POPULARITY
37 episodes with administrative state
46 episodes with administrative state
43 episodes with administrative state
27 episodes with administrative state
15 episodes with administrative state
26 episodes with administrative state
12 episodes with administrative state
10 episodes with administrative state
6 episodes with administrative state
8 episodes with administrative state
8 episodes with administrative state
9 episodes with administrative state
8 episodes with administrative state
12 episodes with administrative state
3 episodes with administrative state
5 episodes with administrative state
6 episodes with administrative state
3 episodes with administrative state
Project 2025 has quickly become the most consequential—and controversial—blueprint for American governance in recent history. Conceived by the Heritage Foundation and launched with a sprawling 927-page policy manual in April 2023, Project 2025's core goal is to reshape the entire federal government according to staunch conservative priorities. It is, as Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts puts it, an effort to “dismantle the administrative state and restore presidential control over the executive branch.”Yet behind those words lies an ambitious checklist for the next presidential administration, presuming a Republican—most likely Donald Trump—takes office. Project 2025 is not just a collection of ideas. It is a detailed playbook, complete with executive orders, departmental reorganization timetables, and a so-called 180-day playbook, designed for rapid execution on “Day One.”At the heart of Project 2025 is an unprecedented push to centralize power in the Oval Office. The plan relies on the controversial unitary executive theory, which argues all executive branch employees should be directly answerable to the president. Kevin Roberts has been explicit: “All federal employees should answer to the president.” According to the project manual, entire agencies such as the Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Federal Trade Commission would lose their current independence and fall under direct White House control.One of the most sweeping reforms revolves around personnel. The blueprint resurrects the idea of “Schedule F”—a Trump-era category that would allow the president to reclassify tens of thousands of career civil servants as political appointees, instantly stripping them of protections from partisan firing. The National Federation of Federal Employees warns this would “give the president and his loyalists full control of the executive branch for personal and political gain,” hollowing out civil service checks that have traditionally protected against corruption and patronage.Concrete examples illustrate the scale of the changes envisioned. In foreign policy, the State Department chapter recommends that, before January 20, all leadership be dismissed and replaced with ideologically aligned “acting” appointees who bypass Senate confirmation entirely. Kiron Skinner, the former policy planning chief who wrote this section, has called for removing staff she considers too left-leaning, despite admitting she could not name a single time employees substantively obstructed White House policy.The playbook doesn't stop there. Project 2025 proposes slashing federal workforce numbers through forced attrition, with the White House directing agency heads to lay off or consolidate thousands of positions and eliminate entire offices deemed non-essential. For example, agencies like USAID and the CFPB are earmarked for dissolution, their functions either axed or merged into departments more closely monitored by the executive.Critics from organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union highlight how Project 2025 seeks to erode key civil liberties across a range of issues—abortion, LGBTQ rights, free speech, and the environment. The ACLU describes the initiative as “a roadmap for how to replace the rule of law with right-wing ideals.” Meanwhile, labor unions such as AFGE and NTEU have mounted lawsuits to block the executive orders targeting civil service protections, warning of the dangers of introducing broad political loyalty tests into government hiring and firing.Supporters claim these moves would eliminate bureaucratic inertia and bring swift, accountable leadership to Washington. Yet, legal scholars and former officials have called Project 2025 authoritarian, warning it undermines separation of powers and blurs the lines between partisanship and governance.With the November 2024 presidential election looming, Project 2025's fate comes down to political winds and court rulings. The Heritage Foundation and its partners have prepared a rapid-fire battery of executive orders, ready for signature if they get their candidate in office. Milestones to watch include ongoing legal challenges, Congressional resistance, and, above all, the outcome of the national vote.The scope and ambition of Project 2025 are nothing short of historic, representing both a culmination of decades-long conservative advocacy and an inflection point in debates over the very structure of American democracy. Thank you for tuning in, and be sure to come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Project 2025 began with a clandestine meeting of political strategists and conservative activists in the spring of 2022, their goal clear and unsettling: to engineer a dramatic transformation of American governance. By April 2023, this ambition took written form—a sprawling, 900-page policy blueprint released by the Heritage Foundation and dubbed Mandate for Leadership. Its stated purpose was simple: destroy the so-called “Administrative State” and concentrate presidential power like never before.Supporters of Project 2025 call it a necessary overhaul, arguing that “an unaccountable and biased bureaucracy” has long obstructed the will of the people. The plan's central premise is to place the entire federal executive branch, including agencies like the Department of Justice and the FBI, under direct White House control. As Kevin Roberts, Heritage Foundation president, declared, “All federal employees should answer to the president.” The project's architects are explicit—they want to rid agencies of perceived ideological opponents, filling key roles with loyalists on “Day One.” They envision the president hiring scores of political appointees with no expiration date, using what's known as Schedule F. Under this system, career civil servants could be transferred into politically appointed positions, stripping away their traditional legal protections against arbitrary removal or political interference.Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department section of Project 2025, was blunt about her intentions: remove all senior staff and bring in conservatives ready to serve the administration's agenda. When interviewer Peter Bergen pressed her in June 2024 to provide examples of bureaucratic resistance, she came up empty handed. Despite this, the plan moves forward.Concrete proposals are sweeping. Project 2025 prescribes eliminating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the United States Agency for International Development outright. The Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, wasted no time, dissolving entire agencies, laying off tens of thousands, and initiating a government-wide return-to-office mandate. These personnel moves layered chaos atop the rollback of existing policy, leaving many agency missions in limbo.In criminal justice, Project 2025's recommendations are transformative and controversial. The agenda calls for the Department of Justice to charge or remove local prosecutors who, in their view, fail to sufficiently prosecute crimes like low-level marijuana possession or shoplifting. This would dismantle the tradition of local prosecutorial discretion, potentially pressuring DAs elected on reform platforms to abandon their priorities for fear of federal retribution. The plan also aims to expand federal law enforcement into local jurisdictions deemed “soft” on crime. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, these changes would shift the balance of power away from local communities and toward a politically driven federal apparatus.Project 2025 extends well beyond law enforcement. Its architects target environmental regulations, labor rights, health policies, and civil liberties. Detractors such as the ACLU warn that this initiative represents “a dystopian view of America,” threatening civil rights, reproductive freedoms, and hard-won democratic norms. The Center for Progressive Reform describes the project as “an authoritarian blueprint” likely to weaken the very institutions meant to protect public health, the environment, and equitable governance.Yet, proponents remain undeterred. They envision a streamlined government, claiming it will be more effective and responsive, a nod to longstanding conservative desires to reduce bureaucracy and entrench executive authority. Critics, however, see dangers in the centralization of power, the erosion of checks and balances, and the removal of expert administrators in favor of partisan loyalists.As the next presidential transition approaches, all eyes turn to the practical impact of Project 2025's prescriptions. Lawsuits and public pushback are already in motion, with labor unions and advocacy groups scrambling to block or mitigate the plan's most far-reaching aspects. Whether this ambitious blueprint will upend American governance or falter in the face of legal and institutional resistance remains uncertain.Thank you for tuning in. Come back next week for more in-depth reporting on the forces shaping the nation's future.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
