extending and expanding the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

Supporters argue that this would stimulate economic growth. However, critics point to studies suggesting that these cuts have contributed to the national debt. (The Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending the 2017 tax cuts alone would increase the deficit by $4.6 trillion by 2028.)

Another concern is data indicating that nearly half of the tax benefits in the TCJA have benefited the top 5% of U.S. taxpayers. Aside from potentially adding to wealth inequality, it would be difficult to maintain the 2017 tax cuts without significant reductions in federal spending.

Corporate tax rate

Lowering the corporate tax rate from 21% to 18%

Supporters have argued that this reduction might stimulate economic growth by encouraging business investment and job creation. They also contend that a lower corporate tax rate would make the U.S. more competitive, potentially attracting foreign investment. 

Meanwhile, opponents worry that reducing the corporate tax rate could significantly reduce government revenue. There’s also the longstanding debate over studies showing limited economic benefits associated with corporate tax cuts. Additionally, some say that lowering corporate taxes shifts the tax burden to individuals and encourages tax avoidance.

Project 2025 plans

In different “reform stages,” Project 2025 proposals include eliminating individual and corporate income taxes in favor of a consumption tax. Proponents argue this would simplify the tax system and encourage saving and investment. However, critics warn that such a shift could burden people with lower and middle incomes who spend more on essential goods and services.

Project 2025 also proposes significant changes to the IRS, including budget cuts and increased presidential appointments within the agency. 

Additionally, the project advocates a three-fifths vote threshold for future tax increases. In an “intermediate tax reform” stage, the project would repeal the clean energy tax breaks and “all tax increases passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act.”

While supporters argue changing the IRS would reduce government overreach, opponents worry it could hamper the agency's ability to enforce tax laws and collect revenue effectively. (The IRS has recently increased its compliance efforts relative to high earners and large corporations.)

Beyond taxes, Project 2025 proposes other sweeping changes, including but not limited to:

• Eliminating various federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Education
• Restricting abortion access
• Increasing presidential authority
• Cutting federal funding for renewable energy research
• Implementing stricter immigration policies

Project 2025 taxes: Bottom line

Project 2025 is seen as a conservative (some say "radical") roadmap for overhauling federal government structure and policy if a Republican administration regains the White House in 2024. 

Supporters argue that proposed tax "reforms" would simplify the tax code and boost economic growth and competitiveness. (*Revenue estimates don't appear in the Project 2025 playbook.) However, opponents warn of negative consequences like increased income inequality, ballooning national debt, reduced government capacity to provide essential services and unchecked authority.

In any case, and especially in the current highly charged political environment, it’s important to remain informed about potential tax changes that could affect your finances.

[Jamie_B]

If you cant see how going to 2 tier would hurt the poor by increasing those at the bottom tax burden by 50% ..... (from 10% to 15%).....

 

While reducing the burden at the top....

 

 

[Homer_Rice]

21 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Agree entirely re: the feckless Dems, however to your first point I think it's important not to let Trump weasel out of his full support and involvement with Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation. He's spoken at several of their events, including giving keynote speeches, and according to them worked closeley on developing policy.

That ship has already sailed. Howling at the moon won't help. Nor will it stop Republicans from crafting a government that they like if they get power.

 

Just as the Republican party has spent a couple of decades building power in multiple ways, the Democratic party needs to do the same. Thus far it hasn't and that's because they transformed the party into Republican-lite when it comes to economic matters. Your time is better spent crafting an agenda you like, find some other people who like it, and get busy grabbing power to implement your vision.

 

All the hand-wringing in the world won't stop these people. Power will. That they understand. Here's some more ammo:

 

Why Some Americans Really Do Want an Authoritarian in Charge

 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/07/22/inside-the-trump-plan-for-2025

 

Dark Money Just Got Darker: Wall Street Helped Fund Project 2025

 

The Trump Administration’s Plan to Seize Control of Spending

 

And what ought to have been done, but wasn't, because the Democratic party does not represent you and me. If you'll notice, this election cycle features a Presidential selection that had virtually no input from Democratic voters. From suppressing the primary votes to donors and party bigwigs forcing that clown out, did you get a chance to participate?

 

Tell me, why do they hate this guy?:

 

America Missed Out So, So Bad By Not Electing Bernie President

[T-Dub]

3 hours ago, Homer_Rice said:

That ship has already sailed. Howling at the moon won't help. Nor will it stop Republicans from crafting a government that they like if they get power.

