Podcasts about american governance

On the sixty-second episode of the Constitutionalist, Ben, Shane, and Matthew discuss the Mayflower Compact, and its implications for American political life as one of the nation's earliest constitutional compacts. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

On the sixty-first episode, Shane and Ben are joined by Joseph Natali, a Ph.D. student at Baylor University dissertating on the constitutionalism of bureaucracy and how Presidents succeed or fail in exercising control over the executive branch. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew K. Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound change and potential upheaval in the U.S. federal government becomes increasingly clear. This initiative, backed by influential conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, is nothing short of a radical blueprint to reshape American governance.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to centralize greater control over the government in the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, has made it clear that all federal employees should answer directly to the president, a notion that has been gaining traction since the Reagan administration. The Supreme Court, with its conservative lean, has supported this stronger unitary executive, setting the stage for Project 2025's ambitious plans[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. The Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission are all targeted for direct presidential control. This move is not just about streamlining bureaucracy; it's about consolidating power in a way that could fundamentally alter the checks and balances that have long defined American democracy.For instance, the plan explicitly recommends dismissing all Department of State employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025, and replacing them with ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of Project 2025, has been vocal about her belief that most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When asked if she could name a time when State Department employees obstructed Trump policy, she admitted she could not, highlighting the ideological rather than performance-based nature of these proposed changes[4].The policy proposals outlined in Project 2025 are comprehensive and far-reaching. The 900-page document calls for the elimination of entire agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Board and USAID. These moves are part of a broader effort to cut back on civil servants' powers and reduce what the project's backers see as inefficiencies across the federal government. The Trump administration, with the help of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has already begun executing these plans, albeit in a chaotic and legally questionable manner. As of the latest data, this has resulted in the layoff or planned layoff of 280,253 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies[5].The implications of these changes are profound. By eliminating agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Board, the administration is stripping away regulatory bodies that were designed to protect consumers from financial abuse. This move aligns with the project's goal of reducing government oversight and empowering the executive branch, but it also raises significant concerns about the protection of public interests.Experts and critics alike have sounded alarms about the potential consequences of Project 2025. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking the executive action proposals across 20 federal agencies, warning that these actions will have devastating consequences for workers and the general public. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has also expressed deep concerns, noting that the re-election of a president aligned with these policies could have immense and far-reaching impacts on civil liberties and governance[1][3].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a set of policy proposals but a vision for a fundamentally different form of government. The project's backers see it as a necessary step to streamline government and align it more closely with conservative ideals. However, critics view it as a dangerous erosion of democratic principles and the independence of federal agencies.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial in determining the fate of Project 2025. As the Trump administration continues to implement its plans, legal challenges and public backlash are likely to intensify. The upcoming milestones, including the continued dismantling of federal agencies and the replacement of key personnel, will serve as critical decision points that could shape the future of American governance.In the end, Project 2025 represents a crossroads in American politics—a choice between a more centralized, executive-driven government and the traditional system of checks and balances that has defined the country's democracy. As this story unfolds, it remains to be seen whether this vision of governance will prevail, and what the long-term consequences will be for the nation.

On the sixtieth episode, Matthew and Ben are joined by Shilo Brooks, Executive Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, to discuss his immensely popular course "The Art of Statesmanship and the Political Life." We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew K. Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

On the fifty-ninth episode of the Constitutionalist, Ben and Matthew discuss Volume 1, Part 2, Chapter 7 of Alexis De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" on the omnipotence of the majority. They discuss Tocqueville's warnings of the detrimental effects of democracy on the citizen. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and potential upheaval in the U.S. federal government becomes increasingly clear. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations and aligned with the vision of a strong, centralized executive power, aims to reshape the very fabric of American governance.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to consolidate control over the entire executive branch under the direct authority of the White House. This vision is championed by figures like Kevin Roberts, who advocates for all federal employees to answer directly to the president, a stance that reflects a significant shift from the traditional checks and balances of the U.S. system[5].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to dismantle or significantly alter several key federal agencies. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for instance, would be eliminated, and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) would be privatized. These agencies, created in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, have been crucial in coordinating national security efforts and preventing terrorist attacks. The idea of reverting to a pre-9/11 era in terms of national security is not only seen as irresponsible but also fraught with risk, as it would undermine the robust security measures put in place over the past two decades[2].The Department of Education is another target, with plans to eliminate it and transfer oversight of education and federal funding to the states. This move would not only decentralize education policy but also gut regulations that prohibit sex-based discrimination, discrimination based on gender identity, and sexual orientation in schools. This change could have far-reaching implications for the rights and protections of students across the country[2].The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would also face significant changes, with proposals to eliminate it and shift its responsibilities to either the Department of Interior or the Department of Transportation, potentially combined with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). The costs of disaster preparedness and response would be shifted to states and local governments, a move that could strain local resources and compromise the nation's ability to respond to natural disasters effectively[2].The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is another agency on the chopping block, with plans to eliminate many of its regional labs, offices of enforcement and compliance, and scientific integrity and risk information divisions. This would essentially give corporations and big businesses a free hand to pollute the air, water, and food, posing a significant threat to public health[2].The project's proponents