In this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop speaks with Robin Hanson, economist and originator of the idea of futarchy, about how conditional betting markets might transform governance by tying decisions to measurable outcomes. Their conversation moves through examples of organizational incentives in business and government, the balance between elegant theories and messy implementation details, the role of AI in robust institutions, and the tension between complexity and simplicity in legal and political systems. Hanson highlights historical experiments with futarchy, reflects on polarization and collective behavior in times of peace versus crisis, and underscores how ossified bureaucracies mirror software rot. To learn more about his work, you can find Robin Hanson online simply by searching his name or his blog overcomingbias.com, where his interviews—including one with Jeffrey Wernick on early applications of futarchy—are available.Check out this GPT we trained on the conversationTimestamps00:05 Hanson explains futarchy as conditional betting markets that tie governance to measurable outcome metrics, contrasting elegant ideas with messy implementation details.00:10 He describes early experiments, including Jeffrey Wernick's company in the 1980s, and more recent trials in crypto and an India-based agency.00:15 The conversation shifts to how companies use stock prices as feedback, comparing public firms tied to speculators with private equity and long-term incentives.00:20 Alsop connects futarchy to corporate governance and history, while Hanson explains how futarchy can act as a veto system against executive self-interest.00:25 They discuss conditional political markets in elections, AI participation in institutions, and why proof of human is unnecessary for robust systems.00:30 Hanson reflects on simplicity versus complexity in democracy and legal systems, noting how futarchy faces similar design trade-offs.00:35 He introduces veto markets and outcome metrics, adding nuance to how futarchy could constrain executives while allowing discretion.00:40 The focus turns to implementation in organizations, outcome-based OKRs, and trade-offs between openness, liquidity, and transparency.00:45 They explore DAOs, crypto governance, and the need for focus, then compare news-driven attention with deeper institutional design.00:50 Hanson contrasts novelty with timelessness in academia and policy, explaining how futarchy could break the pattern of weak governance.00:55 The discussion closes on bureaucratic inertia, software rot, and how government ossifies compared to adaptive private organizations.Key InsightsFutarchy proposes that governance can be improved by tying decisions directly to measurable outcome metrics, using conditional betting markets to reveal which policies are expected to achieve agreed goals. This turns speculation into structured decision advice, offering a way to make institutions more competent and accountable.Early experiments with futarchy existed decades ago, including Jeffrey Wernick's 1980s company that made hiring and product decisions using prediction markets, as well as more recent trials in crypto-based DAOs and a quiet adoption by a government agency in India. These examples show that the idea, while radical, is not just theoretical.A central problem in governance is the tension between elegant ideas and messy implementation. Hanson emphasizes that while the core concept of futarchy is simple, real-world use requires addressing veto powers, executive discretion, and complex outcome metrics. The evolution of institutions involves finding workable compromises without losing the simplicity of the original vision.The conversation highlights how existing governance in corporations mirrors these challenges. Public firms rely heavily on speculators and short-term stock incentives, while private equity benefits from long-term executive stakes. Futarchy could offer companies a new tool, giving executives market-based feedback on major decisions before they act.Institutions must be robust not just to human diversity but also to AI participation. Hanson argues that markets, unlike one-person-one-vote systems, can accommodate AI traders without needing proof of human identity. Designing systems to be indifferent to whether participants are human or machine strengthens long-term resilience.Complexity versus simplicity emerges as a theme, with Hanson noting that democracy and legal systems began with simple structures but accreted layers of rules that now demand lawyers to navigate. Futarchy faces the same trade-off: it starts simple, but real implementation requires added detail, and the balance between elegance and robustness becomes crucial.Finally, the episode situates futarchy within broader social trends. Hanson connects rising polarization and inequality to times of peace and prosperity, contrasting this with the unifying effect of external threats. He also critiques bureaucratic inertia and “software rot” in government, arguing that without innovation in governance, even advanced societies risk ossification.
In this week's episode of The Good Fight Club, Yascha Mounk, Francis Fukuyama, Mona Charen, and Russell Muirhead explore why the “Trump is dead” conspiracy took hold, the recent summit between Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Narendra Modi, and what the latest developments at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tell us about the fate of public health in America. Francis Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. He is also the author of the “Frankly Fukuyama” column, carried forward from American Purpose, at Persuasion. Mona Charen, syndicated columnist and author, is Policy Editor of The Bulwark and host of two weekly podcasts: The Mona Charen Show and Just Between Us. Russell Muirhead teaches Government at Dartmouth College. He is the author, with Nancy Rosenblum, of Ungoverning: The Attack on the Administrative State and the Politics of Chaos. He serves in the NH House of Representatives where he focuses on election law. Email: leonora.barclay@persuasion.community Podcast production by Mickey Freeland and Leonora Barclay. Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google X: @Yascha_Mounk & @JoinPersuasion YouTube: Yascha Mounk, Persuasion LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Project 2025 is not just another policy blueprint; it is a sweeping, meticulously detailed playbook designed to overhaul how the federal government operates, reshape the civil service, and realign American governance along sharply conservative lines. Crafted by the Heritage Foundation with contributions from over 100 coalition partners and released in April 2023, the 927-page document, titled “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” outlines concrete steps a newly elected Republican president could take starting from day one in office.Proponents of Project 2025 describe it as a plan to “destroy the Administrative State,” targeting what they argue is an unaccountable bureaucracy captured by liberal interests. Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation put it bluntly: “All federal employees should answer to the president.” The vision centralizes control of the entire executive branch, grounding itself in an expansive interpretation of the unitary executive theory. According to the project's documentation, independence for agencies such as the Department of Justice, the Federal Communications Commission, and others would be eliminated. Leadership at these institutions would be swept clean and staffed by presidential loyalists, many of whom could be installed in “acting” roles that bypass Senate confirmation.A key mechanism enabling this transformation is Schedule F, a controversial classification devised to move large numbers of nonpartisan civil servants into at-will positions. Without traditional civil service protections, these employees could be easily removed and replaced with political appointees. Heritage Foundation writers stress that this is essential to secure rapid, loyal implementation of the president's agenda. Critics, however, warn that the move exposes federal government positions to unchecked political influence and undermines the longstanding principle of impartial public service.Listeners may recognize some of these ambitions from earlier efforts under President Trump. This time, Project 2025 comes armed with a detailed 180-day playbook and ready-to-sign executive orders designed to implement change with unprecedented speed. As reported by Government Executive, the plan's first phase has already resulted in the abrupt dissolution of agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Board and USAID, accompanied by mass firings spanning across more than two dozen agencies. Challengers, including federal employee unions like the NTEU, have launched lawsuits, arguing these actions violate long-standing legal protections for government workers.Project 2025 reaches well beyond administrative restructuring. In criminal justice, for example, the document spells out proposals directing the Department of Justice to directly intervene in cases where local prosecutors are viewed as too lenient—potentially removing them from office. The Brennan Center points out that such measures could limit prosecutorial discretion and pressure local officials to abandon reform agendas, particularly in drug or low-level offenses.In the education sphere, the blueprint calls for significant expansion of voucher programs, the empowerment of charter schools, and even the closure of public schools deemed noncompliant with conservative values. Curriculum “censorship” is highlighted as a tool to ensure ideological conformity, and efforts to diminish the role of public education are explicitly connected to broader goals of limiting federal influence at the state and local levels.Reproductive rights are a prominent battleground as well. The project supports creating a national registry to track abortions and calls for nationwide restrictions that leverage statutes like the Comstock Act and reverse FDA approvals of abortion medication.Expert commentary ranges widely on the likely impacts of these reforms. Advocates assert Project 2025 will bring accountability and restore order, claiming decades of bureaucratic drift must be corrected by strong executive leadership. Detractors warn of an “authoritarian presidency,” as noted by the Brennan Center and the ACLU, pointing to risks for democratic norms, the separation of powers, and civil liberties.As the nation watches, key milestones approach. Should a Republican administration prevail in the next election, listeners can expect swift, far-reaching executive actions, many of which are already being tested on a smaller scale in various states. The months ahead promise critical court battles, legislative showdowns, and profound debates about the future of American government.Thank you for tuning in to today's narrative exploration of Project 2025. Join us again next week for more in-depth analysis and vital updates on the changing landscape of American policy and governance.