Project 2025: The plan for radical republicans to take America back to the 1700s

[WhatTheBuck 28604]

1 hour ago, ROFL BOX said:

If you're gonna DL this .pdf, you will probably wanna do it on a computer vs. your phone.

https://www.project2025.org/policy/

It’s only 7.1 MB. Shouldn’t be a problem for anyone’s phone. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11728]

Still wondering why Dixon Hurr is an independent.  What that means to me is someone is unwilling to commit to a side until they get promised something.  You as an independent will not get shit.   Your indecision will fuck the rest of us over.   You have a right to vote, but yo don’t deserve one.  

[TwiceHorn 30834]

2 hours ago, SKJ said:

Yes... we should end bailouts?

I know the language is stayed too be ambiguous,  but...

Also nasty that endnote 25 equates deposit insurance with bank bailouts.  In a very broad sense, they are comparable; in any realistic sense (small-time individual who lacks information vs. professional financial institution with scads of information) it is a very invidious comparison and shows you what they're thinking.

[bolverk 29036]

Lengthy article about the GQP fucking up the entire election.

Unbowed by Jan. 6 Charges, Republicans Pursue Plans to Contest a Trump Defeat
Mr. Trump’s allies are preparing to try to short-circuit the election system, if he does not win.

The Republican Party and its conservative allies are engaged in an unprecedented legal campaign targeting the American voting system. Their wide-ranging and methodical effort is laying the groundwork to contest an election that they argue, falsely, is already being rigged against former President Donald J. Trump.

The campaign involves a powerful network of Republican lawyers and activist groups, working loosely in concert with the Republican National Committee. Many of the key players were active in Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

But unlike the chaotic and improvised challenge four years ago, the new drive includes a systematic search for any vulnerability in the nation’s patchwork election system.

Mr. Trump’s allies have followed a two-pronged approach: restricting voting for partisan advantage ahead of Election Day and short-circuiting the process of ratifying the winner afterward, if Mr. Trump loses. The latter strategy involves an ambitious — and legally dubious — attempt to reimagine decades of settled law dictating how results are officially certified in the weeks before the transfer of power.

At the heart of the strategy is a drive to convince voters that the election is about to be stolen, even without evidence. Democrats use mail voting, drop boxes and voter registration drives to swing elections, they have argued. And Mr. Trump’s indictments and criminal conviction are a Biden administration gambit to interfere with the election, they claim.

“As things stand right now, there’s zero chance of a free and fair election,” Mike Howell, a project director at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said at an event this week. “I’m formally accusing the Biden administration of creating the conditions that most reasonable policymakers and officials cannot in good conscience certify an election.”

The legal campaign, which has come into focus as Republicans prepare to nominate Mr. Trump at their convention next week, has been quietly playing out in courts, statehouses and county boards for months, and is concentrated in critical battlegrounds.

In Nevada and several other states, Republicans have sued to tighten rules for voting by mail — currently a method preferred by Democrats. In Georgia and Arizona, they have filed lawsuits that, if successful, would effectively give local election board members the right to hold up certification and even conduct their own personal investigation into the vote.

Republicans say that their only goal is to bolster the system and build trust, especially after changes during the coronavirus pandemic made it easier to vote.

“The way we honestly think about this is making sure that every legal vote is counted legally,” an R.N.C. spokeswoman, Claire Fortenberry Zunk, said. “It essentially empowers all Americans, so that at no point in the system would you have someone whose vote is diluted or compromised.”

But Democrats, civil rights lawyers and even some Republicans say that the threat is clear: Even if the cases fail, Mr. Trump’s allies are building excuses to dispute the results, while trying to empower thousands of local election officials to disrupt the process. Already, election board members in several states have moved to block certification of primary election tallies, including in a major swing county in Nevada last week.

“The fundamental principle of the system — the rule of law, the finality of the results, the ability to challenge an election but then accept the results if the challenges fail — is being stood on its head,” said Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election lawyer who broke with his party over Mr. Trump.