argue that these changes are necessary to streamline government operations and reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies. However, critics see these moves as a dangerous erosion of essential public services and regulatory protections. Kiron Skinner, who wrote the State Department chapter of Project 2025, exemplifies this ideological stance, suggesting that many State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced with ideologically vetted leaders loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policy, Skinner admitted she could not name any, highlighting the ideological rather than practical basis of these proposed changes[5].The expansion of presidential powers is a central theme of Project 2025. The plan seeks to eliminate the independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, placing them under direct presidential control. This is part of a broader effort to centralize power in the White House, a move that has been supported by conservative justices and organizations like the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation[5].As we move forward, the implications of Project 2025 are likely to be felt across various sectors of American society. The elimination of key agencies and the centralization of power could lead to a significant shift in how the federal government operates, potentially undermining the system of checks and balances that has been a cornerstone of U.S. democracy.In the coming months, as President Trump marks his first year in his second term, the rollout of these policies will be closely watched. The first 100 days have already seen several executive actions aligned with Project 2025's proposals, and the next milestones will be crucial in determining the full extent of these changes[3].As I reflect on Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative represents a profound reimagining of the U.S. federal government. Whether these changes will enhance efficiency and effectiveness or compromise essential public services and democratic principles remains to be seen. One thing is certain, however: the path ahead will be marked by significant challenges and transformations that will shape the future of American governance in ways both profound and far-reaching.

On the fifty-eighth episode, Shane, Matthew, and Ben are joined by William B. Allen, Professor Emeritus of Political Philosophy at Michigan State University, to discuss Montesquieu's political philosophy and its influence on the American Founding and eighteenth-century British politics. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew K. Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

Today we welcome Retired Col Jon Shaffner, now with Liberty Alliance.I first met Jon when he was an army strategist assigned to the Army chief of public affairs as their plans chief.Jon is working with Liberty Alliance to help expand their work in South America. So, let's get started.---One CA is a product of the civil affairs association and brings in people who are current or former military, diplomats, development officers, and field agents to discuss their experiences on the ground with a partner nation's people and leadership. We aim to inspire anyone interested in working in the "last three feet" of U.S. foreign relations. To contact the show, email us at CApodcasting@gmail.com or look us up on the Civil Affairs Association website at www.civilaffairsassoc.org---Great news!Feedspot, the podcast industry ranking system, rated One CA Podcast as one of the top 10 shows on foreign policy. Check it out at:https://podcast.feedspot.com/foreign_policy_podcasts/---Special Thanks to bushinside for the sample of Upbeat Background Music Instrumental "Dance ＆ Electronic." Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MzdQLTBPPo

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and controversy emerges. This initiative, spearheaded by a coalition of conservative organizations, aims to reshape the very fabric of the federal government in the United States, with far-reaching implications for American governance.At its core, Project 2025 is built on the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to centralize greater control over the government in the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, has been clear: all federal employees should answer directly to the president. This vision is not new; it has roots in the Reagan administration and has been bolstered by conservative justices, the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundation. The Supreme Court has increasingly embraced this stronger unitary executive, paving the way for Project 2025's ambitious plans[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to dismantle the independence of several critical federal agencies. The Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission are all targeted for direct presidential control. This would mean that these agencies, historically designed to operate with some degree of autonomy to ensure impartiality, would be brought under the direct purview of the executive branch. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of Project 2025, exemplifies this mindset when she suggests that most State Department employees are too left-wing and should be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. Her recommendation includes dismissing all Department of State employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025, and replacing them with ideologically vetted leaders who do not require Senate confirmation[4].The scope of these changes is vast and multifaceted. For instance, Project 2025 advocates for the abolition of the Department of Education, a move that would significantly alter the federal government's role in education policy. Additionally, the project proposes slashing climate regulations, banning abortion pills, and implementing mass deportations. These policies reflect a stark shift away from current federal priorities and towards a more conservative agenda. When questioned about these proposals, President Trump has claimed to "know nothing about" them, despite the involvement of his own appointees in their development[5].The impact on journalism is another area of concern. Project 2025 includes provisions that would make it easier for the government to seize journalists' emails and phone records, and even considers measures to restrict the presence of reporters in certain areas. While the First Amendment protects against the outright shutdown of critical news outlets, these proposals suggest a chilling effect on press freedom. The project's approach to journalism is part of a broader effort to control the narrative and limit dissenting voices[5].The potential implications of these changes are profound. By centralizing power in the executive branch, Project 2025 risks undermining the system of checks and balances that is fundamental to American democracy. This concentration of power could lead to a significant erosion of civil liberties and the independence of federal agencies. The ACLU, for example, has expressed deep concerns about the re-election of a president who would implement such sweeping changes, highlighting the immense impact it would have on civil rights and liberties[1].As I reflect on the latest developments, it becomes clear that Project 2025 is not just a set of policy proposals but a vision for a fundamentally different government. The project's proponents argue that these changes are necessary to streamline government operations and align them with conservative values. However, critics see this as a dangerous overreach that threatens the democratic fabric of the country.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial. With many of Project 2025's policies already making their way into the president's agenda within the first 100 days, the pace of change is rapid. As the 2025 deadline approaches, the nation will be watching closely to see how these reforms unfold and what they mean for the future of American governance. The stakes are high, and the outcome will shape the course of the country for years to come[3].In this journey through the complexities of Project 2025, one thing is clear: the initiative represents a seismic shift in how the federal government operates and the balance of power within it. Whether one views this as a necessary correction or a perilous overreach, the implications are undeniable. As the nation navigates these uncharted waters, it is imperative to remain vigilant and informed, for the future of American democracy hangs in the balance.