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Project 2025 is not just a policy blueprint—it's a movement aiming to remake American governance from the ground up. Growing out of the Heritage Foundation's nearly 1,000-page Mandate for Leadership, Project 2025 lays out detailed steps to reshape the federal government in ways that, in its authors' words, will “destroy the Administrative State.” Supporters see it as a plan to bring an unaccountable bureaucracy under control, while critics warn it risks undermining the checks and balances at the heart of American democracy.At the heart of Project 2025 is an ambitious assertion of presidential control over the federal government. The proposal rests on the controversial unitary executive theory—a vision that would give the president direct authority over agencies traditionally considered independent. According to Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, “All federal employees should answer to the president.” That's not an abstract idea; the plan explicitly calls for replacing civil service protections with the so-called Schedule F scheme, permitting mass firings and replacing thousands of current staffers with political loyalists who can be hired—and fired—at will. The stated aim is to ensure government personnel are “aligned with the president's vision,” a move that legal experts like those at the ACLU say could erode the rule of law and the traditional separation of church and state.One of the most consequential aspects of Project 2025 is its Day One playbook—hundreds of executive orders prepared for immediate signature by a new Republican president. These directives aren't vague. The plan recommends, for example, eliminating entire agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It also outlines how to dismiss all Department of State leadership before the next inauguration, replacing them with interim officials who are “ideologically vetted,” bypassing Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who contributed to the State Department chapter, told journalist Peter Bergen this summer, “Most State Department employees are too left-wing and must be replaced by those loyal to the president,” though she could not name concrete examples of alleged obstruction.The intended changes go far beyond personnel shuffles. Project 2025 includes proposals for increasing executive control over policy on education, health, and the environment—often with the goal of terminating or rolling back regulations deemed “woke” or outside a conservative agenda. For example, its environmental proposals would gut major climate initiatives and environmental protections, while social policy sections support rolling back abortion rights and LGBTQ protections. Heritage Foundation materials state that these moves are needed to “put the people back in charge,” but organizations like the Center for Progressive Reform warn that such changes could devastate protections for workers, the public's health, and marginalized communities.Concrete steps are already underway. Since January, under the new Department of Government Efficiency, agencies have announced mass layoffs and office closures, with an eye toward shrinking government to its “essential functions.” According to data cited by Government Executive, more than 280,000 federal workers and contractors are facing layoffs or job uncertainty across 27 federal agencies. Office buildings are being consolidated, and a strict return-to-office mandate is being enforced to reduce federal infrastructure, often in a haphazard fashion.Project 2025's vision is not universally accepted even within conservative circles, but its scale and urgency have jolted both supporters and opponents. Critics, from policy experts to civil liberties advocates, argue that replacing career professionals with political operatives risks turning agencies into arms of the executive, threatening not just efficiency but the stability of American institutions. Yet, for its authors, this is precisely the point—a bold, sweeping course correction.Looking forward, the coming months will see critical decision points as Congress, the courts, and public opinion respond to the push to enact Project 2025. Both sides are mobilizing, as legal battles and heated public debates loom. As American governance stands on the cusp of profound change, Project 2025 offers both a rallying cry and a warning—one that demands attention from every corner of the nation.Thank you for tuning in, and be sure to come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Project 2025 is reshaping the conversation about the role and reach of the federal government in ways that feel both sweeping and personal. Born from the Heritage Foundation's “Mandate for Leadership,” this 900-plus-page policy blueprint divides nearly every federal agency and department into zones of targeted reform, all aimed at what its architects call “destroying the administrative state.” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts summed up the mood behind it simply, declaring that “every federal employee should answer to the president.” That principle, experts say, guides the project's plans to consolidate power at the top and move swiftly on a series of executive moves from day one.The scale of intended change is hard to overstate. Project 2025 outlines an operational playbook for the first 180 days of a new Republican administration. Its centerpiece is Schedule F—a government job classification that would allow the new president to reclassify tens of thousands of career civil servants as at-will political appointees. That means federal workers, who traditionally hold their positions regardless of party, could be replaced without cause by loyalists. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter, suggested clearing out senior career officials before January 20 and quickly installing appointees who share the president's views, bypassing regular Senate confirmation requirements. Skinner argues such moves are necessary to ensure ideological alignment, though when pressed by CNN's Peter Bergen, she couldn't cite a specific past obstruction by career diplomats.Concrete actions have followed rhetoric. When President Trump took office on January 20, he and Elon Musk's newly minted Department of Government Efficiency hit the ground running. According to Government Executive and other outlets, entire agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and USAID were targeted for elimination through “legally questionable means,” with the stated goal of cutting $1 trillion in spending. Executive orders soon followed, including one mandating that federal agencies may only hire one worker for every four who leave, and requiring return-to-office mandates for a federal workforce that had grown accustomed to remote work during the pandemic.Faced with the threat of losing job protections, over a quarter-million federal workers and contractors were facing layoffs by spring 2025, with forty-seven years of collective bargaining law challenged as unions raced to court. NTEU President Doreen Greenwald put it bluntly, calling it “an attack on the law, and on public service.” Opposition isn't limited to labor groups. The ACLU has charged that Project 2025 is a “roadmap to replace the rule of law with right-wing ideals,” warning that the proposals could undermine legal norms, civil rights, and protections for marginalized groups. Legal scholars from both political parties have raised flags about weakening the separation of powers, endangering environmental and public health safeguards, and risking consolidated, unchecked executive authority.Proponents are equally resolute. They argue that Project 2025 is a necessary corrective to what they view as a bloated, left-leaning bureaucracy unaccountable to the people. Heritage Foundation materials frame the federal government as too large, too costly, and resistant to the priorities of conservative Americans. They cite the sheer scale—over 2.4 million civilian federal employees—and the proliferation of agencies as drivers for dramatic consolidation and workforce reductions.Specific policy proposals go beyond personnel. The project seeks to reset environmental rules, roll back climate policies, and overhaul protections related to health, education, and civil rights. Critics, including groups like the Center for Progressive Reform, warn that these policies will lead to significant negative effects for ordinary Americans—from loss of workplace and environmental protections to sharp changes in immigration enforcement and reproductive rights.As the summer of 2025 progresses, listeners should watch several key milestones. Court cases brought by federal employee unions and advocacy groups could set vital precedents for the separation of powers. Agency heads are evaluating which departments could be merged or eliminated entirely in accordance with new directives. Congress, too, will play an uncertain but pivotal role as many Project 2025 reforms require new legislation or appropriations. Meanwhile, a country already polarized by election-year tensions is bracing for the long-term consequences of this radical experiment in federal power.Thank you for tuning in to this week's deep dive into Project 2025's ambitions and realities. Be sure to come back next week for more crucial stories shaping the nation.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Interviewer: MATTHEW ROTH. In their 2024 book Ungoverning: The Attack on the Administrative State and the Politics of Chaos, Professors RUSSELL MUIRHEAD (Dartmouth) and NANCY ROSENBLUM (Harvard) analyze the emergence of “ungoverning,” a political trend aimed at limiting or dismantling key functions of the administrative state. They situate this development within broader shifts in American politics, tracing its roots to earlier debates over the role of government and examining how it has been intensified in the Trump era. In conversation with historian Matthew Roth, they reflect on what makes this movement distinctive, the challenges it poses for democratic governance, and the importance of safeguarding (and also reforming) the administrative state.