Mr. Ginsberg and other election lawyers said they were confident that the system had enough checks and balances to hold, as it did in 2020.

Calling the effort “unlawful and undemocratic,” the Biden campaign has put in place a field army of lawyers to counter the Republican moves in every swing state, a level of concerted legal activity that has never happened this early in an election cycle.

cont'd

Spoiler

Some 2020 Veterans Return
A partisan tug of war over voting laws ahead of a major election is nothing new. The parties have long clashed in the courts over rules they hope may give them an edge. But the scope and the leadership of Republicans’ current campaign sets it apart.

The effort involves a sprawling network of groups and includes some people that worked to overturn the results in 2020 — a campaign that led to federal and state criminal charges against Mr. Trump and several of his associates.

Mr. Trump’s own homeland security officials called that election the “most secure in American history”; his attorney general said there was no evidence of substantial fraud, and Mr. Trump’s legal team lost all but one of the dozens of lawsuits it filed disputing results.

But this year, the R.N.C. has worked to align Trump allies behind a more coherent strategy. Its new leaders — Michael Whatley and his co-chair, Lara Trump, who is Mr. Trump’s daughter-in-law — have vowed to turn the party more fully toward preventing what they call “cheating.”

They have installed a new “senior counsel for election integrity” at the Republican Party headquarters: Christina Bobb, a lawyer indicted in Arizona on charges related to Mr. Trump’s attempt to dispute his defeat there. She has pleaded not guilty.

Cleta Mitchell, a Republican lawyer who was part of Mr. Trump’s push to overturn his loss in Georgia now runs the Election Integrity Network, a group that is advising activists on how to challenge voters’ eligibility.

The Heritage Foundation has provided institutional support and planning. Last month, the group war-gamed exercises exploring scenarios in a disputed election.

“What we need is everybody to be in the same boat, in the same direction and rowing at more or less the same time,” Mr. Whatley told reporters recently, adding that the party was working with governors, legislators and local boards of election. “Where we can’t get what we need in terms of our comfort level with state laws, we’re going to be filing those lawsuits.”

An Avalanche of Litigation
The party says it has filed more than 90 lawsuits on election rules. Allied groups have filed dozens more. Both Democrats and Republicans described the legal blitz as the most lawsuits ever filed before an election.

Many of these cases are continuing or caught up in the appeals process. Final decisions are unlikely to be reached until closer to the election. But the outcomes could affect election results.

In Nevada, the R.N.C. is suing to do away with a grace period that allows mail ballots sent by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within four days of the election. Voting rights advocates say that window ensures that voters aren’t disenfranchised by postal delays. Republicans argue, however, that the grace period runs counter to the concept of a national “Election Day” and only increase chances that votes cast late are counted.

In 2022, 40,000 ballots from the state’s two most populous counties arrived within that grace period; the margin of victory for the Democratic incumbent in the Senate, Catherine Cortez Masto, was 8,000 votes.

In a similar case in Mississippi, the R.N.C. has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to eliminate the state’s five-day grace period — an attempt, lawyers with the Biden campaign believe, to get the case before the nation’s most conservative federal appellate court, the Fifth Circuit, and invalidate grace periods altogether.

Activists across the country, often with guidance from the Election Integrity Network, have been challenging voter registrations en masse, often using faulty databases to question voters who are eligible to vote.

Democrats are particularly concerned about the tactic in Georgia, where a new law has made it far easier for one voter to challenge another’s registration. Two days after the new law went into effect, the Republican county chair in Bibb County challenged the eligibility of 243 voters.

Marc Elias, a leading Democratic election lawyer, said he believed that the Republican lawsuits were not about curbing fraud, and not just about keeping Democratic votes from being counted.

The disputes provide a pretext for pro-Trump election officials to “challenge votes and not have votes accurately counted and certified,” he said.

Short-Circuiting the System
The process of making a winner official is slow, local and, largely, pageantry.

