Like everyone else, I've been hearing a lot about Project 2025. But I want to do more than listen to other people's interpretation, so I've decided to read it for myself. Starting now. And I'll put my notes here. (I started this project on Facebook, and I’m copying it here because I like the formatting better, and I wanted a spot where I could put it in order and send people the whole thing if they wanted it.

my approach

I'll clearly label summary, direct quotes (If it's in "quotes," it's a direct quote) and my opinions, so you can skip anything you want. If you see **, that's something that I think goes farther than most conservatives have gone in the past. It's surprising or alarming to me.

I’ll be putting those in a pull quote like this here. (If you read it on Facebook, that format doesn’t allow this.

I'm not going to use page numbers because I've heard that the page numbers keep getting changed, so a search in the PDF (which is available on The Heritage Foundation's website) will yield better results if you want to check something out for yourself.

This is obviously going to take some time, since it's 922 pages, but I'll try to post something every day.

So we're all talking about the same document: Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise.

Also, I started this before the director got fired. But these ideas and this document still exist, so I’m still doing it.

SUMMARY

Starts with acknowledgments, particularly The Heritage Foundation. It's "the work of dozens of authors and hundreds of contributors." Editors are from The Heritage Foundation. The Advisory Board lists more than 50 members.

Then "A Note On 'Project 2025'" written by Paul Dans, director Project 2025

Most of it is a summary of the project and how it came to be, but the first paragraph says "Indeed, one set of eyes reading these passages will be those of the 47th President of the United States ..."

Dans hearkens back to Ronald Reagan, saying 1980's document "literally put the conservative movement and Reagan on the same page ..."

Then there are nine pages of authors and editors.

OPINION/BIAS

I'm only going to list those that specifically mention working in the Trump Administration or people I know have worked for him, since he has said he's not affiliated with the project. (I don't know if that's true or not, and I'm not telling what you to think about it.) Nearly all of them mention that work in their bios in Project 2025, which you can look up.

SUMMARY

Adam Candeub

Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., MD

Ken Cuccinelli

Rick Dearborn

Thomas F. Gilman

Mandy M. Gunasekara

Dennis Dean Kirk

Christopher Miller

Mora Namdar

Peter Navarro

William Perry Pendley

Roger Severino

Kiron K. Skinner

Brooks D. Tucker

Hans A. von Spakovsky

Russ Vought

William L. Walton

Paul Winfree

Editor: Paul Dans

Editor: Seven Groves

MY OPINION

Whether or not the former president knows anything about Project 2025, its list of authors and editors know him and have had his ear in the past.

SUMMARY

That list is followed by seven pages of contributors. There's a disclaimer that the project isn't all-inclusive, and that not all of the contributors or the organizations they represent agree with everything.

We're finally to Page 1, the foreword, "A Promise to America," written by Kevin D. Roberts, the president of The Heritage Foundation. It's 17 pages long.

It begins with a list of what's ailing the country, from inflation to pornography "invading their (children's) school libraries" to an economic Cold War with China.

Roberts gives a brief history of the Mandate for Leadership, which was first published in January 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office. "By the end of that year, more than 60 percent of its recommendations had become policy ..."

Roberts lists promises along "four broad fronts":

1. "Restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children."

2. "Dismantle the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people."

3. "Defend our nation's sovereignty, borders, and bounty against global threats."

4. "Secure our God-given individual rights to live freely--what our Constitution calls 'the Blessings of Liberty.'"

MY OPINION

No surprises here. These are pillars of the conservative movement. I suspect (and know because of what I've read) that the surprise will come in how Project 2025 proposes to accomplish these goals.

SUMMARY

More praise of Ronald Reagan. Then he breaks down each promise. He makes some sweeping statements without evidence, such as, "In many ways, the entire (italics) point of centralizing political power to subvert (italics) the family." He says the family is in crisis and bemoans the number of children born to unmarried mothers.

Then he mentions some specific policies:

-elminating marriage penalties in welfare programs and the tax code

-installing work requirements for food stamps (MY OPINION: Not sure what that has to do with the breakdown of the family, and unless the food stamp program has changed significantly, there are work requirements)

**-"deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity('SOGI'), diversity, equity, and inclusion ('DEI'), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists."

MY OPINION

It takes some mental gymnastics to champion the First Amendment while listing words and phrases to be deleted.

SUMMARY

**-"Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered."

MY OPINION

What makes this surprising isn't that conservatives want to outlaw pornography. It's that it mentions educators and librarians. This begs the question, "What would be considered pornography, and who would get to decide?" Does a sex ed book qualify? Nude art? Because I haven't seen porn in libraries and schools.

SUMMARY

• universal school choice

**-"But even before we achieve that long-term goal (of school choice), parents' rights as their children's primary educators should be non-negotiable in American schools. States, cities and counties, school boards, union bosses, principals, and teachers who disagree should be immediately cut off from federal funds."

MY OPINION

I'm not sure what this is getting at. I think they're saying parents can object to anything their kids are learning. The "disagree" language is concerning. This sounds like thought police to me.

SUMMARY

• excise "critical race theory" and "gender ideology" from curricula in every public school in the country

-"Allowing parents or physicians to 'reassign' the sex of a minor is child abuse and must end."

MY OPINION

Not surprising, but seems to contradict the earlier bit about parents' rights.

SUMMARY

• There's a description of children being addicted to mobile apps as "industrial-scale child abuse." It says federal policy can't allow that to continue, but doesn't offer a specific policy to combat it. At least not yet.

• push harder to "protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America and receive federal and state support for adoption

That's it for today, y'all. Next time: "Promise #2: Dismantle the Adminstrative State and Return Self-Governance to the American People."