Some Ethical Questions on Project 2025
In our recent Project 2025 informational post on social media, we introduced some of the ideas proposed by Project 2025 as well as the concerns this proposal raises. As Mormon Women for Ethical Government, we believe diversity of thought is an important ingredient in a vibrant democracy. A healthy democracy follows deliberative processes that facilitate productive disagreement and allow voters to have their voices heard, provide input and feedback to influence legislation, and participate in a robust public system that promotes broad representation of views.
A basic overview of Project 2025
Project 2025, a document outlining a sweeping reform of American government, has been created and published by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, and other conservative thought partners. It includes many specific policy endorsements as well as extensive changes to the structure of government.
The policies espoused by the plan cover a wide range of topics, from restructuring the federal Department of Education to further restricting eligibility requirements for programs like SNAP/EBT and Medicaid. There are many existing resources that describe and review the specific policy recommendations contained in the plan. But throughout the document, the various policy changes are structured within a broader reform of the scaffolding of government that would dramatically change the balance of power in American government.
At the crux of Project 2025 is a consolidation of power to the executive branch of the federal government. To illustrate the scope and breadth of these proposed changes, it is first necessary to understand how and why the structure of our democracy was first designed.
A legacy of checks and balances
The United States Constitution, signed and ratified in 1787, established the composition of the federal government. Articles I-III of the Constitution create the three branches of government — legislative, executive, and judicial — and articulate the powers given to each.
Additional clarification of these branches and their roles occurred with the adoption of the 12th and 25th Amendments to the Constitution (which address or clarify details of the presidential election and succession process), as well as the Judiciary Act of 1789, passed by the First Congress, which clarified the role of federal district and circuit courts under the Supreme Court. Additionally, Article V of the Constitution outlines the process for amending the Constitution, which is a more intensive process than passing a law, with a higher threshold for passage — endorsement by two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and Senate in Congress, as well as ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
This separation of power, and the checks and balances it creates, is the fundamental principle on which our Constitutional democracy rests. The creation of the U.S. and its representative governmental structure was a bold departure from the monarchist or imperial traditions of Europe and elsewhere. Rather than consolidate power to one head of state, the U.S. government was designed to distribute the powers of the federal government among its branches. This allows each to offset and counterbalance the others and to provide a degree of accountability among them. It ensures each branch of government is acting within the bounds established by the Constitution, and if one of the branches pushes its authority too far, one of the other branches of government may step in, based on their responsibilities and duties, to provide a check on that power through the established processes of government.
Project 2025: Shifting the balance of power
By removing the checks and balances that are a fundamental part of our democracy, Project 2025 seeks to shift the balance of power among the branches of government in ways that could dramatically change how our country functions. We should be concerned if anyone, of any political party, is suggesting such a significant change to the federal government without the full breadth of the prescribed deliberative process.
The changes proposed in Project 2025, if implemented in a unilateral and imprudent way, promote a vision of governance that is unethical because it prescribes shifts in government without deliberation and representation as part of the process. In doing so, it prevents the American people from having a voice in their government and in determining the direction of the country through voting and other participatory democratic processes.
Many aspects of Project 2025 seek to consolidate power in the executive branch. Project 2025 also calls for judiciary and other appointed positions to be responsive to the executive branch. This is in direct opposition to the composition of the U.S. government as imagined by America’s founders. In the Constitution, the branches of government are established to balance one another, with each countering potential overreach or inappropriate action of the others.
Transparency vs. obfuscation
Although Project 2025 has been published and made publicly available, this does not necessarily constitute transparency. The document is more than 900 pages; its length makes it inaccessible for most Americans who do not have the time to study such a protracted document. In addition, Project 2025 often employs veiled or coded language that may obscure its true purposes or aims. Small details in proposed policy can have broad impacts and can be overlooked when included in a high volume of policy materials.
This introduction has only scratched the surface of Project 2025 and its envisioned changes for the country. In future articles we will look at a timeline of events surrounding Project 2025 and its public reception. We will also look at the changes Project 2025 is proposing to the civil service and administrative agencies. Join the conversation on MWEG Central to discuss your questions or concerns about Project 2025 with other MWEG members.