Project 2025 began quietly in conservative circles, with its origins traced to a Spring 2022 gathering of strategists and operatives in Washington. By April 2023, the Heritage Foundation had unveiled the nine-hundred-plus page blueprint, branding it “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise.” The document reads less like a policy wish list and more like a regime change manual, spelling out a dramatic vision for American governance under a future conservative administration.Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, captured the mood in a statement: “All federal employees should answer to the president.” This encapsulates the project's signature ambition—greater centralization of executive power—rooted in what conservative legal theorists call “unitary executive theory.” According to analysis in The New York Times, this vision would go farther than any post-Nixon Republican platform by making the entire federal bureaucracy directly accountable to the president, erasing agency independence and civil service barriers that have existed for decades.The Project's approach is methodical. Its 180-day playbook details how agency heads should be replaced immediately after inauguration, with thousands of ideologically vetted appointees stepping into critical roles. The controversial Schedule F personnel policy is central: it seeks to reclassify existing civil servants, strip them of job protections, and replace large swathes with loyalists, allowing the new administration essentially unlimited power to hire and fire across government. According to the National Federation of Federal Employees, this would have unprecedented ramifications—apolitical employees, many with deep expertise, would lose their shields from political interference and could be replaced at will, upending regulatory stability.Examples of proposed reforms are as concrete as they are sweeping. The plan advocates abolishing entire agencies, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the U.S. Agency for International Development. According to reporting on the current administration's implementation efforts, the Department of Government Efficiency led by Elon Musk has already moved to shut down both of those agencies, simultaneously laying off over a quarter million federal workers and contractors—27 agencies impacted in total. The chaos of rapid layoffs has led to lawsuits: NTEU President Tony Reardon stated, “For over 47 years, the law has made clear that collective bargaining in the federal sector is in the public interest. We have taken the necessary action to file a lawsuit to uphold the law and stop this attack.”On the policy side, criminal justice stands as a stark example. Project 2025 recommends that the Department of Justice intervene in local cases where it believes “rule of law deficiencies” exist, targeting prosecutors who prefer diversion programs or refuse to prosecute low-level offenses. The Brennan Center underscores that this would politicize local law enforcement and undermine prosecutorial discretion, with potentially chilling effects on criminal justice reform.Economic policy proposals include consolidating the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Census Bureau, and Bureau of Labor Statistics into a single agency—a move that critics, like Democracy Forward, warn would “kneecap the data-collection capacities” essential for planning and transparency. Project 2025 also seeks to dismantle the Economic Development Administration, which recently overseen billions in infrastructure investment and the creation of over 200,000 jobs, threatening significant disruption to federal investment in communities.Supporters argue these measures will “destroy the administrative state,” clearing away what they view as unaccountable power. Critics, from the ACLU to the Center for Progressive Reform, counter that the blueprint's methods—centralized appointment, aggressive deregulation, and sweeping personnel changes—threaten democratic checks and balances, civil rights, and the rule of law.As the country approaches pivotal elections, Project 2025 stands at a crossroads between aspiration and action. The next major milestone will arrive with the inauguration—should the conservative movement prevail, all eyes will be on the new administration's first hundred days, as the fate of agencies, public servants, and the structure of American governance hang in the balance.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for moreSome great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
In April 2023, a coalition led by the Heritage Foundation released Project 2025, an audacious blueprint proposing to reshape American governance on a scale rarely seen in modern politics. The plan, spanning nearly a thousand pages, lays out a “Mandate for Leadership” that reaches into the fiber of every federal agency and policy domain, promising dramatic change beginning as soon as January 20, 2025, should the architects gain influence.Project 2025 isn't just another policy playbook. According to The Center for Progressive Reform, it aims to radically restructure the executive branch by concentrating unprecedented power in the Oval Office. By relying on a controversial interpretation of the unitary executive theory, the project proposes to eliminate the independence of the Justice Department, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, placing them all directly under presidential control. Kevin Roberts of Heritage proclaimed, “All federal employees should answer to the president,” highlighting the drive for loyalty and ideological uniformity at the highest levels.A significant tool in this restructuring is Schedule F, a hiring scheme that allows for unlimited political appointments without civil service protections. Political loyalists would fill key posts overnight, while thousands of career officials could be dismissed or reassigned. The National Federation of Federal Employees warns this could “destroy the Administrative State,” stripping public servants of their protection and empowering the incoming administration to act with little oversight. Experts note this opens the door to corruption and abuse of power on a level unseen since the patronage systems of the 19th century.Concrete proposals go beyond staffing. Project 2025 calls for dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Board and the United States Agency for International Development, as seen in recent attempts to eliminate these agencies under the current administration, which has already fired hundreds of thousands of workers. The American Federation of Government Employees and National Treasury Employees Union have filed lawsuits, arguing, “For over 47 years, the law has made clear that collective bargaining in the federal sector is in the public interest. We have taken the necessary action to file a lawsuit to uphold the law and stop this attack.” Meanwhile, chaotic return-to-office mandates and office closures serve a dual purpose: savings, and making remote work, long a civil service perk, much harder.Education policies advocated by Project 2025 are even more sweeping. Brookings experts describe proposals to shutter the Department of Education, eliminate Head Start and Title I funding, privatize the federal student loan program, and rescind protections for LGBTQ+ students. The report's authors, many of whom served in the first Trump administration, envision a landscape where federal enforcement of civil rights is severely curtailed. “This is a great group, and they're going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do,” said former President Trump in 2022, underscoring the project's ambition and alignment with his worldview.Civil liberties groups, including the ACLU, describe Project 2025 as a “blueprint for how to replace the rule of law with right-wing ideals.” Their analysis argues that, from abortion and immigration to free speech and racial justice, recommended actions would erode democratic norms and threaten fundamental rights.As the Heritage Foundation and its allies press forward, the next few months loom large. Will Congress and the courts intervene in time to temper the most sweeping proposals? Could a dramatic overhaul of the federal government become reality on “Day One”? Experts from both ends of the political spectrum agree that, if enacted, Project 2025 would alter the balance of power in Washington – possibly for generations.Thank you for tuning in. Join us next week for a deeper look at how these changes could affect American lives, and what milestones to watch as this bold project unfolds.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
We discuss how ungoverning is the equivalent of a bull in a china shop. We have already seen the destruction of many institutions and many functions of the administrative state, but we don't yet know how much there is still to come. Nancy's civic action toolkit recommendations are: 1) Don't let unpredictability strip you of your agency 2) Vote in local, county, and state elections Nancy Rosenblum is the Senator Joseph Clark Professor of Ethics in Politics and Government Emerita at Harvard University, and the co-author of Ungoverning: The Attack on the Administrative State and the Politics of Chaos. Let's connect! Follow Future Hindsight on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehindsightpod/ Discover new ways to #BetheSpark: https://www.futurehindsight.com/spark Follow Mila on X: https://x.com/milaatmos Follow Nancy on X: https://x.com/Nlrosenblum Read Ungoverning: https://bookshop.org/shop/futurehindsight Sponsor: Thank you to Shopify! Sign up for a $1/month trial at shopify.com/hopeful. Early episodes for Patreon supporters: https://patreon.com/futurehindsight Credits: Host: Mila Atmos Guests: Nancy Rosenblum Executive Producer: Mila Atmos Producer: Zack Travis
Project 2025 has become one of the most ambitious—and controversial—proposals to reshape American governance in modern times. Unveiled by the Heritage Foundation and backed by a coalition of over 100 conservative groups, this nearly thousand-page blueprint envisions a sweeping overhaul of the federal government if a Republican president takes office in January 2025. Its stated mission is nothing short of a root-and-branch restructuring: dismantle the so-called “administrative state,” reassert presidential control, and roll back everything from agency independence to civil service protections.As Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts put it, “all federal employees should answer to the president.” At Project 2025's core lies an aggressive reading of the “unitary executive” theory, which claims the president should exercise direct oversight of the entire executive branch. The project calls for the elimination of the independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission. This would mean every official answers directly to the Oval Office, erasing barriers that, until now, protected agencies from political interference.Concrete examples of this ambition spill across the plan's 30 dense chapters. According to the policy document “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” Project 2025 proposes the immediate dismissal of all State Department leadership and their replacement by ideologically vetted appointees. Kiron Skinner, who led the chapter on the State Department, wrote that career officials should be replaced by those more loyal to the president's agenda—noting she considered most State staff as “too left-wing.”The implications run deep for the federal workforce. Project 2025 reinvigorates the controversial “Schedule F” system, which would allow the mass reclassification of up to a million civil service positions to at-will federal jobs. As the National Federation of Federal Employees explains, everyone in these positions could be fired and replaced at the president's discretion. This would gut long-standing protections intended to shield government workers from political retribution or interference, paving the way for a loyalist bureaucracy on “Day One.”Some of the earliest developments since the 2024 election have been dramatic. The new administration, working with an Elon Musk–led Department of Government Efficiency, has already attempted to dismantle entire agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the U.S. Agency for International Development. According to Politico, Musk's team eliminated the CFPB and USAID, fired tens of thousands of federal workers, and rapidly imposed return-to-office mandates intended to shrink the government's physical footprint. The White House described the effort as making government “more efficient and effective,” with President Trump issuing an executive order for agencies to hire only one new worker for every four who leave.Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, warn that Project 2025 poses a grave threat to civil liberties and democratic norms. The ACLU highlights that the blueprint would roll back protections for LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, and racial equity, while rolling out aggressive new policies on immigration, policing, and free speech. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking these moves, reporting devastating consequences upon workers, the environment, and the rights of millions as the changes ripple through every U.S. state and territory.Supporters say Project 2025 is necessary to rid Washington of bias, inefficiency, and “woke” influence. Critics counter that it is, in the words of one legal expert for The Atlantic, “an attempt to intellectually retrofit a rationale for Trumpism.” They note that many proposals may require approval from Congress or survive Supreme Court scrutiny, but much of the plan is designed to work through executive action alone.As the country heads toward the 2026 congressional midterms, all eyes are on milestones set by the Project 2025 playbook. Will the courts uphold the expanded executive powers? Can civil service protections be permanently dismantled? And to what extent will Congress shield or resist the transformation underway? More executive orders, agency reshuffles, and legal showdowns are on the horizon, ensuring the fate of Project 2025 will remain a defining issue for the nation.Thanks for tuning in—come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Project 2025 stands at the center of the most audacious effort to refashion the American federal government in a generation. Announced by the Heritage Foundation in April 2023, it's described by its architects as a “Mandate for Leadership,” a nearly 1,000-page policy blueprint orchestrated for the next conservative administration. Its goal is to radically re-engineer almost every corner of the federal bureaucracy, starting on day one after inauguration.The true scope of Project 2025 emerges in its detailed chapters—each targeting a federal agency, each brimming with concrete proposals and strict timelines. According to Heritage president Kevin Roberts, “We must tear apart the administrative state,” and his words echo through the policy pages. The plan's core principle is to place the executive branch firmly under direct presidential control. This means eliminating the independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Federal Communications Commission. Kiron Skinner, the main author of the State Department section, put it bluntly: “Most State Department employees are too left-wing. They should be replaced by loyal conservatives appointed to acting roles with no Senate confirmation required.”Listeners should note the mechanism behind this overhaul: Schedule F. This little-known hiring classification, revived for this project, lets the president move career civil servants into politically appointed roles stripped of traditional protections. As the National Federation of Federal Employees explains, “Schedule F wipes out the guardrails against political overreach or abuse of power.” The vision is clear—on January 20, 2025, the new president would sign a prepared stack of executive orders, dismiss hundreds of agency leaders, and flood offices with handpicked loyalists.Elon Musk's stewardship of the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has served as the shock troops for these changes, reports Government Executive. Entire agencies, like the Consumer Financial Protection Board and USAID, have already been eliminated. In tandem, tens of thousands of federal workers have been laid off, with over 280,000 jobs cut or slated for elimination across 27 agencies. This restructuring, according to statements from the American Federation of Government Employees, represents “an attack on the very foundation of public service.” Return-to-office mandates and the downsizing of federal office buildings, often with little coordination, have further upended daily life for civil servants.President Trump's executive order from February 2025 codified much of the Project's ethos. The Department of Government Efficiency must reduce federal hiring to only essential positions, and for every four employees departing, only one replacement is allowed—excluding national security, law enforcement, and immigration. Agencies must draw up plans for large-scale reductions in force. Trump asserts this will shrink the government “for a new era of prosperity and innovation.”But the ambition doesn't stop at workforce reshuffling. Project 2025 targets environmental regulations, civil rights enforcement, and social policies. The Center for Progressive Reform warns that rollbacks across 20 agencies will have “devastating consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions.” Civil rights organizations like the Leadership Conference highlight proposals to gut the enforcement of key laws, eliminate disparate impact as a metric for discrimination, shut down diversity, equity, and inclusion offices, and retool the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to prioritize “religious exemptions” and shield employers from DEIA mandates. The stated goal is to erase what the blueprint calls “managerialist left-wing race and gender ideology.”Supporters say these proposals will reclaim democratic accountability from an unelected bureaucracy and restore presidential power. “All federal employees should answer to the president,” says Kevin Roberts. Critics, however, see the project as authoritarian, calling it an unprecedented centralization of power and a threat to civil liberties, institutional independence, and separation of powers.As the country approaches key decision points in the months ahead, Project 2025 stands ready for rapid, high-impact implementation. It's not just a wishlist—it's a playbook, already in motion, with real consequences unfurling agency by agency and law by law. With court challenges underway and public debate intensifying, listeners can expect major milestones and consequences in the coming weeks.Thank you for tuning in, and be sure to join us next week for more insights and updates on America's changing governance.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
SHOW SCHEDULE 8-13-25 1917 ODESSA CIRCUS THE SHOW BEGINS IN UKRAINE ENROUTE TO ALASKA... CBS Eye on the World with John Batchelor First Hour 9:00-9:15 #Ukraine: Putin wants; Kyiv wants. Colonel Jeff McCausland, USA (Retired) @McCauslJ @CBSNews @DickinsonCol 9:15-9:30 #Ukraine: Trump wants. Colonel Jeff McCausland, USA (Retired) @McCauslJ @CBSNews @DickinsonCol 9:30-9:45 PRC: Repeating failure. Anne Stevenson-Yang @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill 9:45-10:00 South China Sea: PLA provocation. Jim Holmes, @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill Second Hour 10:00-10:15 Nixon: Continues with Trump vs Administrative State. Steve Hayward, Civitas Institute 10:15-10:30 Nixon: Continues with Trump vs Administrative State. Steve Hayward, Civitas Institute 10:30-10:45 Sudan: Anarchy with guns. Husain Abdul-Husain, FDD 10:45-11:00 Robert Kaplan and the analog Weimar Republic 2025. Peter Berkowitz, Hoover Third Hour 11:00-11:15 Alaska: Low expectations. John Bolton 11:15-11:30 Alaska: Power secondary sanctions. Michael Bernstam, Hoover 11:30-11:45 Oceania: CNMI influenced by PRC. Cleo Paskal, FDD 11:45-12:00 US Navy: Sea going drones and the fleet. Jim Holmes @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill Fourth Hour 12:00-12:15 France: Heat wave. Simon Constable 12:15-12:30 UK: Vance in the Cotswolds 12:30-12:45 Kuiper launching. Bob Zimmerman BehindTheBlack.com 12:45-1:00 AM Interstellar comets unknowns. Bob Zimmerman BehindTheBlack.com
Nixon: Continues with Trump vs Administrative State. Steve Hayward, Civitas Institute
Nixon: Continues with Trump vs Administrative State. Steve Hayward, Civitas Institute 1920 HANOI
In 2025, antitrust and consumer protection remain hot topics in the legal world as a new Congress and Administration begin. Join this FedSoc Forum as we discuss possible antitrust and Federal Trade Commission reforms in the 119th Congress.Featuring:Adam Cella, Chief Counsel for the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, House Committee on the JudiciaryThomas DeMatteo, Chief Counsel, Senate Judiciary CommitteeDaniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, U.S. House of RepresentativesLynda Garcia, Chief Counsel to Senator Cory A. Booker, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at United States SenateModerator: Svetlana Gans, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
Since taking office on January 20, 2025, President Trump has emphasized deregulation. Deregulatory efforts have focused both on undoing Biden-era policies in areas of interest (environmental regulation, SOGI issues, immigration, etc.) and on a broader effort to limit the scope of administrative power more broadly. In light of these strong changes, this panel will discuss the history of deregulation efforts in the Executive Branch, how those compare to the deregulatory efforts of the Trump Administration, and what these changes may mean both practically and more institutionally for the future of the Administrative State.Featuring:Prof. Bridget C.E. Dooling, Assistant Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State UniversityProf. Susan E. Dudley, Distinguished Professor, Regulatory Studies Center, George Washington UniversityMr. William C. Hughes, Senior Counsel, Consensys SoftwareProf. Richard J. Pierce Jr., Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School(Moderator) Mr. Adam White, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Co-Director, C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School
Jeffrey Tucker returns to Finding Freedom. Jeffrey is an economist, author, and founder of the Brownstone Institute. Known for his fearless critiques of government overreach and central planning, Jeffrey has written extensively on economics, technology, and the erosion of liberty. He's a leading voice on the dangers of the administrative state and its impact on liberty. Through his work, he champions decentralization and individual rights. We have a new show on Lions of Liberty! The Politicks Podcast! Be sure to subscribe to the standalone Politicks Podcast feed. This is the absolute best way to support the show! Listen and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. And remember, they're all Blood Suckers! Subscribe to John's Finding Freedom Show solo feed to listen to “Pursuit of Freedom,” which is a new podcast series where John shares the highs and lows of his entrepreneurial journey. Listen and Subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Follow the Lions of Liberty: Twitter Rumble YouTube Instagram Telegram Get access to all of our bonus audio content, livestreams, behind-the-scenes segments and more for as little as $5 per month by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride on Patreon OR support us on Locals! Check out our merchandise at the Lions of Liberty Store for all of our awesome t-shirts, mugs and hats! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Jeffrey Tucker returns to Finding Freedom. Jeffrey is an economist, author, and founder of the Brownstone Institute. Known for his fearless critiques of government overreach and central planning, Jeffrey has written extensively on economics, technology, and the erosion of liberty. He's a leading voice on the dangers of the administrative state and its impact on liberty. Through his work, he champions decentralization and individual rights. We have a new show on Lions of Liberty! The Politicks Podcast! Be sure to subscribe to the standalone Politicks Podcast feed. This is the absolute best way to support the show! Listen and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. And remember, they're all Blood Suckers! Subscribe to John's Finding Freedom Show solo feed to listen to “Pursuit of Freedom,” which is a new podcast series where John shares the highs and lows of his entrepreneurial journey. Listen and Subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Follow the Lions of Liberty: Twitter Rumble YouTube Instagram Telegram Get access to all of our bonus audio content, livestreams, behind-the-scenes segments and more for as little as $5 per month by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride on Patreon OR support us on Locals! Check out our merchandise at the Lions of Liberty Store for all of our awesome t-shirts, mugs and hats! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Jeffrey Tucker returns to Finding Freedom. Jeffrey is an economist, author, and founder of the Brownstone Institute. Known for his fearless critiques of government overreach and central planning, Jeffrey has written extensively on economics, technology, and the erosion of liberty. He's a leading voice on the dangers of the administrative state and its impact on liberty. Through his work, he champions decentralization and individual rights. We have a new show on Lions of Liberty! The Politicks Podcast! Be sure to subscribe to the standalone Politicks Podcast feed. This is the absolute best way to support the show! Listen and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. And remember, they're all Blood Suckers! Subscribe to John's Finding Freedom Show solo feed to listen to “Pursuit of Freedom,” which is a new podcast series where John shares the highs and lows of his entrepreneurial journey. Listen and Subscribe on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Follow the Lions of Liberty: Twitter Rumble YouTube Instagram Telegram Get access to all of our bonus audio content, livestreams, behind-the-scenes segments and more for as little as $5 per month by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride on Patreon OR support us on Locals! Check out our merchandise at the Lions of Liberty Store for all of our awesome t-shirts, mugs and hats! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Nancy Rosenblum talks about her new book, "Ungoverning: The Attack on the Administrative State and the Politics of Chaos”.
