Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Who’s Pulling Trump’s Strings? Inside Project 2025 and the 7 Think Tanks Reshaping America

From Heritage’s Project 2025 to America First Legal, these seven groups are driving Trump’s second-term agenda—reshaping federal agencies, civil rights, and global diplomacy


Opinion

Who’s Pulling Trump’s Strings? Inside Project 2025 and the 7 Think Tanks Reshaping America

Donald Trump

James Devaney/GC Images

Since the 1960s, think tanks and advocacy groups have been key influencers of presidential policymaking. For decades, Democrat and Republican presidents have relied on think tanks for research and policy ideas. Most recently, think tank roles have shifted from advisory to actual policy formulation and implementation, whereby the President is the marionette controlled by the think tank puppeteers.

Research is replete with the fact that seven conservative organizations have had, in just 285 days of Trump 2.0 – hundreds of their recommendations implemented. If, since Jan. 20, your mind has been spinning around after witnessing a rapidly reshaped federal government and change in international diplomacy and social norms, you may wonder who is pulling Trump’s strings.


Let’s examine the seven think tank puppeteers who have controlled President Trump since Jan. 20 and will continue to change the USA until Jan. 2029. This should help you better understand what’s going on at the White House.

Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025

Donald Trump posted on Truth Social in mid-2024 “I know nothing about Project 2025” despite an April 2022 speech at a Heritage Foundation event where he endorsed or acknowledged the project’s efforts (Salon, July 11, 2024).

Project 2025, a 922-page blueprint, contained 735 detailed policy proposals across for Trump to implement across 20 federal agencies (CBS News). Interestingly, only 31% of Republicans are aware of Project 2025 (Navigator Research) and of those who are knowledgeable, only 7% view the blueprint favorably (NBC News).

Data from the Center for Progressive Reform and Governing for Impact’s Oct. 15 report reveals the Trump 2.0 administration has already implemented 251 domestic policies written by the Heritage Foundation. Sixty-four of Project 2025’s foreign affairs and international economic policy proposals have also been implemented since Trump’s inauguration.

Together, this means 315 of Project 2025’s policy proposals (42.8%) have been implemented by Mr. Trump (The Hill). Additionally, about 70% of Trump’s cabinet and over 50 senior officials had prior roles with Heritage or its Project 2025 partner groups (DeSmog).

Here’s just nine high-profile recommendations Mr. Trump implemented: 1) disbanding U.S. Agency for International Development, 2) prohibiting transgender individuals from serving in the military, 3) allocating funds for 100,000 ICE detention beds, 4) laying off thousands of IRS employees and eliminating new funding for tax enforcement, 5) deploying Secret Service and other federal officers as law enforcement in Washington, D.C., 6) canceling federal contracts supporting diversity, equity and inclusion, 7) defunding NPR, PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, 8) withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement and 9) expanding tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico and China. (The Hill and BBC)

America First Policy

America First Policy Institute (AFPI) prepared nearly 300 executive orders ready for Trump’s signature immediately after his Jan. 20 inauguration. AFPI dominates Trump’s “America First” economic nationalism, immigration restrictions and deregulation task forces personnel and their co-founder Linda McMahon is now Secretary of Education (NPR).

Center for Renewing America

The Center for Renewing America, founded by Russel Vought -- top Project 2025 architect and Director, Office of Management and Budget -- has been instrumental in shaping policies around Schedule F (civil service reclassification), Christian nationalist faith-based governance and federal budget restructuring (Politico).

Claremont Institute

The Claremont Institute has contributed ideological frameworks promoting “national conservatism,” advancing “constitutional conservatism,” state-level resistance to the federal bureaucracy, DEI reforms and climate-related executive orders (DeSmog).

Hillsdale College

Hillsdale College-trained figures have taken education posts across Trump’s agencies, promoting the nationalization of curriculum and the rollback of federal education standards (NCSL).

America First Legal

Stephen Miller’s organization, America First Legal, advises Mr. Trump on litigation and executive acts aimed at neutralizing federal civil rights enforcement, immigration enforcement, Department of Justice strategies and border governance (Politico).

Council for National Policy

The Council for National Policy is the hub for political appointments and helps integrate religious nationalist proposals into agencies’ missions, including Health and Human Services and Education (DeSmog).

285-day assessment of Trump 2.0

Mr. Trump has followed the playbooks presented to him by seven self-serving organizations. Already in play are 251 policies that span from federal agency restrictions to immigration crackdowns, rollback of environmental civil rights protections, and significant centralization of the executive branch.

Internationally, 64 policies created by think tanks are in force and have enabled Mr. Trump to take a sharp pivot toward isolationism, trade protectionism and militarized deterrence that is consistent with the “America First” concept (The Fulcrum).

But, hold your hat. The Project 2025 Tracker and other independent observers note that another 309 objectives of the marionette masters remain “in progress” (www.project2025.observer/en). Reformation of America has only just begun as we’ve still got 1,176 days of Trump 2.0 to go.

As the late Paul Harvey would say at the closure of his historic ABC News radio broadcasts, “and now you know the rest of the story. Good day.”

Steve Corbin is Professor Emeritus of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.


Read More

An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less