My Writing Corner Pulse of the World

Project 2025: Economic Insights & Criticisms of the Conservative Promise

July 22, 2024 by Mineka No Comments

Project 2025: Economic Insights & Criticisms of the Conservative Promise

As the global spotlight intensifies on the impending US Presidential Elections of 2024, profound uncertainties loom over the potential transition from democratic to republican leadership, raising pivotal inquiries about its implications for the trajectory of the American economy, its social fabric and its geopolitical footprint amidst an era defined by pervasive global conflicts and economic downturns. Lodged by the Heritage foundation in 2022, The Mandate for Leadership or Project 2025, as its commonly called, is a 900-page document put together by more than 400 writers, that delivers some explicit insights on the implications of such a political transformation in 2025 and beyond. With elections inching closer, discussions and debates regarding the Project’s plans have erupted amongst academic communities with scepticism and cynicism being a common theme. In this article, I attempt to briefly summarise the essence of the project, it key controversies and criticisms and the top 10 insights I find the most intriguing from the project’s economics section.

The Essence of Project 2025

The Mandate for Leadership or Project 2025 is a 900-page document that entails a comprehensive compendium of conservative policies that thereby encapsulates the future implications of America under the new republican administration it expects to form in 2025. Amalgamated, by a group of policy-makers, law-givers and economists tied to the Heritage Foundation, the documents resonate with the thinking tanks of conservative ideology and aims to propose policies, legislative changes and restructurings that are intended at advancing USA’s political structure to suits its growing economic and social needs that in their view have been disoriented by the current administration.

Primarily, Project 2025 is structured on four fundamental pillars that helps streamline of the essence of its Writer’s agenda and have been summarised below:

Pillar I: Governance Framework – Establishes a consensus on how major federal agencies should be governed and identifies areas of disagreement for the incoming President to decide upon including key economic and social policy changes.
Pillar II: Personnel Database –Candidates create professional profiles for review by coalition members. Recommendations are collated and shared with the President-elect’s team to streamline appointments.
Pillar III: Presidential Administration Academy –Online educational system taught by coalition experts. Provides newcomers with an understanding of government operations and roles. Offers in-person seminars for advanced training of senior leadership.
Pillar IV: The 180-Day Playbook- Forms agency teams and drafts transition plans that the next republican president is expected to implement within the first 180 days held in office.

While the pillars themselves are foundational to the purpose of Project 2025, they do not form the distinct sections of the document are only inferred upon its 30 chapters. These chapters lay out a myriad of clear and concrete policy recommendations for White House offices, Cabinet departments, Congress, and other federal agencies. These policy recommendations have been meticulously crafted to resonate with the ideological tenets of conservative politics. Moreover, they are underpinned by four overarching objectives that collectively embody the individuals promised that make up the ‘Conservative Promise,’ which have been declared with precision in the list below:

Restore the family as the centrepiece of American life and protect our children: Focus on policies and initiatives aimed at strengthening family units and ensuring the well-being and safety of children within society.
Dismantle the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people: Advocate for reducing bureaucratic control and empowering individuals and local communities to make decisions that affect their lives.
Defend our nation’s sovereignty, borders, and bounty against global threats: Prioritize national security measures to safeguard borders, protect American interests, and counteract external threats to sovereignty.
Secure our God-given individual rights to live freely—what our Constitution calls “the Blessings of Liberty”: Ensure that constitutional freedoms and liberties are protected, allowing individuals to live their lives without undue government interference.

As the promises above underscores, much of the economic, social and governance polices detailed in the document are designed to streamline the President’s thought processes to focus firmly on the foundational moral and economic challenges that USA faces in its current day and age. It is their belief that by restoring America’s moral values, the success of conservative policies would blossom which they believe was resonant during the Reagan Era where right-wing politics saw its successful peak. Despite some of its ideas sounding affirming on paper, Project 2025 was heavily subjected to criticism and scepticism even amongst populists’ right voters triggering wide spread debate. Th followings sections detail the projects key controversies and criticisms.