As I delved into the world of Project 2025, I found myself at the forefront of a movement that promises to reshape the very fabric of American governance. This initiative, backed by over 100 respected organizations from across the conservative spectrum, is nothing short of ambitious. At its core, Project 2025 aims to "take down the Deep State and return the government to the people," a mantra that resonates deeply with its supporters.The project's blueprint for change is outlined in the comprehensive document, "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise," published in April 2023. This tome, crafted by more than 400 scholars and policy experts, presents a wide array of policy suggestions designed to address some of the nation's most pressing challenges. One of the most striking proposals is the call to "secure the border, finish building the wall, and deport illegal aliens." This stance reflects a hardline approach to immigration, a topic that has long been a lightning rod for political debate.Another key area of focus is the reform of federal agencies, particularly the FBI and DOJ. Project 2025 advocates for "de-weaponizing the Federal Government" by increasing accountability and oversight of these institutions. This move is part of a broader effort to make federal bureaucrats more accountable to the democratically elected President and Congress, a theme that echoes throughout the project's policy recommendations.Energy production is another critical sector targeted by Project 2025. The initiative urges the "unleash[ing] of American energy production to reduce energy prices," a strategy that aligns with long-standing conservative views on energy independence and deregulation. This proposal is intertwined with the broader goal of cutting government spending to reduce inflation, a fiscal policy that could have far-reaching implications for the national economy.Education reform is also high on the agenda. Project 2025 proposes shifting control and funding of education from federal bureaucrats to parents and state and local governments. This decentralization is intended to empower local communities to make decisions about their own educational systems, a move that could significantly alter the educational landscape in the United States.One of the more contentious proposals involves banning biological males from competing in women's sports, a policy that has sparked intense debate and criticism from various civil rights groups. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), for instance, has expressed deep concerns about this and other aspects of Project 2025, arguing that such policies undermine civil rights and erode essential social programs[3].The project's vision for disaster response and management is another area of significant change. Project 2025 recommends reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities rather than the federal government. This proposal is based on the argument that FEMA is "overtasked, overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response, and is regularly in deep debt[4]." The plan suggests that Congress should change the cost-sharing arrangement so the federal government covers only 25% of the costs for small disasters and up to 75% for "truly catastrophic disasters."This shift in disaster response aligns with broader themes of decentralization and state autonomy, as exemplified by Donald Trump's suggestion to leave disaster response management to the states. "That's what states are for, to take care of problems," Trump stated, reflecting a philosophy that underpins many of Project 2025's policy proposals[4].Despite its ambitious scope, Project 2025 has already begun to manifest in various states. In Texas and Washington, for example, policies similar to those outlined in the project are being tested through legislation and court challenges. These incremental steps are "stress-testing their viability and setting the stage for easier implementation nationwide," according to an update by the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)[5].Critics argue that these policies represent a substantial threat not only to individual rights but also to the very foundation of American democracy. By seeking to centralize power in the executive branch and undermine civil rights, Project 2025's agenda is seen as prioritizing control over fairness and enforcement over welfare. The potential consequences of such policies are far-reaching, with concerns raised about the impact on marginalized groups, including women, immigrants, and low-income families[5].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a distant vision but a tangible force already shaping the political landscape. With its comprehensive policy proposals and incremental implementation in various states, Project 2025 is poised to be a significant player in the upcoming political cycle.Looking ahead, the next few years will be crucial in determining the full impact of Project 2025. As the 2025 presidential election approaches, the alignment of Trump's policies with those of Project 2025 will likely remain a point of contention and discussion. Whether this movement succeeds in its goals of reshaping American governance remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: Project 2025 has already become a pivotal force in the ongoing debate about the future of the United States.