First, thousands of election boards collect tallies from the voting precincts, certify their accuracy and send them up to the state capitals. There, the numbers are audited, certified again and sent to Washington ahead of the Electoral College vote in mid December. Even after that, Congress must sign off on the final result at a ceremony presided over by the vice president, on Jan. 6, before a new administration can take power.

State and federal laws define this process as ceremonial — prescribing that those involved “shall” certify the vote tallies upon receiving them and checking them. Disputes over alleged fraud or major errors are typically left to recounts and courts.

Voting against certification was practically unheard-of in presidential elections until late in 2020, when Trump allies sought to block certification in Wayne County, Mich. — and until Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of protesters sought to block Congress from certifying the election results.

Since then, members of state and local boards have voted against certification more than 20 times across eight states, according to a list compiled by Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group that tracks antidemocratic trends in the United States. In most cases, the board members were outvoted or, when they weren’t, courts or officials forced them to certify the vote. (In one case, in Arizona, two board members who voted against certification have been criminally charged, pleading not guilty.)

But Republicans and their allies are working to redefine the board members’ duties.

Election lawyers are carefully watching a dispute in Fulton County, Ga. A pro-Trump group, the America First Policy Institute, filed a lawsuit last month on behalf of a conservative member of the local elections board who has refused to certify primary results this year.

The board member, Julie Adams, who has been active with the Election Integrity Network, said that she was not provided with the reams of voter information she wanted to personally determine the results were accurate and not marred by fraud.

The lawsuit said that she was within her rights to conduct such an investigation because, as part of her oath, she swore to “prevent fraud, deceit and abuse.”

The Democratic National Committee, which intervened in the case, countered that “members have no discretion to refuse to certify election results.” Giving them that power, they wrote in court papers, “would invite chaos.”

Chaos has already erupted in northern Nevada’s Washoe County, where a fight over certification has prompted a moderate Republican board member to vote against certifying her own victory.

The board member, Clara Andriola, was seen as a firewall against a right-wing, anti-certification faction on the commission. A group connected to the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State even ran ads supporting her in her primary race, worried that her defeat would jeopardize a smooth approval of presidential results in the fall.

Two weeks ago, Ms. Andriola voted with the two Democrats to certify the election results showing her winning handily. But on Tuesday, after a recount affirmed her victory, she voted against certification, bending to pressure from right-wing protesters.

Nevada’s attorney general and its secretary of state, both Democrats, have since asked the State Supreme Court to compel the commission to certify the election as required by law and to clarify that local officials do not have the right to refuse to advance the process.

The results, meanwhile, remain in legal limbo.

A Ticking Clock
After Trump supporters rioted on Jan. 6, 2021, to disrupt the congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory, leaders in both parties set out to prevent a repeat. In 2022, Mr. Biden signed legislation making it harder to challenge the certification process.

The law set a new hard deadline for states to submit their final certified results; this year’s is Dec. 11. The date was intended to give judges and states incentive to settle disputes before the votes at the Electoral College and Congress.

But the law does not say clearly what would happen if a state misses its deadline.

“When deadlines are so tight, delay could really put us in a land of some legal uncertainty,” said Jessica Marsden, a lawyer who oversees elections work at Protect Democracy. “Bad actors might try to exploit that.”

For instance, if the situation in Washoe unfolded the same way this fall, Nevada would have less than a week to resolve the dispute. A resolution could require a court order — which could be followed by appeals or, potentially, by a refusal to abide a judge’s orders.

If Mr. Biden were to win Nevada, and if the state failed to send complete results on time, Ms. Marsden said that Republicans in the House and the Senate could seize on a missed deadline to justify rejecting Electoral College votes. (Under the law, a majority in both the House and Senate is needed to reject a state’s electors.)

“There is not a legal way to disrupt certification,’’ said Wendy R. Weiser, of the Brennan Center, a group that tracks election issues. “But if people in these positions believe there are fewer limits on what they can do and they have support for taking actions against the law, that will increase the likelihood we end up in a crisis situation.”