The Criticisms of Project 2025

According to former US Secretary Robert Reich, a significant source of criticism surrounding Project 2025, widely shared among academics, stems from the constraints it imposes on American social policy as well as its plans to foster what seem like a Christian nationalistic democracy. For instance, the document outlines strategies aimed at gradually dismantling pro-abortion laws, reducing subsidies to medical institutions conducting abortion research and contraception, and advocating for the withdrawal of abortion pills from the US market. In the realm of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), the project proposes eliminating what it terms as “Woke Propaganda” from laws and federal regulations. This includes potentially penalizing the extensive use of terms like “sexual orientation,” “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” “gender equality,” and “reproductive rights” in educational settings and media. Additionally, Project 2025 advocates for expanding domestic oil drilling while terminating environmental agencies and withdrawing from international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. These social policies are indicative of Project 2025’s strong advocation to align the USA with the Judeo-Christian Ideals the conservatives form the foundation of the nations moral values. However, inherently rooted in these polices is the rejection of female reproductive wellbeing, restriction of freedom of speech and total disregard for the environmental and external costs caused by the economy on human wellbeing.

Project 2025 opens a window onto how the modern American conservative movement would shape the nations future and the world it encircles. According to Senior Researcher, Emma Shortis, the proposal features frequent discussion on the restructuring and dismantling of several federal bodies and agencies including the CIA and Export-Import Bank. While these initiatives maybe consistent with right-wing ideology that seek to shrink the government, many seem to speculate that these recommendations are part of a broader plan to restore the Unitary Executive Theory which would ultimately disequilibrate the distribution of power between the 3 branches giving the president an unchecked degree of power and control that some critics argue is resonant with fascist principles. Critics of Project 2025 argue against this centralization of executive power, citing risks such as potential abuse of authority and reduced democratic representation. They contend that decentralized federal systems better uphold democratic principles by ensuring diverse regional input and maintaining checks and balances through transparent oversight. While centralization may streamline decision-making, it could compromise accountability and resilience in responding to diverse societal needs. Moreover, critics warn of the susceptibility to policy capture by special interests, potentially undermining public interest and democratic governance.

Beyond debates over social policy and political governance lies the intriguing interaction between Project 2025 and Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. As the leading Republican candidate, Trump’s potential victory, supported by statistical evidence from electoral polls and surveys, positions him at the forefront of shaping future conservative agendas. One might assume Trump’s campaign would naturally align with the ideals and plans outlined in Project 2025, given his historical ties to the Heritage Foundation. However, Trump has consistently distanced himself from the project, a stance that has sparked controversy. In a post on Truth-Social following a presidential debate, Trump stated, “I have no idea who is behind it,” and criticized aspects of Project 2025 as “ridiculous and abysmal.” This denialism has fuelled speculation about whether Trump’s disavowal is a political tactic aimed at safeguarding his campaign against potential attacks from Democratic opponents who might paint Project 2025 as extremist right-wing politics. According to Washington Post reporter Patrick Svitech, Trump’s strategy appears to be a calculated move to protect his public image. By disavowing any association with Project 2025, he may mitigate criticism and maintain broader appeal among voters. However, whether Trump’s denials are genuine or strategic remains uncertain. Looking ahead, the question looms whether Trump’s potential victory would indeed see the implementation of Project 2025’s ambitious agenda starting from January 2025. Only time will reveal the extent of Trump’s actual involvement with Project 2025 and how it might shape future policy directions if he assumes office.

The US Economy Under Project 2025: 3 Insights

The economic section of Project 2025 outlines a comprehensive agenda focused on revitalising economic policies to benefit ordinary Americans and strengthen national sovereignty. It critiques decades of elite-driven governance that neglected securing borders, outsourced manufacturing and mismanaged the federal budget. While aiming to correct these failure, Project 2025 seems to be emphasising a return to foundational principles of securing individual rights and fostering free enterprise through economic policy. The discussion spans diverse viewpoints on trade policy, advocating either for minimal government intervention to promote free trade and economic growth, as argued by Kent Lassman, or for a more protective stance to safeguard American manufacturing and defence capabilities against global competition, as advocated by Peter Navarro. Beyond trade, debates include the role of institutions like the Export-Import Bank and the Department of Commerce in shaping economic strategy, reflecting broader concerns about regulatory efficiency, strategic economic planning, and defending against international economic threats.