Is America approaching the point where peaceful reform is no longer enough? In this powerful episode of The P.A.S. Report Podcast, Professor Nick Giordano responds to a listener's bold question: do the government's abuses rise to the level the Founders warned about? Drawing from the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, and the Founders' own words, Professor Giordano separates policy disagreements from true tyranny. He also explains how we can still fight back using the tools built into the Constitution. From censorship and lawfare to the Chevron ruling and the rise of the Fourth Branch, this episode is a wake-up call for every American who senses something is deeply wrong. Episode Highlights: A listener's powerful question sparks a deep dive into whether America's government abuses justify revolution or demand reform How the Founders defined tyranny, what "a long train of abuses" really means, and how modern examples like the CIA spying on Congress and the Russia hoax measure up Why the Supreme Court's reversal of the Chevron doctrine marks a historic turning point in reining in the unelected Fourth Branch of government
The controversial auto-pen signatures from the Biden administration's final days are finally getting examined. The fellas discuss how these decisions, particularly the pardons for figures like Anthony Fauci, Biden Family members, and Jerry Lundergan, were reportedly made without Biden's direct involvement, despite his team's insistence otherwise. But Hunter got a handwritten one. The deep state left a note. So this is your friendly reminder that the State Department fired employees want you to do your best to ‘resist fascism.' A really wild read from the New York Times by Obama speech writer David Litt sheds light on how the democrats look down on MAGA, and the fellas just can't get enough of this OpEd. ️ Trump approaches foreign policy unlike any other President and it's paying off, just like The Progrum knew it would. PLUS, golf commemorations and Duncan is desperate to gamble on kids playing UNO. 00:00 - It's A Good Week to Be Donald Trump 02:18 - State Department Parting Messages 05:00 - Biden's Auto-Pen Problem 10:00 - True Confessions of Snubbing Your Right-Wing Relatives 17:30 - More Left-Wing Violence 22:00 - Trump's Ukraine Gambit Pays Off 25:00 - Golf Course Marks History and Why We Need to Gamble on UNO Our Sponsors: ➢Want to make a difference in your community? Join AFP's grass-roots efforts at https://afpvolunteer.com/ ➢Beverage America believes in the promise that makes this nation great. Learn more at http://wedeliverforamerica.org/ ➢Crack down on the middlemen and help lower drug prices, go to http://balancethescales.org/ ➢Beverage America believes in the promise that makes this nation great. Learn more at http://wedeliverforamerica.org/ ➢Find out the true power of America's oil and natural gas. Go to https://lightsonenergy.org/
Project 2025 represents a seismic attempt to reshape the machinery of American governance, guided by a philosophy that seeks to place virtually all executive power directly under presidential control. Initiated by the Heritage Foundation and an alliance of over a hundred conservative organizations, its centerpiece is the “Mandate for Leadership,” a massive policy playbook published in 2023 designed to act as the transition manual for a potential new administration following the 2024 election.At its core, Project 2025 seeks to “destroy the Administrative State,” meaning it aims to strip federal agencies of much of their independence and dismantle what its authors claim are layers of unaccountable and biased bureaucracy. Proponents, such as Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation, argue that “all federal employees should answer to the president,” encapsulating the project's vision of a centralized, powerful executive branch. To achieve this, Project 2025 recommends the widespread dismissal of current senior officials across agencies like the Department of State—and their immediate replacement with individuals selected for their loyalty and ideological alignment, bypassing traditional Senate confirmation hurdles.One of the most controversial levers in the playbook is the resurrection of Schedule F, a proposed employment classification that would allow the president to convert career civil servants into at-will employees, stripping them of long-standing job protections. This maneuver would, according to its critics, allow the White House to purge thousands of nonpartisan officials and replace them with political loyalists—an approach described in detail by advocacy outlets and union leaders as a recipe for “political overreach or abuse of power."The document's scope spans 30 federal departments, each with a dedicated chapter and specific 180-day action plans—right down to pre-drafted executive orders waiting for a president's signature on inauguration day. Concrete proposals include eliminating entire agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and USAID, mass layoffs affecting hundreds of thousands of federal workers, and strict mandates requiring employees to return to office buildings, often ignoring remote work policies established during the pandemic. Since January 2025, the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, has acted on this blueprint with remarkable speed, eliminating agencies and laying off more than 280,000 federal employees and contractors across 27 agencies in just a few months.In terms of social policy, Project 2025 is unmistakably ambitious. The playbook calls for aggressive curbs on abortion rights, restrictions on LGBTQ protections, and a reversal of progress regarding racial and immigrant rights. Critics such as the American Civil Liberties Union warn that these measures, if implemented, could erode civil liberties and tip the balance of American governance toward an “imperial presidency.” Legal scholars, as referenced by Wikipedia, raise alarms that this model risks undermining the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the independence of key regulatory and law enforcement bodies.Supporters, however, frame these moves as an overdue correction. Kiron Skinner, author of the State Department chapter, claims the agency is overrun by left-leaning officials and needs a leadership overhaul favoring those loyal to a conservative president, though she famously could not cite specific examples of deliberate obstruction during her tenure when pressed in a 2024 interview.The latest developments underscore both the swiftness and controversy with which Project 2025 is moving forward. President Trump's administration is already well underway in executing its most dramatic provisions, facing a slew of lawsuits from federal employee unions and advocacy groups. The legal and partisan battles that loom will determine whether this vision of governance—marked by centralization, sweeping personnel changes, and redefined federal agency missions—becomes a new American reality or stalls amid constitutional challenges and public resistance.Listeners, thank you for tuning in to this deep dive into Project 2025. Stay with us next week for more analysis and updates on the future of American governance.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai
Today on The McCarthy Report, Andy takes the reins for a solo show. In this episode, he dives deep into the administrative state controversy, new ‘Crossfire Hurricane' updates, the Trump administration's odd approach to MS-13, and much more. This podcast was edited and produced by Sarah Colleen Schutte.