Biden campaign advisers say they believe this is unlikely; the law and the courts would intervene to keep the process on course before any worst-case scenarios could come to pass.

For his part, Mr. Whatley, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, was noncommittal when reporters recently asked him if his party would seek to block certification in any states this fall.

“We’re not going to cross any of those bridges right now,’’ he said.

 

[ROFL BOX 6622]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Lengthy article about the GQP fucking up the entire election.

Unbowed by Jan. 6 Charges, Republicans Pursue Plans to Contest a Trump Defeat
Mr. Trump’s allies are preparing to try to short-circuit the election system, if he does not win.

The Republican Party and its conservative allies are engaged in an unprecedented legal campaign targeting the American voting system. Their wide-ranging and methodical effort is laying the groundwork to contest an election that they argue, falsely, is already being rigged against former President Donald J. Trump.

The campaign involves a powerful network of Republican lawyers and activist groups, working loosely in concert with the Republican National Committee. Many of the key players were active in Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

But unlike the chaotic and improvised challenge four years ago, the new drive includes a systematic search for any vulnerability in the nation’s patchwork election system.

Mr. Trump’s allies have followed a two-pronged approach: restricting voting for partisan advantage ahead of Election Day and short-circuiting the process of ratifying the winner afterward, if Mr. Trump loses. The latter strategy involves an ambitious — and legally dubious — attempt to reimagine decades of settled law dictating how results are officially certified in the weeks before the transfer of power.

At the heart of the strategy is a drive to convince voters that the election is about to be stolen, even without evidence. Democrats use mail voting, drop boxes and voter registration drives to swing elections, they have argued. And Mr. Trump’s indictments and criminal conviction are a Biden administration gambit to interfere with the election, they claim.

“As things stand right now, there’s zero chance of a free and fair election,” Mike Howell, a project director at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said at an event this week. “I’m formally accusing the Biden administration of creating the conditions that most reasonable policymakers and officials cannot in good conscience certify an election.”

The legal campaign, which has come into focus as Republicans prepare to nominate Mr. Trump at their convention next week, has been quietly playing out in courts, statehouses and county boards for months, and is concentrated in critical battlegrounds.

In Nevada and several other states, Republicans have sued to tighten rules for voting by mail — currently a method preferred by Democrats. In Georgia and Arizona, they have filed lawsuits that, if successful, would effectively give local election board members the right to hold up certification and even conduct their own personal investigation into the vote.

Republicans say that their only goal is to bolster the system and build trust, especially after changes during the coronavirus pandemic made it easier to vote.

“The way we honestly think about this is making sure that every legal vote is counted legally,” an R.N.C. spokeswoman, Claire Fortenberry Zunk, said. “It essentially empowers all Americans, so that at no point in the system would you have someone whose vote is diluted or compromised.”

But Democrats, civil rights lawyers and even some Republicans say that the threat is clear: Even if the cases fail, Mr. Trump’s allies are building excuses to dispute the results, while trying to empower thousands of local election officials to disrupt the process. Already, election board members in several states have moved to block certification of primary election tallies, including in a major swing county in Nevada last week.

“The fundamental principle of the system — the rule of law, the finality of the results, the ability to challenge an election but then accept the results if the challenges fail — is being stood on its head,” said Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election lawyer who broke with his party over Mr. Trump.

Mr. Ginsberg and other election lawyers said they were confident that the system had enough checks and balances to hold, as it did in 2020.

Calling the effort “unlawful and undemocratic,” the Biden campaign has put in place a field army of lawyers to counter the Republican moves in every swing state, a level of concerted legal activity that has never happened this early in an election cycle.

cont'd

  Hide contents

Some 2020 Veterans Return
A partisan tug of war over voting laws ahead of a major election is nothing new. The parties have long clashed in the courts over rules they hope may give them an edge. But the scope and the leadership of Republicans’ current campaign sets it apart.