Based on my personal analyses and engagement of the pages dedicated to this section of the document, there are certain economic proposal and policies that are of particular interest which I believe would be of most use for debate and discussion by the wider academic community. To simplify my findings, I have based my analysis on the assumption that three key functions of economic management for any federal administration are as follows:

Provision of Public Services – Providing essential services and other public as well as merit good that maybe under-provided or disincentivised by the private sector. It also concerns decisions regarding privatisation, nationalisation, mergers and acquisitional s well as strategic choices to dismantle, distribution or diversify public sector service between the private sector.
Regulation and Oversight – Designing and Intervening in markets when they fail to align with direct and indirect regulation as well as implementing new regulation and oversight measure to prevent market failures and unfair outcomes. This extends to regulating foreign investments opportunities, both inward and outwards, and aligning them with national security interests as well as economic interests.
Economic Growth & Stabilisation – Leveraging the use monetary and fiscal polices to stimulate economic growth and stabilise parts of the economy like prices and exchange rates as well as dynamically responding exogenous and internal shocks within the business cycle.

I have presented case that aligns with each function mostly of beneficial used with a brief description and evaluation of its implication on the fulfilment of USA’s macroeconomic objectives.

Provision of Public Services: The Case of the NOAA

Right-wing politics, viewed through an economic lens, places a strong emphasis on reducing the government’s role in the provision of services, often favouring the privatisation of these services. The concept of shrinking the government, which aligns with Republican policies, ensures that privatization proposals are a recurring theme in Project 2025. One of the most ambitious of these plans involves restructuring and reallocating the functions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a federal institution comprising six offices dedicated to oceanic, atmospheric, satellite, and meteorological data analysis and research. These, offices not only conduct research but also provide structured information to promote environmental stewardship within the private sector. However, the authors of Project 2025 argue that this represents an inefficient use of federal funds, consuming over 50% of the Department of Commerce’s budget without delivering observable improvements in environmental efficiency.

Rather than dismantling NOAA entirely, Project 2025 proposes a comprehensive review and redistribution of its functions between the private and public sectors. For example, it has been suggested that meteorological services be fully privatised, atmospheric research be downsized, and the environmental surveying functions be transferred to the U.S. Coast Guard. Once most services in the field are privatized, the project also focuses on plans to enhance competition by introducing innovation prizes and encouraging the entry of small businesses into the research industry. This approach to commercialize NOAA and its functions, rather than completely dismantling it, aims to enhance efficiency by leveraging private sector capabilities for environmental research services and reallocating environmental stewardship roles to a more suitable public agency. In the long run, through further privatization and responsibility transfer, not only will the cost-efficiency and economic sustainability of these organizations be maintained, but greater environmental sustainability is also expected. This will be encouraged through the innovative and competitive environment fostered by the NOAA.

Regulation & Oversight: The Case of Chinese FDI

Project 2025 proposes a strategic realignment of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to address current geopolitical threats, particularly from China. Key initiatives include developing a transparent mitigation monitoring program, publishing a penalty schedule for CFIUS violations, and advocating for legislative amendments to cover Chinese greenfield investments. Additionally, the plan suggests making the Department of Defence (DOD) a co-chair of CFIUS alongside the Treasury to balance corporate and national security interests. There is also a recommendation for creating a joint school of financial warfare with DOD to enhance the U.S.’s ability to use financial strategies and instruments against geopolitical threats although the details of this have not been specified. Lastly, Treasury is urged to scrutinize U.S. outward foreign direct investment in China, particularly those enhance China’s technology, research innovation and partnerships with state-sector organisation that could be exploited against the USA’s economic interests.