 

Just as the Republican party has spent a couple of decades building power in multiple ways, the Democratic party needs to do the same. Thus far it hasn't and that's because they transformed the party into Republican-lite when it comes to economic matters. Your time is better spent crafting an agenda you like, find some other people who like it, and get busy grabbing power to implement your vision.

 

All the hand-wringing in the world won't stop these people. Power will. That they understand. Here's some more ammo:

 

Why Some Americans Really Do Want an Authoritarian in Charge

 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/07/22/inside-the-trump-plan-for-2025

 

Dark Money Just Got Darker: Wall Street Helped Fund Project 2025

 

The Trump Administration’s Plan to Seize Control of Spending

 

And what ought to have been done, but wasn't, because the Democratic party does not represent you and me. If you'll notice, this election cycle features a Presidential selection that had virtually no input from Democratic voters. From suppressing the primary votes to donors and party bigwigs forcing that clown out, did you get a chance to participate?

 

Tell me, why do they hate this guy?:

 

America Missed Out So, So Bad By Not Electing Bernie President

 

I'd say he's trying very hard to deny P2025 are his marching orders for a reason & it's important not to let him.

 

2016 certainly exposed how the primaries are all for show but Bernie will be 83 years old before the election. He's served long & well but I think it's time to pass the torch. We all know why the current Dem leaders hate him. He wants to place some limits on corporate greed and they're owned by greedy corporations.

[Homer_Rice]

7 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

I'd say he's trying very hard to deny P2025 are his marching orders for a reason & it's important not to let him.

Why? Why is it important? What kind of victory will you have achieved? It doesn't matter whether he admits it or not. Imagine that Trump were not the candidate and some other Republican was. The Heritage Foundation would still be pushing these ideas. If you want to fight the ideas, in and of themselves, that is another story and a worthy effort. Get some good ideas of your own and fight like the dickens for them, too.

 

Big part of the problem today is that the ideas, the policies, often take a back seat to the personalities. You want to play "pin the tail on the donkey" but you don't recognize that the donkey is a jackass and will kick you in the teeth to win. And that the "tail" is what needs to be destroyed, not waved around in some kind of juvenile blame game that has no effect on the outcome at all.

 

And no one suggested that Bernie run this time. Although that wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea. He's vital, still has a sharp mind, and is certainly no ally of the people who want to keep the majority of the population down. But again, it's the ideas that matter.

 

And if you can't tell the difference between a sycophant hack like Buttigieg and Sanders, then no wonder you'll lose every time. Even if the Dems win, if it is that sort of Dem, you are fucked for certain.

 

Ideas. Ideas. Ideas.

[T-Dub]

It's not about admission, it's about making people aware that this agenda exists and this candidate intends to enact it if given the chance.

 

I'm sure the next Republican presidential candidate will have the same agenda but I can only vote against the current one.

 

I think I've made it clear I'm no fan of Biden or Harris but the present alternative is horrifying. 

 

Beyond holding the Dems accountable if they win I'm not sure what you'd suggest?

[Jamie_B]

How Project 2025 would change American life (axios.com)

 

Democrats have warned of the damage that Project 2025 could do to the federal government and access to reproductive care if former President Trump wins in November.

Why it matters: The Heritage Foundation-backed plan would do far more than that. Its 900-page wishlist could reshape daily life for millions of Americans if some of its less publicized recommendations are adopted.

The big picture: The foundation has been a fixture in conservative politics for decades, and its roadmap for the next Republican administration zeroes in on programs and initiatives the GOP has long targeted.

• At least 140 former Trump administration officials contributed to Project 2025, CNN reports.
• Trump has publicly disavowed the project; his campaign has pointed to his own policy plan, Agenda47, and the official Republican Party platform as his agenda if he wins in November.

Yes, but: The foundation boasted that the GOP presidential nominee carried out roughly two-thirds of its 2015 recommendations within a year of taking office the first time.

• Here is some of what it wants during a second Trump presidency.

Privatizing weather forecasts

The project calls for dissolving the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and either transferring its functions to other agencies or eliminating them entirely.

• It argues NOAA must be terminated because its research on the effects of human-caused climate change from greenhouse gas emissions "is harmful to future U.S. prosperity."
• The National Weather Service (NWS), one of NOAA's sub-agencies that produces free weather forecasts and warnings for the public, "should fully commercialize its forecasting operations," the plan recommends.
• Effectively privatizing weather data could hinder Americans' access to weather data and how the U.S. accesses other countries' weather models, the Atlantic reports.

• Zoom out: Throughout all scientific agencies in the government, the plan calls on the president to "ensure appointees agree with administration aims," which may allow political ideologues to overrule the expertise of trained scientists.