The effort involves a sprawling network of groups and includes some people that worked to overturn the results in 2020 — a campaign that led to federal and state criminal charges against Mr. Trump and several of his associates.

Mr. Trump’s own homeland security officials called that election the “most secure in American history”; his attorney general said there was no evidence of substantial fraud, and Mr. Trump’s legal team lost all but one of the dozens of lawsuits it filed disputing results.

But this year, the R.N.C. has worked to align Trump allies behind a more coherent strategy. Its new leaders — Michael Whatley and his co-chair, Lara Trump, who is Mr. Trump’s daughter-in-law — have vowed to turn the party more fully toward preventing what they call “cheating.”

They have installed a new “senior counsel for election integrity” at the Republican Party headquarters: Christina Bobb, a lawyer indicted in Arizona on charges related to Mr. Trump’s attempt to dispute his defeat there. She has pleaded not guilty.

Cleta Mitchell, a Republican lawyer who was part of Mr. Trump’s push to overturn his loss in Georgia now runs the Election Integrity Network, a group that is advising activists on how to challenge voters’ eligibility.

The Heritage Foundation has provided institutional support and planning. Last month, the group war-gamed exercises exploring scenarios in a disputed election.

“What we need is everybody to be in the same boat, in the same direction and rowing at more or less the same time,” Mr. Whatley told reporters recently, adding that the party was working with governors, legislators and local boards of election. “Where we can’t get what we need in terms of our comfort level with state laws, we’re going to be filing those lawsuits.”

An Avalanche of Litigation
The party says it has filed more than 90 lawsuits on election rules. Allied groups have filed dozens more. Both Democrats and Republicans described the legal blitz as the most lawsuits ever filed before an election.

Many of these cases are continuing or caught up in the appeals process. Final decisions are unlikely to be reached until closer to the election. But the outcomes could affect election results.

In Nevada, the R.N.C. is suing to do away with a grace period that allows mail ballots sent by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within four days of the election. Voting rights advocates say that window ensures that voters aren’t disenfranchised by postal delays. Republicans argue, however, that the grace period runs counter to the concept of a national “Election Day” and only increase chances that votes cast late are counted.

In 2022, 40,000 ballots from the state’s two most populous counties arrived within that grace period; the margin of victory for the Democratic incumbent in the Senate, Catherine Cortez Masto, was 8,000 votes.

In a similar case in Mississippi, the R.N.C. has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to eliminate the state’s five-day grace period — an attempt, lawyers with the Biden campaign believe, to get the case before the nation’s most conservative federal appellate court, the Fifth Circuit, and invalidate grace periods altogether.

Activists across the country, often with guidance from the Election Integrity Network, have been challenging voter registrations en masse, often using faulty databases to question voters who are eligible to vote.

Democrats are particularly concerned about the tactic in Georgia, where a new law has made it far easier for one voter to challenge another’s registration. Two days after the new law went into effect, the Republican county chair in Bibb County challenged the eligibility of 243 voters.

Marc Elias, a leading Democratic election lawyer, said he believed that the Republican lawsuits were not about curbing fraud, and not just about keeping Democratic votes from being counted.

The disputes provide a pretext for pro-Trump election officials to “challenge votes and not have votes accurately counted and certified,” he said.

Short-Circuiting the System
The process of making a winner official is slow, local and, largely, pageantry.

First, thousands of election boards collect tallies from the voting precincts, certify their accuracy and send them up to the state capitals. There, the numbers are audited, certified again and sent to Washington ahead of the Electoral College vote in mid December. Even after that, Congress must sign off on the final result at a ceremony presided over by the vice president, on Jan. 6, before a new administration can take power.

State and federal laws define this process as ceremonial — prescribing that those involved “shall” certify the vote tallies upon receiving them and checking them. Disputes over alleged fraud or major errors are typically left to recounts and courts.

Voting against certification was practically unheard-of in presidential elections until late in 2020, when Trump allies sought to block certification in Wayne County, Mich. — and until Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of protesters sought to block Congress from certifying the election results.