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is more than just a collection of policy proposals; it is a comprehensive vision for a radical shift in American governance. Born out of a coalition of over 100 respected conservative organizations, Project 2025 aims to reshape the federal government in ways that are both profound and contentious.At the heart of Project 2025 is its manifesto, "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise," published in April 2023. This document, crafted by more than 400 scholars and policy experts, outlines a sweeping array of policy suggestions designed to address what the project's proponents see as the country's most pressing challenges. One of the key proposals is to "secure the border, finish building the wall, and deport illegal aliens," reflecting a hardline stance on immigration that aligns with long-held conservative views on border security[1].Another significant area of focus is the reform of federal agencies, particularly the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Project 2025 advocates for de-weaponizing these agencies by increasing accountability and oversight, a move that its authors believe will restore trust in these institutions and ensure they are more accountable to the democratically elected branches of government[1].Energy policy is also a critical component, with the project calling for the unleashing of American energy production to reduce energy prices. This approach is rooted in the belief that domestic energy production can be a powerful economic driver and a means to achieve energy independence[1].The project's economic policies are equally ambitious, with a strong emphasis on cutting the growth of government spending to reduce inflation. This fiscal conservatism is central to the project's broader goal of making federal bureaucrats more accountable to the elected branches of government. By reducing federal spending, the project's authors argue that the government can be made more efficient and responsive to the needs of the people[1].Education reform is another key area, with Project 2025 proposing to move control and funding of education from federal bureaucrats to parents and state and local governments. This decentralization is intended to give communities more control over their educational systems, a move that reflects a long-standing conservative critique of federal overreach in education policy[1].One of the more contentious proposals is the ban on biological males competing in women's sports, a policy that has sparked heated debates about gender identity and athletic fairness. This proposal is part of a broader set of social policies that aim to redefine the role of the federal government in regulating personal and social issues[1].The project's vision for disaster response is also noteworthy. Project 2025 suggests reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities. This approach is based on the argument that FEMA is "overtasked, overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response, and is regularly in deep debt." The proposal includes changing the cost-sharing arrangement so the federal government covers 25% of the costs for small disasters and up to 75% for "truly catastrophic disasters"[4].This shift in disaster response aligns with broader themes of decentralization and state autonomy that run through many of Project 2025's proposals. For instance, Donald Trump, whose policies have been compared to those of Project 2025, has suggested that states should take more responsibility for disaster response, stating, "That's what states are for, to take care of problems"[4].Despite its ambitious scope, Project 2025 has faced significant criticism. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has warned that the project's agenda represents a substantial threat not only to individual rights but also to the very foundation of American democracy. The ACLU argues that by seeking to centralize power in the executive branch, undermine civil rights, and erode essential social programs, Project 2025 prioritizes control over fairness and enforcement over welfare[3].Experts and critics alike point out that the incremental implementation of these policies in states like Texas and Washington is already testing the limits of legislative and judicial resilience. These small, strategic moves are paving the way for the project's larger vision, which could have far-reaching detrimental effects on communities and the economy, particularly for marginalized groups such as women, immigrants, and low-income families[5].As I reflect on the breadth and depth of Project 2025, it is clear that this initiative is not just a set of policy proposals but a vision for a fundamentally different America. Whether one sees this vision as a necessary correction or a dangerous deviation from current norms, it is undeniable that Project 2025 is shaping the conversation about the future of American governance.Looking ahead, the next few years will be crucial in determining the trajectory of Project 2025. As the 2025 presidential election approaches, the alignment of Trump's policies with those of Project 2025 will likely remain a point of contention. The project's success will depend on its ability to garner widespread support and navigate the complex landscape of American politics.In the end, Project 2025 stands as a testament to the enduring power of ideological vision in shaping public policy. Whether it succeeds in its ambitious goals or faces significant resistance, its impact on the national discourse is already being felt. As the country moves forward, it will be important to continue monitoring the developments of Project 2025, not just as a set of policies, but as a reflection of the deeper debates about the role of government in American society.

