How Trump’s Picks Could Turn Project 2025 into a Game Changer

This story was originally published by The 19th.

As the 2024 presidential race intensifies, President-elect Donald Trump has begun an overt alignment with Project 2025, a controversial blueprint designed to guide his second term. Despite earlier efforts to distance himself from it, Trump’s recent appointments indicate a full embrace of this conservative Christian agenda, which could significantly impact federal policies, particularly regarding the rights of women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and marginalized groups.

Russell Vought, a prominent figure in the Heritage Foundation’s vision, is poised to lead the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) once again. His role, pending Senate confirmation, is critical; he will control the budgetary framework that implements Trump’s conservative policies across various federal agencies. Vought’s previous experience, including serving as OMB’s acting director during Trump’s first term, positions him strategically to enforce the priorities outlined in Project 2025.

Critics, including Ben Olinsky from the Center for American Progress, argue that Vought’s approach could erode necessary checks and balances within the federal government. “Vought’s vision for OMB is aimed at changing the plumbing so they can do whatever they want,” Olinsky remarked, emphasizing the risks associated with such unchecked power.

Vought has been candid about his ambitions, even likening the organizations he’s affiliated with to a formidable force meant to challenge established norms. His commitment to promoting a Christian nationalist agenda reflects a broader strategy to reshape American governance fundamentally. He described his nonprofit work as transforming the Center for Renewing America into a “Death Star” of conservative influence, which some critics fear could undermine equity initiatives and civil rights protections.

At the core of Project 2025 lies a series of proposals that challenge established social norms. The recommendations include limiting abortion rights, reinterpreting familial structures to align with conservative values, and fundamentally changing the role of federal agencies, including the FBI, to support these objectives. The agenda also suggests that federal housing assistance be restricted based on citizenship status, reinforcing Trump’s past promises regarding immigration control.

Past initiatives, like the “Schedule F” executive order aimed at reclassifying federal employees and stripping them of protections, are also on the table for reinstatement under Vought’s leadership. Reports suggest that there may be plans to identify and potentially purge up to 50,000 federal workers deemed non-compliant with the new administration’s agenda.

During his first term, Vought’s decisions raised alarms; he notably withheld military aid to Ukraine, a move that led to significant legal scrutiny. Such actions underscore his belief that OMB can be a powerful tool for advancing presidential priorities, even at the expense of congressional appropriations. “Making Impoundment Great Again!” Vought has quipped, hinting at a return to unilateral budgetary control that could steer government policy in a decidedly conservative direction.

The ramifications of these developments extend beyond the fiscal realm; they pose a fundamental question about the type of governance that will emerge from Trump’s second term. With his administration’s choices likely to redefine individual rights and entitlements, the socio-political landscape of the United States may undergo profound shifts.

As Trump prepares to assume office on January 20, the attention inevitably turns to how his selections will navigate and potentially reshape the federal workforce and its budgetary authority. The implications for civil rights, social equity, and governmental structure remain on the line, raising critical concerns about whose interests will be prioritized.