As the fourth anniversary of the Biden administration's National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism passes, one thing is clear: President Trump must immediately rescind this unconstitutional framework. In this episode of The P.A.S. Report, Professor Nick Giordano how the National Strategy was never about protecting Americans. It created a dangerous system used to silence dissent, target political opponents, and empower unelected bureaucrats. Parents, Catholics, and critics of government overreach were all caught in its crosshairs. With newly declassified documents and Trump back in office, now is the time to dismantle the surveillance state and restore constitutional accountability. This episode breaks it all down and explains why every American, regardless of party, should be alarmed. Episode Highlights How Biden's domestic terror strategy criminalized dissent and violated civil liberties Why President Trump must revoke the Strategy and how he can dismantle the surveillance state The legal gray zone federal agencies exploited to target Americans without oversight
Social media is dominated by trolls, and they have used their influence to wreak mass destruction on and off line. Topics include: making sense of things, no allegiances, social media interactions, Tim Pool, bots, trolls, sarcasm, communication, social media Nihilism, trolling is now seen as good, MAGA riding dark online wave, Russian money, Tenet Media, targets of propaganda, alternative thinking taboos, American decline, divide and conquer, Trump vs Musk, telling jokes, rising to top by being an internet troll, comedy routine at debate, Vivek Ramaswamy, being the biggest winner and loser at the same time, billionaires acting like clowns, pro wrestling, is the fight real?, technocratic overlords, Heritage Foundation, Project 2025, Administrative State, privatized system of control, attention economy, pay to play, possible schism within right wing world, MTG, Alex Jones, making excuses for Palantir, hall of mirrors, alternative is already the new mainstream, Steve Albini, being confrontational for its own sake, recanting edge lord past, analog media is dead, living a virtual reality, deflecting, nebulous enemies, literally demonizing your enemy, Golden Age, Western geopolitical alliances breaking on purpose, alchemical dissolution, nebulous ideas as enemies, Red Pill, cosplaying The Matrix, 3 AIs talking to each other
The Age of Transitions and Uncle 6-6-2025AoT#464Social media is dominated by trolls, and they have used their influence to wreak mass destruction on and off line. Topics include: making sense of things, no allegiances, social media interactions, Tim Pool, bots, trolls, sarcasm, communication, social media Nihilism, trolling is now seen as good, MAGA riding dark online wave, Russian money, Tenet Media, targets of propaganda, alternative thinking taboos, American decline, divide and conquer, Trump vs Musk, telling jokes, rising to top by being an internet troll, comedy routine at debate, Vivek Ramaswamy, being the biggest winner and loser at the same time, billionaires acting like clowns, pro wrestling, is the fight real?, technocratic overlords, Heritage Foundation, Project 2025, Administrative State, privatized system of control, attention economy, pay to play, possible schism within right wing world, MTG, Alex Jones, making excuses for Palantir, hall of mirrors, alternative is already the new mainstream, Steve Albini, being confrontational for its own sake, recanting edge lord past, analog media is dead, living a virtual reality, deflecting, nebulous enemies, literally demonizing your enemy, Golden Age, Western geopolitical alliances breaking on purpose, alchemical dissolution, nebulous ideas as enemies, Red Pill, cosplaying The Matrix, 3 AIs talking to each otherUtp#372Jesse Ventura is back on the broadcast to talk with Uncle. Topics include: climbing and getting there, Animal House, Pacifico, best concerts, Live Aid, seeing bands before they get big, Round One arcade, TikTak, live-streaming, odd type messages popping up on social media videos, subliminal messages, comedy performance enhancing substances, Eric Clapton Trump supporter, Van Halen, RFK Jr, Covid masks, Jesse Ventura back on the show, Macho Warrior wrestler, at the Baja, Sacramento Kings, NBA FinalsFRANZ MAIN HUB:https://theageoftransitions.com/PATREONhttps://www.patreon.com/aaronfranzUNCLEhttps://unclethepodcast.com/ORhttps://theageoftransitions.com/category/uncle-the-podcast/FRANZ and UNCLE Merchhttps://theageoftransitions.com/category/support-the-podcasts/Email Chuck or PayPalblindjfkresearcher@gmail.comBE THE EFFECTListen/Chat on the Sitehttps://ochelli.com/listen-live/TuneInhttp://tun.in/sfxkxAPPLEhttps://music.apple.com/us/station/ochelli-com/ra.1461174708Ochelli Link Treehttps://linktr.ee/chuckochelli
In this episode of Right to Life Radio, Sarah Goring and Linda Teliha share two powerful Stories from the Sidewalk—“Faith,” a teen who chose life after seeing a fetal model and discovering she was carrying a girl, and “Jack,” a young father whose life and faith were transformed through support despite domestic abuse trauma. Later, Jonathan Keller explains why the Trump administration dropped the Biden-era EMTALA lawsuit that would have forced hospitals in pro-life states to provide abortions, and discusses the long-term strategy for protecting unborn children. The show concludes with new research from the Charlotte Lozier Institute debunking the “safer than Tylenol” myth about the abortion pill and revealing how complications are often misreported as miscarriages.
What if the recent crackdown on elite universities didn't start with Trump—but with Obama? In this episode, we trace a surprising through-line connecting Obama's Title IX enforcement to Trump's Title VI threats. Harvard Law Professor Jacob Gersen joins us to reveal how both presidents used informal bureaucratic tools to reshape higher education—often without Congress. What does this say about presidential power and academic freedom in America?Papers discussed:“The Sex Bureaucracy”: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2750143“The Six Bureaucracy”: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5199652
The SEC was created to protect investors—but is it now protecting incumbents instead? In this episode of Context, we explore the rise of unelected bureaucracies and their hostility to innovation, using crypto regulation as a lens into a larger democratic dysfunction. From the roots of the administrative state to today's battle between blockchain pioneers and entrenched financial regulators, we explore how bureaucratic overreach can derail progress—and what it would take for America to rediscover its courage to build. Topics include: • SEC vs. Ripple Labs and Coinbase • Regulatory capture and the death of oversight • Blockchain, XRP, and the Internet of Value • American innovation and bureaucratic stagnation Support the show: patreon.com/bradcoleharris
On this episode: From local zoning laws to federal education funding, rules created by the administrative state shape daily life in more ways than most people realize. Amy Handlin — a new member of Ballotpedia's Policy team — unpacks how the modern regulatory system developed in response to 20th-century corruption, how it expanded through citizen demand and federal policy, and how it continues to evolve today. Amy and our host Norm Leahy explore why criticisms of bureaucracy persist, what could be lost in efforts to dismantle it, and how everyday people can influence the system without needing a law degree.Learn more by exploring our portal: https://ballotpedia.org/Administrative_stateThis year, we're hoping to learn more about what our audience and what topics you want us to tackle. Complete a brief 5 minute survey to review the show and share some feedback: https://forms.gle/zPxYSog5civyvEKX6 Sign up for our Newsletters: https://ballotpedia.org/Ballotpedia_Email_Updates Stream "On the Ballot" on Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. If you have questions, comments, or love for BP, feel free to reach out at ontheballot@ballotpedia.org or on X (formerly Twitter) @Ballotpedia.*On The Ballot is a conversational podcast featuring interviews with guests across the political spectrum. The views and opinions expressed by them are solely their own and are not representative of the views of the host or Ballotpedia as a whole.
Steve Bannon: Trump Is Waging ‘Economic Warfare' on the Chinese Communist Party This is the full version of Jan Jekielek's interview with Steve Bannon. The interview was originally released on Epoch TV on May 3, 2025. “Never before in history have two great trading entities ever engaged in outright economic warfare, like is being engaged today. And that's why I say we're living in historic times,” says Steve Bannon, former White House chief strategist during President Donald Trump's first administration and host of the “War Room” show. “It's not just tariffs. They're a tool. [Trump]'s reorganizing the world system of commerce and of trade,” Bannon says. In this episode, we dive into the U.S.–China trade war, Trump's tariff strategy, his first 100 days in office, and where America is headed in the weeks and months to come. “The next 100 days are going to be three times more intense, dramatic, and meaningful than the first 100 days,” Bannon says. Watch the video of this program at- https://youtu.be/pFgYuwPA4xw?si=ftDnvi0LneEp35lG American Thought Leaders - The Epoch Times 460K subscribers 114,389 views Premiered May 5, 2025
In this episode of The Ultimate Assist, John Stockton and Ken Ruettgers welcome back constitutional attorney and FDA “Dragon Slayer” Jonathan Emord for a high-powered takedown of the bureaucratic machine. Emord pulls no punches, exposing the unconstitutional rise of the administrative state, Big Pharma collusion, Fauci's alleged betrayal, and the disturbing ideological agenda behind modern regulatory overreach. From COVID censorship to energy policy to education warfare, Emord lays out how America's founding principles are under assault—and why restoring individual liberty is the ultimate act of resistance.