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has a bizarre message for school parents. Federal judges are out of control. Comparing the throwing styles of President Donald Trump and Governor Tony Evers (D) of Wisconsin. Trump 2028?? A Russian general killed by a car bomb near Moscow threatens to derail an already tenuous peace process between Russia and Ukraine. Is the U.S. getting close to trade deal with China? JD Vance serves beer to the troops. New information about "Maryland Man" Abrego Garcia. Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) holds a press conference on the side of the road … but why?? Trump administration moves to speed up mining in the U.S. The president's approval rating is down. Pete Buttigieg talks about the adoption process. Dylan Mulvaney leaving the country for good? AOC running for president? The Amish come together to help rebuild Chimney Rock, North Carolina. 00:00 Pat Gray UNLEASHED 00:46 Judicial Overreach Continues 08:45 Tony Evers Tries to Catch a Football 11:20 Flashback: Trump Throws a Football 12:12 Clay Matthews' Message from Trump 17:22 Russia/Ukraine Update 18:02 Trump on Russia/Ukraine Deal 21:20 Marco Rubio on Russia/Ukraine Deal 23:12 Trump on Meeting with China 27:53 A New Dog Whistle? 33:02 Fat Five 52:31 Vance on Abrego Garcia Case 55:50 Frederica Wilson Press Conference 1:04:41 Dirtiest Cities in America 1:12:24 China Slows Down Rare Earth Mineral Exports 1:20:08 Pete Buttigieg on Adoptions 1:25:43 Dylan Mulvaney Moving to the UK 1:27:25 AOC Running for President? 1:31:07 Chimney Rock is being Rebuilt by the Amish Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On the fifty-seventh episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane and Matthew discuss Volume 1, Chapter 2 of Alexis De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America." We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of both fascination and concern grips me. This initiative, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, is more than just a policy blueprint; it is a comprehensive plan to reshape the very fabric of American governance. At its core, Project 2025 aims to establish an effective conservative administration, but its implications extend far beyond partisan lines, touching on fundamental aspects of democracy, civil rights, and social welfare.The project is built on four pillars, each designed to centralize power, streamline government operations, and implement a conservative agenda across various federal agencies. One of the key strategies involves a significant overhaul of the executive branch, with proposals to weaken the bureaucratic apparatus and enhance the president's authority. This vision is encapsulated in the words of the project's proponents, who see it as a way to "build an authoritarian presidency"[5].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its incremental approach. Rather than attempting sweeping changes all at once, the project's architects are testing their policies in state legislatures and courts. For instance, in states like Texas and Washington, we are seeing the gradual implementation of policies that centralize power away from individuals and towards the executive branch. These small, strategic moves are "stress-testing their viability and setting the stage for easier implementation nationwide"[4].A concrete example of this incremental strategy can be seen in the realm of healthcare. In states where abortion is not considered healthcare, women facing severe health risks during pregnancy may be denied life-saving care. This is not just a theoretical concern; it is a reality that is already unfolding. As Paulina Perez, a Policy and Legislation Fellow at LULAC, notes, "Conditions such as [severe health risks] may be denied the life-saving care they need," highlighting the immediate and dire consequences of these policies[4].The project also includes a wide array of executive action proposals that are being tracked across 20 federal agencies. These proposals range from rollbacks of environmental and climate policies to changes in public safety regulations. For example, the Center for Progressive Reform is monitoring how the Trump administration is implementing these actions, which they warn will have "devastating consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions of Americans"[5].The potential implications of Project 2025 are far-reaching and multifaceted. By seeking to centralize power in the executive branch, the project undermines civil rights and erodes essential social programs. This radical agenda prioritizes control over fairness, enforcement over welfare, and exclusion over inclusion. As the ACLU points out, "Project 2025 represents a substantial threat not only to individual rights but also to the very foundation of American democracy"[4].One of the most alarming aspects of this project is its impact on marginalized communities. Policies suggested in Project 2025 are likely to further compromise the rights of women, immigrants, and low-income families. For instance, the administration's decision to house immigrants in "tent complexes" in El Paso, Texas, is a stark example of how these policies can manifest on the ground[2].As I reflect on the latest developments and key policy proposals of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a distant vision but a tangible reality that is already shaping American governance. The incremental steps being taken in states and federal agencies are setting the stage for a future where the balance of power is significantly skewed towards the executive branch.Looking ahead, the next few years will be crucial in determining the full extent of Project 2025's impact. As the Center for Progressive Reform continues to track the implementation of these executive actions, we will see whether these proposals will indeed have the devastating consequences predicted by critics. The upcoming milestones and decision points will be pivotal in shaping the future of American democracy and the rights of its citizens.In this journey through the complexities of Project 2025, one thing is clear: this is not just a policy debate but a fundamental struggle over the values and principles that underpin American society. As we move forward, it is imperative to remain vigilant and engaged, ensuring that the democratic foundations of our nation are not eroded by the very policies intended to reshape it.