Project 2025: Overview

This overview provides insights into Project 2025, a comprehensive policy document crafted by the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation. Project 2025 is an agenda for a potential Republican-Trump presidency in 2025. While former President Donald Trump has distanced himself from the 2025 policy proposals, it is essential to note that dozens of former Trump officials have contributed to the document's creation. And in 2017, the foundation boasted that Trump had already enacted more than half of its 2016 proposals. Lastly, three Members of Congress from California’s San Joaquin Valley and the Inland Empire are already voting for policies that advance Project 2025’s agenda of giving Trump unchecked powers.

Listen to the 13-minute podcast here.

Central Themes:

Project 2025 emphasizes four key areas:

• Restoring the Traditional Family: This involves promoting a "biblically based" definition of marriage and family, restricting access to abortion, and eliminating what it deems "woke" ideologies from education and government.
• Dismantling the Administrative State: The plan aims to centralize power in the presidency by consolidating agencies and replacing career civil servants with political appointees. It explicitly targets the FBI and Department of Education for elimination or significant restructuring.
• Strengthening National Sovereignty and Borders: Key proposals include increased border wall funding, stricter immigration policies, including visa limits, and a more significant, more powerful border patrol force.
• Securing Individual Freedoms: This encompasses promoting "God-given" rights, advocating for deregulation and tax cuts, and bolstering energy independence by prioritizing fossil fuels.

Key Facts & Controversies:

• Authorship & Influence: Project 2025, authored by the Heritage Foundation with contributions from over 100 conservative groups and former Trump administration officials, raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest and undue influence on a future administration.
• Executive Power Expansion: The document advocates for a "unitary executive theory," which would grant the president significant control over the federal bureaucracy. Critics see this move as a threat to checks and balances.
• Abortion Restrictions: While not explicitly calling for a nationwide ban, the plan suggests withdrawing the abortion pill mifepristone, limiting access to emergency contraception, and potentially using the Comstock Act to restrict access to abortion medication by mail.
• Economic Policy: Project 2025 proposes significant tax cuts, deregulation, and a potential return to the gold standard—ideas that have been criticized for potentially exacerbating inequality and economic instability.
• Social Policy: The plan seeks to curtail LGBTQ+ rights by eliminating terms like "sexual orientation" and "gender equality" from federal documents and dismantling diversity programs.

Impact on California:

The Center for American Progress argues that Project 2025 would disproportionately harm Californians, citing potential impacts such as:

• Increased Tax Burden: "The typical family of four in California would see a tax increase of $3,201 per year" while the wealthy receive significant tax breaks.
• Social Security Cuts: Raising the retirement age, a proposal endorsed by Project 2025 authors, would "cut benefits by $4,100 to $8,900 after just one year" for many Californians.
• Healthcare Access Reduced: The plan proposes limiting Medicaid benefits, potentially jeopardizing coverage for millions in California. It also aims to eliminate out-of-pocket drug cost limits for Medicare beneficiaries.
• Childcare and Education Funding Cuts: Eliminating Head Start would result in "85,236 low-income children in California" losing access to crucial early childhood education. Additionally, defunding Title I would severely impact schools serving low-income students.

Conclusion:

Project 2025 represents a dangerous and controversial conservative agenda for reshaping American society. While its future remains uncertain, the document has sparked fierce debate about the direction of the country and the potential consequences of its implementation. Its proposals regarding executive power, social safety net programs, and individual rights have raised significant concerns among critics, who view it as a roadmap for Trump to have an authoritarian and profoundly unequal society. 

How are California’s Battleground Congressional Candidates Responding?

California Congressional District 13 

John Duarte represents the San Joaquin Valley as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. He has been criticized for being out of touch with working-class families, particularly the Latino communities that make up more than half of his constituency. Despite his promises to champion their interests, John Duarte has shown a pattern of prioritizing conservative party lines over the needs of local neighborhoods. His record includes voting against common-sense solutions for affordable housing and healthcare, and his refusal to engage meaningfully with families in the Valley—avoiding public town halls to keep a low profile—suggests he is more interested in maintaining his position in Congress than serving his constituents effectively. His votes, such as those in favor of conservative extremist bills on immigration and his continued support for restrictive abortion measures, reflect a disconnect from the values that many in the Valley hold dear. Instead of addressing the needs of families, he has largely aligned himself with party politics, becoming a rubber stamp for policies that benefit the few, not working-class families. John Duarte plans to continue executing the extremist policy agenda outlined in Project 2025 and has already:

1. Voted to deny rental assistance to Valley seniors and families, increasing the risk of homelessness. Project 2025 addresses this on page 509 and John Duarte voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would raise housing costs and eliminate emergency housing vouchers for thousands of Californians.
2. Voted to severely restrict women’s access to reproductive healthcare. Project 2025’s belief that life begins at “the moment of conception” and this is carried out by radical policies that would make the delivery of abortion medication illegal (page 562). John Duarte voted to pass the FY24 Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Act, which would have placed a new nationwide restriction on the safe, legal abortion medication mifepristone.
3. Voted to take away food support from 136,000 Californians, making the cost of living even higher. Project 2025 addresses this on page 299 and John Duarte voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which expands harsh work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assitance Program (SNAP) benefits.
4. Voted to cut Medicaid benefits, threatening the health of 4.1 million Californians. Project 2025 addresses this on page 468, and John Duarte voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would implement these policies.
5. Prioritized corporations instead of Valley families by advocating to defund the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which was enacted as a result of the 2007-08 financial crisis. On page 839, Project 2025 outlines abolishing the CFPB so banking regulators can provide consumer protection again, and John Duarte signed an amicus brief to dismantle the CFPB in 2023.
6. Voted to get rid of almost 46,000 preschool and childcare slots in the state. Project 2025 addresses this on page 476 and 486, and John Duarte voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would make it more difficult for parents to join the workforce.