The rule of law is essential to the flourishing of liberal democracy and capitalism. Yet, it is now under pressure in the United States, and corporate law firms are in the eye of the storm. Over the last few weeks, President Donald Trump has issued executive orders against several prominent law firms that represented his political adversaries and promoted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Some of these law firms have caved into the administration's demands to end such practices and provide pro bono services to the government, whereas others are fighting back.To discuss the financial reasons why some firms have capitulated while others have held out, and what the consequences are for the survival of the rule of law, Bethany and Luigi speak to John Morley, Augustus E. Lines Professor of Law at Yale University and an expert on the economics of law. Are Trump's orders unconstitutional, and if so, why have so many law firms reached a deal with him? How have changes to law firms' business models left them particularly vulnerable to a moment like this? Why are some firms more vulnerable to political attacks than others? Together, the three discuss the firms' reciprocal agreements with the administration, the possibilities for a collective-action response, and how this moment may profoundly reshape the future of law, democracy, and capitalism in America.Show Notes:Watch a recording of the panel “Antitrust and the 1st Amendment” from the 2025 Stigler Center Antitrust and Competition Conference, featuring Greg Day, Eleanor Fox, and Matt Stoller, and moderated by Maciej Bernatt. The panel highlights how antitrust may stand in the way of collective action, competitive markets, and free speech.
As President Trump reaches his 100th day, his assault on federal agencies continues as he expands his authority over every aspect of the Executive Branch of the federal government. Join David, Nita, and Burt's spirited debate on the impact of Trump's plans to eliminate undesired regulations, unwanted labor agreements, and bothersome legal theories, like disparate impact, on employers, workers, and the role government.Contact Fortney & Scott: Tweet us at @fortneyscott Follow us on LinkedIn Email us at info@fortneyscott.com Thank you for listening! https://www.fortneyscott.com/
In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica talks with USA Today reporter Erin Mansfield about the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul and reduce the federal workforce. They discuss the administration's push for greater executive power, the agencies hit hardest by job cuts, and the impact on public services like education and food safety. Erin also explains the legal battles unfolding over these changes, including the significance of the landmark Supreme Court case Humphrey's Executor and the future independence of federal agencies. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:The Federal Workforce Under the Trump Administration: Trump's administration is undertaking dramatic efforts to reshape--and notably reduce--the federal workforce, prompting widespread job insecurity, potential displacements, and structural overhauls throughout the government.Who is Affected by Federal Workforce Reductions: Erin outlines which agencies are most impacted. Socially-oriented agencies—like the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, USDA, and the Environmental Protection Agency—face the brunt of the cutbacks, while national security, law enforcement, and immigration agencies are largely exempt. She clarifies that massive cuts are not equally distributed across all departments. Real-Life Impacts of Workforce Reduction: Jessica and Erin discuss how these changes might touch everyday Americans. Reductions in the workforce could affect everything from food safety inspections and educational grant administration to public health services and climate research—potentially making certain public services less effective or slower.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@_erinmansfield
3pm: Guest - John Vecchione - Attorney for Civil Liberites Alliance // Mr. Vecchione is a Senior Litigation Counsel for the non-profit New Civil Liberties Alliance representing clients against the Administrative State. // Crabbers sue US state of Washington over GPS surveillance of vessels // I Stand Corrected - Ask, Tell, Correct or Yell at John about anything // Curley, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this Maryland guy who was apparently accidentally sent to that prison in El Salvador. // Braves Sideline Reporter demonstrates excellent game while calling the game
6pm: Guest - John Vecchione - Attorney for Civil Liberites Alliance // Mr. Vecchione is a Senior Litigation Counsel for the non-profit New Civil Liberties Alliance representing clients against the Administrative State. // Crabbers sue US state of Washington over GPS surveillance of vessels // I Stand Corrected - Ask, Tell, Correct or Yell at John about anything // Curley, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this Maryland guy who was apparently accidentally sent to that prison in El Salvador. // Braves Sideline Reporter demonstrates excellent game while calling the game
Led by the Trump administration and Elon Musk's DOGE, Americans are debating once again how our government should hire civil servants, but are we asking the right questions? In this episode, we dive into a compelling new study on the Pendleton Act, one of the most significant bureaucratic reforms in U.S. history, which introduced merit-based civil service exams to combat corruption and incompetence. But did it work?We speak with economist Santiago Perez about his paper “Civil Service Exams and Organizational Performance: Evidence From The Pendleton Act” and his surprising findings that while the reform did help hire more qualified and stable employees, it didn't clearly improve government efficiency. Also, what unintended consequences may have emerged, such as manipulation of salary thresholds and persistent power dynamics among political appointees.So, what can the Pendleton Act teach us about modern bureaucracy, accountability, and fairness? And could reintroducing merit-based exams actually fix today's polarized and politicized civil service—or make it even worse?
Join special guest host Jay Shepard as he and Ericka welcome nationally recognized American Majority CEO, conservative strategist, and author Ned Ryun to Of The People. Together, they discuss Ned's recently released documentary, American Leviathan—a timely and urgent exposé on the rise of Progressive Authoritarianism and the unchecked power of the Administrative State. Brash, irreverent, and […]
For years, unelected bureaucrats have stretched vague laws to impose regulations that Congress never explicitly approved. But with a new executive order, President Trump is taking steps to rein in the administrative state and ensure that federal agencies stay within their constitutional limits. In this episode of American Potential, host David From speaks with Ryan Mulvey, Policy Counsel for Americans for Prosperity Foundation, to break down what this executive order means, how it builds on key Supreme Court doctrines, and what impact it could have on federal regulations, agency overreach, and the economy. They discuss: ✅ The Major Questions Doctrine and why it limits bureaucratic power ✅ How the Chevron Doctrine's demise shifts power back to judges and Congress ✅ The role of Congress in making these changes permanent ✅ What this could mean for business owners, taxpayers, and individual freedoms Could this executive order mark a turning point in restoring constitutional balance and limiting government overreach? Tune in for an in-depth conversation on the fight to restore accountability in Washington.
Preview: Professor John Yoo identifies the Roberts Court as critical in the rejection of the Chevron doctrine that empowered the administrative state. More soon. 1945 SECRETARY OF COMMERCE HARRIMAN
Today on The McCarthy Report, Andy and Rich discuss Trump's tussles with bureaucracy, who's actually heading DOGE, and more. This podcast was edited and produced by Sarah Colleen Schutte.
In this episode, Carl Jackson discusses Doge's discoveries regarding government waste and accountability, particularly in immigration policies. Finally, Jackson covers Pam Bundy's legal actions against New York's immigration policies, emphasizing the need for accountability and reform. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carljacksonradio Twitter: https://twitter.com/carljacksonshow Parler: https://parler.com/carljacksonshow Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarljacksonshow http://www.TheCarlJacksonShow.com NEW!!!! THE CARL JACKSON SHOW MERCH IS HERE. SUPPORT THE PODCAST GETTING A T-SHIRT NOW! https://carljacksonmerch.itemorder.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Ned Ryun CEO of American Majority shares his new book "American Leviathan: The Birth of the Administrative State and Progressive Authoritarianism".See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In this episode of American Potential, host David From sits down with Congresswoman Harriet Hageman, Wyoming's at-large representative and chair of the new Article One Task Force, to discuss her mission to rein in the administrative state and defend constitutional freedoms. Rep. Hageman shares her experiences as a trial attorney fighting federal overreach, including cases that highlight the unchecked power of unelected bureaucrats. She discusses the significant implications of the Loper Bright Supreme Court decision and the urgent need for Congress to reclaim its legislative authority. Learn how the Article One Task Force aims to limit regulatory overreach and strengthen the role of elected representatives in shaping clear and accountable laws. The conversation also explores her proposed First Amendment Accountability Act, which would hold government officials personally responsible for violating Americans' constitutional rights. Rep. Hageman emphasizes the critical importance of ensuring that government agencies remain transparent, fair, and accountable to the people. Tune in to hear how Rep. Hageman is leading the charge to right-size government, protect individual freedoms, and ensure that the principles of the Constitution remain at the heart of American governance. Visit American Potential for more inspiring stories of Americans fighting for freedom and opportunity.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