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is more than just a collection of policy proposals; it is a comprehensive blueprint for a radical transformation of American governance. At its core, Project 2025 is a vision for an effective conservative administration, built on four pillars that aim to reshape the country's political, social, and economic landscape.One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its approach to disaster management and federal emergency response. The project's authors argue that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is "overtasked, overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response, and is regularly in deep debt"[5]. To address this, they propose a significant shift in the cost-sharing arrangement between the federal government and states. Under their plan, the federal government would cover only 25% of the costs for small disasters and up to 75% for "truly catastrophic disasters." This reform is part of a broader strategy to transfer the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities, a move that aligns with Trump's suggestion to leave disaster response management to the states, stating, "That's what states are for, to take care of problems"[5].This proposal is not merely theoretical; it reflects a broader theme of decentralization and reduced federal involvement. For instance, Project 2025 advocates for the termination of preparedness grants for states and localities, arguing that "DHS should not be in the business of handing out federal tax dollars: These grants should be terminated"[5]. This stance underscores a commitment to reducing federal oversight and financial support, a policy that could have far-reaching implications for communities reliant on federal aid during emergencies.The project's impact on social programs and individual rights is another critical area of concern. Critics, such as those from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), warn that Project 2025 represents a substantial threat to American democracy. By seeking to centralize power in the executive branch, undermine civil rights, and erode essential social programs, the project prioritizes control over fairness and enforcement over welfare[4].For example, the incremental steps already being taken in states like Texas and Washington foreshadow a future where the rights of marginalized groups—such as women, immigrants, and low-income families—are further compromised. Policies that restrict access to healthcare, particularly for women facing severe health risks during pregnancy, are already being tested in legislation and courts. This gradual centralization of power and erosion of individual rights raises serious concerns about the future of American governance and the well-being of vulnerable populations[4].The immigration policies proposed under Project 2025 are equally contentious. The project's vision includes housing immigrants in tent complexes, a practice already observed in El Paso, Texas, where Deployed Resources has set up such facilities. This approach reflects a broader strategy of exclusion and enforcement, which critics argue will exacerbate hardships for immigrant communities and undermine the principles of inclusion and fairness[2].Despite the alignment of some of these policies with Trump's past proposals, it is worth noting that Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025 on the campaign trail. However, the overlap between his policies and those of Project 2025 is undeniable. For instance, Trump's establishment of a review council to advise on FEMA's capabilities and his suggestions for reforming disaster response management mirror key proposals outlined in Project 2025[5].As we look ahead to the upcoming milestones and decision points for Project 2025, it is clear that this initiative will continue to shape the political discourse in the United States. The project's incremental approach, where small, strategic moves are made to test the viability of larger policy changes, suggests that its impact will be felt long before 2025. The gradual erosion of civil rights, the decentralization of federal responsibilities, and the centralization of executive power all point to a future where the fabric of American democracy could be significantly altered.In conclusion, Project 2025 is not just a set of policy proposals; it is a roadmap for a fundamental transformation of American governance. As we navigate the complexities and implications of this project, it becomes evident that its success or failure will have profound consequences for the rights, welfare, and democratic foundations of the United States. The journey ahead will be marked by intense political battles, judicial challenges, and societal shifts, all of which will determine the future shape of American society.

On the fifty-sixth episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane, Ben, and Matthew discuss Federalist 37, and Madison's teachings on political and epistemological limits. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a initiative spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, a prominent conservative think tank, it becomes clear that this is more than just a policy blueprint – it's a comprehensive vision for reshaping American governance. This project, which has garnered significant attention and controversy, aims to guide the next conservative presidential administration in implementing a wide array of policy changes that could profoundly impact various aspects of American life.At its core, Project 2025 is a collaborative effort involving over 100 respected organizations from the conservative movement. The project's foundation is laid out in the book "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise," published in April 2023, which is the culmination of work by more than 400 scholars and policy experts. This document outlines a sweeping policy agenda that touches on nearly every major federal agency and aspect of government operations.One of the key pillars of Project 2025 is the restructuring of federal agencies and the way they operate. For instance, the project proposes to "de-weaponize the Federal Government" by increasing accountability and oversight of the FBI and the Department of Justice. This includes measures to make federal bureaucrats more accountable to the democratically elected President and Congress, a move that critics argue could erode the independence and integrity of these agencies[1][3][5].Another significant area of focus is energy policy. Project 2025 advocates for unleashing American energy production to reduce energy prices, a goal that aligns with broader conservative sentiments on energy independence. However, this approach also raises concerns about environmental regulations and the long-term sustainability of such policies[1][5].Education is another sector that would see substantial changes under Project 2025. The initiative suggests moving control and funding of education from federal bureaucrats directly to parents and state and local governments. Proponents argue this would increase local control and efficiency, while critics worry it could lead to unequal access to quality education across different regions[1].The project also delves into highly contentious issues such as immigration and reproductive rights. It proposes securing the border, finishing the wall, and deporting illegal aliens, as well as transferring the custody of immigrant children from Health and Human Services to the Department of Homeland Security. This move is criticized for prioritizing enforcement over welfare and potentially worsening the safety and psychological well-being of vulnerable immigrant children[1][4].On reproductive rights, Project 2025 calls for the revival of the 19th-century Comstock Act to ban abortion medications