  Shrinking the social safety net

  Critical federal programs meant to support people experiencing economic hardship and children living in poverty would be significantly overhauled or eliminated under the plan.

• Its reforms would make it more difficult for people to qualify for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly referred to as "food stamps."
• SNAP is the country's largest nutritional assistance program, serving an average of around 41 million people — or over 10% percent of the population — per month.
• The foundation also wants to roll back changes made by the Biden administration to increase SNAP benefits over 10 years to keep up with rising food costs.

• Zoom in: The foundation wants Trump to tighten the criteria for when states may give people exemption waivers for SNAP's work requirements, which are issued to ensure access to food stamps during times of high unemployment.

• The recommendation echoes a reform the Trump administration had pursued during his first term before being sued by a coalition of states and D.C.
• At the time, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimated that the changes would strip about 688,000 people of their SNAP benefits.

• The foundation would also like to make it harder for people to qualify for SNAP benefits if they also receive aid from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, another federally funded assistance program.

• The recommendation would revive yet another Trump-era policy that was never finalized.
• The USDA estimated at the time that 3.1 million people — or 9% of SNAP recipients at the time — would have lost their benefits from the change and would disproportionately affect households with at least one elderly member.

• Eliminating free preschool

  The foundation wants to end another key federal program: Head Start, which offers free early childhood education, health and nutrition services to children from low-income families.

• That would eliminate services for the families of roughly 800,000 children, two-thirds of whom are Black, Hispanic or Latino.
• It seeks to limit the number of children who can qualify for free school meal programs while also calling for Republicans to block any effort to implement universal free school meal programs.

• Capping funding for Medicaid

  The plan calls for caps to how much federal funding states may receive to help pay for Medicaid costs, though it doesn't specify how such caps would be determined.

• The caps would ensure that federal Medicaid spending does not keep pace with expected enrollment and health care cost increases, resulting in a significant cut to funding over time.
• It calls for setting time limits on Medicaid coverage and imposing lifetime caps on benefits "to disincentivize permanent dependence."
• Under the project, states would also be allowed adopt work requirements for people to receive Medicaid benefits and "more robust eligibility determinations" for people to qualify for coverage.

• Ending student debt relief

  The plan's architects propose ending all "time-based and occupation-based student loan forgiveness."

• That includes the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, which allows public employees, such as teachers, firefighters, members of law enforcement, and people who work for nonprofit organizations, to apply for forgiveness after they make 10 years' worth of payments.
• Biden's loan forgiveness efforts would be repealed, though Project 2025 does not specify if or how that would affect the over 4 million borrowers who have already been approved for forgiveness.

• Context: Republicans have cast Biden's cancellation effort as an unconstitutional giveaway and have fought to have his signature debt relief program overturned by the courts.

  Defunding public broadcasting

  Project 2025 calls for defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which has long been a Republican target.

• Its $500 million annual appropriation from the government helps support over 1,500 locally controlled and operated public television and radio stations that ensure Americans have universal access to free non-commercial, local public media.
• Defunding CPB "would severely diminish, if not destroy, public broadcasting service in the United States," according to Booz & Co. in a 2012 report, which added that "noncommercial radio and television stations in many localities would struggle to survive."

• Banning adult entertainment

  Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, writes in Project 2025's foreword: "Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned."

• Roberts also calls for telecommunications companies that distribute porn to "be shuttered."
• "It has no claim to First Amendment protection," Roberts writes of adult entertainment.

• Reality check: Prohibiting porn would challenge decades of free speech precedent.

• Courts, including the Supreme Court, have long held that adult entertainment is protected by the First Amendment so long as children are not involved and it is not obscene as defined by the Miller test, according to the Department of Justice.

• Go deeper: Republicans are revving up for a D.C. smackdown

  Editor's note: This story has been corrected to show that the report on defunding CPB was written by Booz & Co. (not Booz Allen Hamilton) and to note that it was published in 2012 (not 2017).

[T-Dub]

Thing is.. Trump could stand up and declare if elected he's going to shove a hot poker up everyone's ass and his cult would say not having a hot poker up your ass is woke & liberal. They abandoned critical thought a long time ago. The last few remaining jumped ship after J6.

 

Everyone left is either drinking the Kool Aid or the ones serving it.

 

 

[Jamie_B]

Propublica just broke that they have on their YouTube channel 14 secret training videos about this stuff. Going to bed but I'll start publishing them tomorrow 

[Jamie_B]

Ok lets get started. Here is a primer. 

 

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]

 

[Jamie_B]