Despite the ambiguity of the proposed measures, it is certain that the implementation of these plans aims to strategically enhance the U.S.’s national security by ensuring a more balanced and transparent CFIUS process that prioritizes security over corporate interests. The proposed penalties and monitoring would deter violations and ensure compliance, while closing the greenfield investment loophole that would protect critical U.S. assets from Chinese state control. Elevating the DOD’s role in CFIUS would ensure national security concerns are adequately represented while the financial warfare school would prepare the U.S. to effectively use financial tools in geopolitical conflicts. Despite the expected impact the Project proposes, it fails to consider what maybe the global response to these measures especially considering increased FDI screening and the development of financial warfare. Undoubtedly countries could retaliate against these measures by implanting similar controls on outward US FDI exacerbating further international disputes. The Project would have to consider the contingency plans that would be set in place in the event the reception of its security plans is unfavourable among international investors. Nevertheless, these changes are expected to bolster economic and national security, reduce vulnerabilities to Chinese economic statecraft, and promote a more secure and resilient economic environment.

Economic Growth & Stabilisation: The Case of Tax Policy

Project 2025 recognises the powerful impacts of tax policy on economic outcomes and has therefore emphasises the Treasury to reform tax legislation centred around the promotion of prosperity defined by greater work, savings and investment incentives. Primarily, Project 2025’s proposal to achieve a simplified tax system that reduces marginal tax rates and corporate costs of capital while enlarging the tax base in order to tax-induced economic distortions. Furthermore, the document defines the principles of an idea tax policy as one that prioritises revenue for a limited government while minimising its impact on the family and core institutions of US civil society. It also recognises the importance of consistent policy which additionally involved ensuring that special privileges are less likely to be granted. Current US Tax policies are inconsistent with the Project’s principles and therefore in order to reform tax policy effectively, The Treasury has been advised to start implementing tax reforms immediately once the new administration takes office. It is expected that the new tax reforms would be of benefit to most economic participants with businesses and families being at the centre of policy-making. The following list is an exhaust summary of the technical specificities Project 2025 proposes with regards to Tax reformation:

Simplified Two-Rate Individual Tax System:

15% and 30% tax brackets.
Eliminate most deductions, credits, and exclusions.
30% bracket starts near the Social Security wage base for a nearly flat tax on wage income beyond the standard deduction.

Corporate Income Tax Reduction:

Reduce corporate tax rate to 18%.
Tax capital gains and qualified dividends at 15%.
Immediate expensing for capital expenditures.
Index capital gains taxes for inflation.

Repeal Tax Increases from Inflation Reduction Act:

Remove book minimum tax, stock buyback excise tax, coal excise tax, reinstated Superfund tax, and excise taxes on drug manufacturers.

Eliminate Recent Subsidies and Tax Breaks:

Repeal credits and tax breaks for green energy companies from Subtitle D of the Inflation Reduction Act.

CONLCUSION

In summary, Project 2025 presents a comprehensive and ambitious plan to reshape American governance, social policy, and economic strategy under a new Republican administration. The project’s four pillars provide a structured approach to governance, personnel management, education, and policy implementation. While the proposed policies aim to address perceived shortcomings of the current administration and restore conservative values, they have sparked significant debate and criticism. Critics highlight concerns about the potential rollback of social policies, the centralization of executive power, and the implications for international relations and environmental sustainability. The economic section, with its focus on tax reform, regulation of foreign investments, and privatization of public services, offers thought-provoking insights but also raises questions about the broader impacts on American society and the global economy. As the 2024 elections approach, the implementation and reception of Project 2025’s proposals will be closely watched, determining their actual influence on the future of the United States.

REFERENCES

Reich, R. (2024, July 8). We should all be terrified of Trump’s Project 2025. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/06/trump-project-2025-robert-reich

Svitek, P. (2024) Trump tries to distance himself from project 2025 plan – The Washington Post, Trump tries to distance himself from Project 2025 plan. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/05/trump-project-2025-disavowal

Roberts, K. and Dans, P. (2024) Mandate for leadership: The conservative promise, Mandate for leadership: The Conservative Promise. Available at: https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf (Accessed: 17 July 2024).