and materials from being sent through the U.S. Postal Service, and the reversal of the FDA's approval of mifepristone. These proposals are part of a broader effort to restrict abortion access, which has been met with fierce opposition from organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)[3][4].The project's ambitions extend to the very structure of the federal government. It aims to establish a more unitary executive branch by increasing the president's authority over federal agencies. This includes reissuing Trump's Schedule F executive order, which would allow the dismissal of federal employees deemed 'non-performing' or disloyal. Critics argue this could erode the system of checks and balances and lead to the politicization of the federal workforce[4].Despite President Trump's public distancing from Project 2025 during his campaign, many of the policies he has implemented align closely with the project's proposals. For example, Trump's executive order ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government mirrors Project 2025's call to dismantle the "DEI apparatus" at various agencies. Trump has also suggested reforms to FEMA, shifting the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities, a proposal that is directly outlined in Project 2025's policy book[5].The implications of these changes are far-reaching. Experts and civil rights organizations, such as the ACLU, warn that Project 2025's policies could significantly erode civil rights, undermine the independence of federal agencies, and centralize power in the executive branch. The ACLU has detailed a roadmap for fighting back against these proposals, including going to court to preserve and advance rights, working with Congress to enact policy solutions, and organizing community efforts to educate the public about the potential harms of Project 2025[3].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it is clear that this initiative represents a fundamental shift in how conservatives envision American governance. The project's proponents see it as a necessary corrective to what they perceive as a bloated and unaccountable federal government, while critics view it as a dangerous erosion of civil liberties and democratic norms.Looking ahead, the implementation of Project 2025's policies will likely be a contentious and ongoing process. As the country approaches future elections and potential changes in administration, the fate of these proposals will remain a critical point of debate. Whether Project 2025 succeeds in reshaping American governance or is met with significant resistance, one thing is certain: its impact will be felt across every aspect of American life.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sweeping initiative spearheaded by the conservative Heritage Foundation, it becomes clear that this is more than just a policy manual – it's a blueprint for a fundamental transformation of American governance.Project 2025 is the culmination of efforts from over 100 respected organizations within the conservative movement, aiming to "take down the Deep State" and return the government to the people. This ambitious plan, outlined in a 900-page manual, involves hundreds of individual policy changes that touch nearly every aspect of American life. From immigration and abortion rights to education and energy production, the scope of Project 2025 is vast and its implications profound.One of the most contentious areas addressed by Project 2025 is immigration. The plan calls for securing the border, finishing the construction of the wall, and deporting illegal aliens. It also proposes transferring the custody of immigrant children from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), a move that critics argue would prioritize enforcement over welfare and potentially worsen the safety and psychological well-being of vulnerable children[5].In the realm of reproductive rights, Project 2025 advocates for drastic measures. It suggests reviving the 19th-century Comstock Act to ban abortion medications and materials from being sent through the U.S. Postal Service and reversing the FDA's approval of mifepristone, a key medication used in abortions. These proposals are part of a broader effort to gut abortion access, with supporters like Pam Bondi, who defended President Trump during his first impeachment trial and upheld Florida's restrictive abortion ban, actively working to implement these changes[3].Education is another sector that would undergo significant changes under Project 2025. The plan aims to dismantle the federal role in education, proposing the abolition of the Department of Education and the privatization of student loans. It also recommends eliminating the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program and increasing taxes on university endowments. Sara Partridge, associate director of higher education policy at the Center for American Progress, notes that "the way I see it, Project 2025 really set out to destroy the federal role in education as we know it, and this administration has already taken major steps to weaken it"[4].The energy sector is not immune to the project's ambitious reforms. Project 2025 advocates for unleashing American energy production to reduce energy prices, including expanding energy exploration and extraction in Alaska and opening the National Petroleum Reserve to leasing and development. This aligns with broader conservative goals of reducing regulatory barriers and increasing domestic energy production[2].A key aspect of Project 2025 is its focus on restructuring the federal government to make it more accountable to the democratically elected President and Congress. This includes proposals to de-weaponize the Federal Government by increasing accountability and oversight of the FBI and DOJ, and to implement Trump's Schedule F executive order, which would allow for the dismissal of ‘non-performing' federal employees. This measure could significantly erode the system of checks and balances by centralizing power in the executive branch[5].The project also delves into social issues, such as banning biological males from competing in women's sports, a policy that reflects the conservative movement's stance on gender and sports[1].Despite President Trump's denials of direct involvement, the connections between Project 2025 and his administration are evident. The Heritage Foundation, which published the project, has direct ties to Trump's first administration, with at least 140 people who worked on Project 2025 having previously worked in Trump's administration. Kevin Roberts, the Heritage Foundation President, has described his organization's role as “institutionalizing Trumpism”[3].Experts and analysts are keenly watching the implementation of these policies, noting that while not all of Trump's actions fully adhere to Project 2025's recommendations, the core concepts are often aligned. Brendan Cantwell, a higher education professor at Michigan State University, observes that "the record established in Project 2025 and by people like Max Eden … [is] being enacted quite clearly"[4].The potential