Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Project 2025 is a threat to democracy

Project 2025 is a threat to democracy

If Donald Trump implements the Heritage Foundation's policy plan, he'll take us down the path of authoritarianism, writes Corbin.

Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images

Corbin is professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.

There are a multitude of issues that voters must assess when deciding between President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump and the independent presidential candidates before casting their ballots in the fall. Logically, the importance of each issue differs between and among America’s 161.4 million registered voters.

One rundown of the issues, produced by NBC News, ranges from abortion to affordable housing to foreign relations to climate change to election integrity to immigration to education. But one issue missing from that report has become a focal point of the Biden camp, MAGA Republicans and third-party candidates: democracy vs. authoritarianism.


Specifically, at noon Eastern on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025, will the duly elected and inaugurated president of the United States keep America as a democracy that dates back to the 1630s or will the commander-in-chief start changing the country to authoritarian-fascism?

If you’ve not heard of Project 2025, it’s very worthy of your independent investigation. Project 2025 is a playbook specifically created for Donald Trump and his minions to use in the first 180 days of Trump’s second presidential administration. The far-right Heritage Foundation proudly takes credit for facilitating the creation of the 887-page document, which if implemented would turn our democracy into an authoritarian country.

Project 2025’s two editors had assistance from 34 authors, 277 contributors, a 54-member advisory board and a coalition of over 100 conservative organizations (including ALEC, The Heartland Institute, Liberty University, Middle East Forum, Moms for Liberty, the NRA, Pro-Life America and the Tea Party Patriots).

It is a serious endeavor — if Trump returns to the White House — to make America a fascist country. After all, on May 20, Trump posted a video on his Truth Social media account depicting his next administration as a “ Unified Reich.” (Hitler’s Third Reich occurred in 1933-1945.)

On Project 2025’s website you can check out the disconcerting manuscript that tells Trump what specifically to do from Jan. 20 to July 18, 2025, to convert America into an authoritarian regime.

The 30 chapters are a daunting read. Project 2025 proposes, among a host of things, eliminating the Department of Education, eliminating the Department of Commerce, deploying the U.S. military whenever protests erupt, dismantling the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, removing protections against sexual and gender discrimination, and terminating diversity, equity, inclusion and affirmative action.

Additional mandates include: siphoning off billions of public school funding, funding private school choice vouchers, phasing out public education’s Title 1 program, gutting the nation’s free school meals program, eliminating the Head Start program, banning books and suppressing any curriculum that discusses the evils of slavery.

Project 2025 also calls for banning abortion (which makes women second-class citizens), restricting access to contraception, forcing would-be immigrants to be detained in concentration camps, eliminating Title VII and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, recruiting 54,000 loyal MAGA Republicans to replace existing federal civil servants, and ending America’s bedrock principle that separates church from state.

A Feb. 20 article in Politico described Project 2025 as an authoritarian Christian nationalist movement and a path for the United States to become an autocracy. Several legal experts have indicated implementing the 180-day manual would undermine the rule of law and the separation of powers.

Seriously consider reading one research-based book per month for the next five months as pre-election homework so you’ll know what authoritarianism looks like. Here’s my suggested reading list:

Reading even just one of these books will enable you to discern candidate- and party-based disinformation, misinformation and propaganda from truth. You’ll be ready to vote on Nov. 5 and keep America a democracy.

More articles about Project 2025


    Read More

    Two volunteers standing in front of a table with toiletries and supplies.

    Mutual aid volunteers hand out food, toiletries and other supplies outside the fence of Amphi Park in Tucson, which was closed recently over concerns about the unsheltered population that previously lived there.

    Photo by Pascal Sabino/Bolts

    Facing a Crackdown on Homelessness, Two Arizona Cities Offer Different Responses

    In August, fewer than 250 voters cast a ballot in a South Tucson recall election targeting the mayor and two allies in the city council. The three officials, Mayor Roxnna “Roxy” Valenzuela and council members Brian Flagg and Cesar Aguirre, form a progressive coalition in the small city’s leadership. Outside government, they also all work with Casa Maria, a local soup kitchen that provides hundreds of warm meals daily and distributes clothing, toiletries and bedding to the city’s unhoused population.

    It was their deeds providing for the homeless population that put a target on their back. A political rival claimed their humanitarian efforts and housing initiatives acted as a magnet for problems that the already struggling city was ill-equipped to handle.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority
    the capitol building in washington d c is seen from across the water

    From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority

    The unprecedented power grab by President Trump, in many cases, usurping the clear and Constitutional authority of the U.S. Congress, appears to leave our legislative branch helpless against executive branch encroachment. In fact, the opposite is true. Congress has ample authority to reassert its role in our democracy, and there is a precedent.

    During the particularly notable episode of executive branch corruption during the Nixon years, Congress responded with a robust series of reforms. Campaign finance laws were dramatically overhauled and strengthened. Nixon’s overreach on congressionally authorized spending was corrected with the passage of the Impoundment Act. And egregious excesses by the military and intelligence community were blunted by the War Powers Act and the bipartisan investigation by Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho).

    Keep ReadingShow less
    In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

    Person speaking in front of an American flag

    Jason_V/Getty Images

    In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

    Nearly 14 years ago, after nearly 12 years of public service, my boss, Rep. Todd Platts, surprised many by announcing he was not running for reelection. He never term-limited himself, per se. Yet he had long supported legislation for 12-year term limits. Stepping aside at that point made sense—a Cincinnatus move, with Todd going back to the Pennsylvania Bar as a hometown judge.

    Term limits are always a timely issue. Term limits may have died down as an issue in the halls of Congress, but I still hear it from people in my home area.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    “It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

    Liliana Mason

    “It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

    In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

    According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

    Keep ReadingShow less