Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Project 2025: A threat to American values

David Pepper and Alexander Vindman

Kettering Foundation Senior Fellows Alexander Vindman and David Pepper

Kettering Foundation

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross-partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Kettering Foundation Senior Fellows David Pepper and Alexander Vindman spoke with the organization’s chief external affairs officer and director of D.C. operations, Brad Rourke, about Project 2025, the controversial Heritage Foundation plan to reshape American democracy.


Pepper is a lawyer, writer, political activist, adjunct professor, former elected official, former chair of the Ohio Democratic Party. While leading the party in Ohio, he was engaged in numerous battles and extensive litigation over voter suppression and election laws in the Buckeye State, as well as reform efforts to enhance voting and end gerrymandering. Pepper is the author of “ Laboratories of Autocracy: A Wake-Up Call from Behind the Lines ” and “ Saving Democracy: A User’s Manual for Every American.”

Vindman, a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, was the director for European affairs on the National Security Council. He previously served at the Pentagon as the political-military affairs officer for Russia and as an attaché at the American embassies in Moscow and Kyiv. While on the joint staff, he authored the U.S. National Military Strategy for Russia. His military awards include two Legions of Merit and the Purple Heart, having sustained wounds in an IED attack during the Iraq War.

Pepper and Vindman unpack the dangers and profound changes posed by Project 2025, including threats to the rule of law, civil service integrity and military loyalty. This eye-opening conversation explores the potential future of U.S. governance and the values at stake.

Enjoy this insightful podcast:

This conversation was filmed on July 10 before the assassination attempt of former President Trump. The Charles F. Kettering Foundation condemns political violence. Such acts work against a healthy, inclusive democracy, and we must work toward a future where everyone can engage in the democratic process without fear.

More in The Fulcrum about Project 2025

      Read More

      A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

      The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

      Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

      Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

      Introduction

      The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

      Keep ReadingShow less
      For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

      Praying outdoors

      ImagineGolf/Getty Images

      For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

      The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

      Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

      Keep ReadingShow less