As President Donald Trump prepares to deliver his State of the Union address, a conspicuous omission is expected: any reference to Project 2025, the comprehensive 920-page conservative policy blueprint he publicly disowned during his 2024 campaign. Despite his previous claims of having “no idea who is behind it” and dismissing portions as “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal,” evidence indicates that approximately half of the project’s proposals have been implemented within his administration’s first year.
Published by the Heritage Foundation in April 2023, Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership document outlined an ultra-conservative vision for governance, including methods to expand presidential power, implement sweeping federal workforce reductions, and advance a conservative social agenda. While Trump initially distanced himself from the project amid Democratic criticism, his administration has since enacted numerous policies that align strikingly with its recommendations.
According to analyses by multiple tracking groups, including the left-leaning Center for Progressive Reform, the administration has initiated or completed 53% of the project’s proposed policies. A separate tracker using different methodology arrived at a nearly identical figure of 51%. Implemented measures include aggressive immigration enforcement expansion, termination of federal diversity programs, elimination of funding for public broadcasters NPR and PBS, and significant foreign aid reductions.
The project’s influence extends to personnel decisions, with several contributors now holding key administration positions. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, “border tsar” Tom Homan, and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought all contributed to the document. Vought, who authored the chapter on bureaucratic restructuring, has played a particularly instrumental role in implementing the president’s policies.
Paul Dans, who directed Project 2025 before resigning from the Heritage Foundation to support Trump’s campaign, described the document as “conservative gospel” and expressed gratification at its implementation. “Any outsider looking at this can easily see how much of this first year was set out by Project 2025,” Dans noted, while emphasizing the need to continue implementation given limited time before midterm elections.
Not all project recommendations have been adopted, however. Proposals yet to be implemented include rescinding approval of abortion pills, classifying educators who discuss transgender issues with children as sex offenders, reducing U.S. forces in Europe, and adding a citizenship question to the census.
Analysts warn that the expanded executive powers developed through Project 2025 could eventually be used by future Democratic administrations to advance progressive agendas. Eugene Kiley of Factcheck.org observed that such power expansion “can come back and bite [Republicans] someday” as political control inevitably shifts between parties.
For liberal groups currently excluded from federal power, the comprehensive nature of Project 2025 presents both a challenge and opportunity. James Goodwin of the Center for Progressive Reform suggested that progressives might need to develop similarly detailed policy documents to articulate their vision should they regain executive authority.
