Russell Vought, one of the chief architects of Project 2025 — a conservative blueprint for the next presidency — is no fan of the federal government that President-elect Donald Trump will soon lead.
He believes “woke” civil servants and “so-called expert authorities” wield illegitimate power to block conservative White House directives from deep within federal agencies, and wants Trump to “bend or break” that bureaucracy to his will, he wrote in the second chapter of the Project 2025 playbook.
Vought is a vocal proponent of a plan known as Schedule F, under which Trump would fire thousands of career civil servants with extensive experience in their fields and replace them with his own political loyalists, and of Christian nationalism, which would see American governance aligned with Christian teachings. Both are core tenets of Project 2025.
Throughout his campaign, Trump adamantly disavowed Project 2025, even though its policies overlapped with his and some of its authors worked in his first administration. He castigated anyone who suggested the blueprint, which polls showed was deeply unpopular among voters, represented his aims for the presidency.
But last week, the president-elect nominated Vought to lead the Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the White House budget and its policy agenda across the federal government.
Trump called Vought, who held the same role during his first term, an “aggressive cost cutter and deregulator” who “knows exactly how to dismantle the Deep State and end Weaponized Government.”
The nomination was one of several Trump has made since his election that have called into question his claims on the campaign trail that Project 2025 was not his playbook and held no sway over him or his plans for a second term.
He selected Tom Homan, a Project 2025 contributor and former visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, the conservative organization behind the blueprint, as his “border czar.” Trump named Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner also linked to Project 2025, as his deputy chief of staff for policy. Both also served in the first Trump administration.
He also named Brendan Carr to serve on the Federal Communications Commission. Carr wrote a chapter of Project 2025 on the FCC, which regulates U.S. internet access and TV and radio networks, and has echoed Trump’s claims that news broadcasters have engaged in political bias against Trump.
Trump named John Ratcliffe as his pick for CIA director and Pete Hoekstra as ambassador to Canada. Both are Project 2025 contributors. It has also been reported that the Trump transition team is filling lower-level government spots using a Project 2025 database of conservative candidates.
During the campaign Trump said that he knew “nothing about” Project 2025 and that he found some of its ideas “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” In response to news in July that Project 2025’s director, Paul Dans, was leaving his post, Trump campaign managers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles — whom the president-elect has since named his chief of staff — issued a statement saying that “reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed.”
Asked about Trump’s selection of several people with Project 2025 connections to serve in his administration, Trump transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt responded with a statement, saying Trump “never had anything to do with Project 2025.”
“This has always been a lie pushed by the Democrats and the legacy media, but clearly the American people did not buy it because they overwhelmingly voted for President Trump to implement the promises that he made on the campaign trail,” Leavitt wrote. “All of President Trump’s cabinet nominees and appointments are whole-heartedly committed to President Trump’s agenda, not the agenda of outside groups.”
Leavitt too has ties to Project 2025, having appeared in a training video for it.
In addition to calling for much greater power in the hands of the president, Project 2025 calls for less federal intervention in certain areas — including through the elimination of the Department of Education. It calls for much stricter immigration enforcement and mass deportations — a policy priority of Trump’s as well — and rails against environmental protections, calling for the demolition of key environmental agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service.
It calls for tougher restrictions on abortion and for the federal government to collect data on women who seek an abortion, and backs a slew of measures that would strip rights from LGBTQ+ people.
For Trump’s critics, his selections make it clear that his disavowal of the conservative playbook was nothing more than a campaign ploy to pacify voters who viewed the plan as too far to the right. It’s an argument many were making before the election as well.
“There are many of us who tried to sound the alarm bell before the election,” when voters still had the power to keep such a plan from coming to fruition, said Ben Olinsky, senior vice president of structural reform and governance at the liberal Center for American Progress.
Now, he said, he expects many of the more “draconian pieces” of Project 2025 to start being implemented given the nominees Trump has put forward. That includes Vought’s plan to eviscerate the career civil service, the core of American government, by doing away with merit-based staffing in favor of loyalty-based appointments, Olinsky said.
“We know what happened before there was a merit-based civil service. There was cronyism in American government, and we can look back through history and see that kind of graft and cronyism,” Olinsky said.
Filling the government with Trump loyalists will clear the way for more policies of Project 2025 to be implemented without resistance, Olinsky said.
Olinsky said the Supreme Court and the Republican-controlled House have already proved they are not willing to stand up to Trump.
There are “still some institutionalists” in the Senate — soon to be controlled by Republicans, as well — who could leverage their power to push back, he said, but it is not clear that they will.
Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has signaled that he may be willing to do so: According to reports from his home state, he said at a local Chamber of Commerce event Tuesday that all presidents try to push policy through executive action, and that Congress “sometimes will have to put the brakes on.”
In the end, Olinsky said, real resistance might come only once Americans start realizing that Trump’s new government, stripped of all of its experts, is failing them in serious ways.
“They do care about their Social Security checks being delivered. They do care about the nation being defended properly. They care that, when they turn on the faucet, they will drink water that won’t sicken them and their kids,” Olinsky said. “And that’s what requires expertise.”