California Congressional District 22 

David Valadao has represented the San Joaquin Valley as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for the past ten years. Despite casting a single high-profile vote for the impeachment of Trump, David Valadao’s voting pattern suggests alignment with the ultra-conservative wing of the Republican Party, contradicting the moderate image he promotes. David Valadao's tendency to avoid public scrutiny further underscores this discrepancy. He has refrained from holding public town halls, preferring to keep a low profile, which many critics see as a way to avoid "rocking the boat" and drawing attention to his alignment with conservative extremists. This strategy has allowed him to remain in Congress, mainly as a reliable vote for the conservative agenda, while avoiding direct accountability to his constituents. Despite representing a politically diverse district, David Valadao's reluctance to engage publicly undermines his claims of being an independent, moderate voice for the Valley. David Valadao has no plan to address the housing crisis, lower the cost of living, or make healthcare more affordable and accessible. Instead, he plans to execute the extremist policy agenda outlined in Project 2025 and has already voted to:

1. Deny rental assistance to Valley seniors and families, increasing the risk of homelessness. Project 2025 addresses this on page 509, and David Valadao voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act (Default on America Act), which would raise housing costs and eliminate emergency housing vouchers for thousands of Californians.
2. Take away food support from 136,000 Californians, making the cost of living even higher. Project 2025 addresses this on page 299, and David Valadao voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which expands harsh work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assitance Program (SNAP) benefits.
3. Cut Medicaid benefits, threatening the health of 4.1 million Californians. Project 2025 addresses this on page 468, and David Valadao voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would implement these policies.
4. Increase out-of-pocket insulin costs for Medicare beneficiaries. Project 2025 addresses repealing the drug price negotiation program on page 465, which is directly connected to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). David Valadao voted against the IRA, which caps monthly out-of-pocket insulin costs for Medicare beneficiaries at $35 per month.
5. Get rid of almost 46,000 preschool and childcare slots in the state. Project 2025 addresses this on page 476 and 486, and David Valadao voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would make it more difficult for parents to join the workforce.

California Congressional District 41 

Ken Calvert has been a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for the past 31 yeas, and has become increasingly out of touch with the changing demographics of the region. As one of the longest-serving Republicans in California, his time in office has been marked by stagnation and an inability to address the evolving needs of working-class families. His alignment with the far-right wing of the Republican Party, including his support for Trump’s extreme agenda, reflects his disconnect from the moderate and diverse voters of the Inland Empire. Ken Calvert’s political record is a testament to his loyalty to conservative extremists. Despite his long tenure, Ken Calvert has failed to deliver meaningful progress on critical issues like affordable housing, healthcare, and improving education in the region. Instead, he plans to execute the extremist policy agenda outlined in Project 2025 and has already voted to:

1. Deny rental assistance to seniors and families in the region, increasing the risk of homelessness. Project 2025 addresses this on page 509 and Ken Calvert voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would raise housing costs and eliminate emergency housing vouchers for thousands of Californians.
2. Severely restrict women’s access to reproductive healthcare. Project 2025’s belief is that life begins at “the moment of conception,” and this is carried out by radical policies that would make the delivery of abortion medication illegal (page 562). Ken Calvert voted to pass the FY24 Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Act, which would have placed a new nationwide restriction on the safe, legal abortion medication mifepristone.
3. Increase out-of-pocket insulin costs for Medicare beneficiaries. Project 2025 addresses repealing the drug price negotiation program on page 465, which is directly connected to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Ken Calvert voted against the IRA, which caps monthly out-of-pocket insulin costs for Medicare beneficiaries at $35 per month.
4. Cut Medicaid benefits, threatening the health of 4.1 million Californians. Project 2025 addresses this on page 468, and Ken Calvert voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would implement these policies.
5. Take away food support from 136,000 Californians, making the cost of living even higher. Project 2025 addresses this on page 299 and Ken Calvert voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which expands harsh work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assitance Program (SNAP) benefits.
6. Get rid of almost 46,000 preschool and childcare slots in the state. Project 2025 addresses this on page 476 and 486, and Ken Calvert voted to pass the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would make it more difficult for parents to join the workforce.

Rather than representing the diverse needs of California’s battleground regions, John Duarte, David Valadao, and Ken Calvert have chosen to use fear and division to maintain their power. Their outdated views on important issues, combined with their inability to respond to the changing needs of their constituents, make them out-of-touch and out-of-time representatives. The future of the state’s battleground regions demand a new kind of leadership that values progress and unity over partisanship and extremism.