implications of Project 2025 are far-reaching and multifaceted. By centralizing power in the executive branch, undermining civil rights, and eroding essential social programs, this agenda prioritizes control over fairness, enforcement over welfare, and exclusion over inclusion. As noted by the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the incremental steps already being taken in states like Texas and Washington are paving the way for the broader implementation of Project 2025's vision, which could significantly compromise the rights of marginalized groups[5].As we look ahead, it is clear that Project 2025 represents a critical juncture in American governance. The next few weeks and months will be pivotal, with expected executive orders and legislative actions that could reshape the landscape of federal policies. Experts predict significant changes in accreditation standards for colleges, further constraints on colleges, and potential overhauls in the student loan system[4].In conclusion, Project 2025 is not just a policy document; it is a vision for a fundamentally different America. As the country navigates these proposed changes, it is imperative to understand the scope, ambition, and potential impacts of this initiative. Whether one supports or opposes these policies, the importance of informed engagement and vigilant oversight cannot be overstated. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made now will shape the nation for generations to come.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a comprehensive and contentious plan crafted by the Heritage Foundation, I am struck by the sheer scope and ambition of this conservative blueprint. This 900-page document, often described as a guidebook for transforming American governance, has sparked intense debate and concern across the political spectrum.At its core, Project 2025 is a vision for a radically different federal government, one that amplifies presidential power and reshapes the bureaucracy to align with conservative ideals. The project is the culmination of efforts by over 400 scholars and policy experts, aiming to provide a detailed policy agenda for a potential incoming Republican administration, particularly one led by Donald Trump, despite his public denials of involvement[2][4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to centralize power within the executive branch. The plan suggests reissuing Trump's Schedule F executive order, which would allow the president to dismiss federal employees deemed 'non-performing' or disloyal. This measure targets the vast federal workforce of approximately 3.5 million individuals, the majority of whom are career civil servants essential for maintaining government continuity and integrity. As Dr. Ray Serrano, Director of Research and Policy at LULAC, notes, "This proposal targets the vast federal workforce... enabling far-right extremists to discharge federal employees considered insufficiently loyal"[1].The project also outlines sweeping reforms to federal agencies, including the elimination of the Department of Education and significant cuts to other agencies. For instance, Project 2025 proposes transferring the custody of immigrant children from Health and Human Services (HHS) to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), prioritizing enforcement over welfare. This change would likely expand detention centers and worsen the safety and psychological well-being of vulnerable immigrant children[1].On the issue of immigration, Project 2025 advocates for mass deportations of millions of undocumented immigrants and the completion of the border wall. These policies align closely with Trump's past rhetoric, although the project goes further in some areas, such as its stance on abortion. While Trump has expressed support for certain abortion restrictions, Project 2025's proposals are more extreme, aiming to limit access to abortion medication through legal challenges and regulatory changes. A recent court case in Texas, where a judge ruled in favor of revoking the FDA's approval of mifepristone, serves as a precursor to these broader restrictions[1][2].The project's impact on reproductive rights is just one facet of its broader assault on civil liberties. It also proposes to ban biological males from competing in women's sports and to de-weaponize the federal government by increasing accountability and oversight of agencies like the FBI and DOJ. These measures are part of a larger effort to "return the government to the people" and dismantle what the project's proponents call the "Deep State"[5].In the realm of media and technology, Project 2025's plans are equally transformative. The project recommends increasing agency accountability while decreasing wasteful spending at the FCC, promoting national security, and expanding connectivity through the support of 5G and satellite technologies. It also suggests that Big Tech companies should contribute to the Universal Service Fund, currently funded through telephone bills. These proposals reflect a broader aim to reshape the regulatory landscape in favor of conservative priorities[4].Critics of Project 2025 argue that its recommendations are not just radical but also risky, potentially endangering democratic institutions and concentrating presidential power to an unprecedented degree. As Roxana Muenster from the Brookings Institution notes, "Project 2025's policy recommendations should be cause for concern: Congress enacted the 1967 Public Broadcasting Act because they believed an educated and informed citizenry was in the public, local, and national interest"[4].The Heritage Foundation and its allies, however, see Project 2025 as a necessary corrective to what they perceive as the failures of the current system. Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, has warned of a "second American Revolution" that could remain bloodless if the left allows it to be, underscoring the project's urgency and the stakes involved[2].As the 2025 presidential transition looms, the implementation of Project 2025's proposals will depend on the outcome of the election. The Center for Progressive Reform and other watchdog groups are closely tracking the project's executive action proposals across 20 federal agencies, ready to highlight the devastating consequences these actions could have for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions of Americans[3].In the coming months, as the political landscape continues to evolve, Project 2025 will remain a focal point of debate and contention. Whether its vision for a centralized, conservative government becomes reality or remains a blueprint for a hypothetical future, one thing is clear: the stakes are high, and the implications for American governance are profound. As we move forward, it will be crucial to monitor the project's progress and its potential to reshape the very fabric of American democracy.

Purchase Professor Rasmussen's book here.We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com  The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org.The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.