Since then, members of state and local boards have voted against certification more than 20 times across eight states, according to a list compiled by Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group that tracks antidemocratic trends in the United States. In most cases, the board members were outvoted or, when they weren’t, courts or officials forced them to certify the vote. (In one case, in Arizona, two board members who voted against certification have been criminally charged, pleading not guilty.)

But Republicans and their allies are working to redefine the board members’ duties.

Election lawyers are carefully watching a dispute in Fulton County, Ga. A pro-Trump group, the America First Policy Institute, filed a lawsuit last month on behalf of a conservative member of the local elections board who has refused to certify primary results this year.

The board member, Julie Adams, who has been active with the Election Integrity Network, said that she was not provided with the reams of voter information she wanted to personally determine the results were accurate and not marred by fraud.

The lawsuit said that she was within her rights to conduct such an investigation because, as part of her oath, she swore to “prevent fraud, deceit and abuse.”

The Democratic National Committee, which intervened in the case, countered that “members have no discretion to refuse to certify election results.” Giving them that power, they wrote in court papers, “would invite chaos.”

Chaos has already erupted in northern Nevada’s Washoe County, where a fight over certification has prompted a moderate Republican board member to vote against certifying her own victory.

The board member, Clara Andriola, was seen as a firewall against a right-wing, anti-certification faction on the commission. A group connected to the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State even ran ads supporting her in her primary race, worried that her defeat would jeopardize a smooth approval of presidential results in the fall.

Two weeks ago, Ms. Andriola voted with the two Democrats to certify the election results showing her winning handily. But on Tuesday, after a recount affirmed her victory, she voted against certification, bending to pressure from right-wing protesters.

Nevada’s attorney general and its secretary of state, both Democrats, have since asked the State Supreme Court to compel the commission to certify the election as required by law and to clarify that local officials do not have the right to refuse to advance the process.

The results, meanwhile, remain in legal limbo.

A Ticking Clock
After Trump supporters rioted on Jan. 6, 2021, to disrupt the congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory, leaders in both parties set out to prevent a repeat. In 2022, Mr. Biden signed legislation making it harder to challenge the certification process.

The law set a new hard deadline for states to submit their final certified results; this year’s is Dec. 11. The date was intended to give judges and states incentive to settle disputes before the votes at the Electoral College and Congress.

But the law does not say clearly what would happen if a state misses its deadline.

“When deadlines are so tight, delay could really put us in a land of some legal uncertainty,” said Jessica Marsden, a lawyer who oversees elections work at Protect Democracy. “Bad actors might try to exploit that.”

For instance, if the situation in Washoe unfolded the same way this fall, Nevada would have less than a week to resolve the dispute. A resolution could require a court order — which could be followed by appeals or, potentially, by a refusal to abide a judge’s orders.

If Mr. Biden were to win Nevada, and if the state failed to send complete results on time, Ms. Marsden said that Republicans in the House and the Senate could seize on a missed deadline to justify rejecting Electoral College votes. (Under the law, a majority in both the House and Senate is needed to reject a state’s electors.)

“There is not a legal way to disrupt certification,’’ said Wendy R. Weiser, of the Brennan Center, a group that tracks election issues. “But if people in these positions believe there are fewer limits on what they can do and they have support for taking actions against the law, that will increase the likelihood we end up in a crisis situation.”

Biden campaign advisers say they believe this is unlikely; the law and the courts would intervene to keep the process on course before any worst-case scenarios could come to pass.

For his part, Mr. Whatley, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, was noncommittal when reporters recently asked him if his party would seek to block certification in any states this fall.

“We’re not going to cross any of those bridges right now,’’ he said.

 

Gimme the TLDR versions of that stuff (hidden as well).

[hobbes2702 12516]

4 minutes ago, ROFL BOX said:

Gimme the TLDR versions of that stuff (hidden as well).

Republicans don’t believe in democracy and plan to stage a coup… again.

Edited July 13 by hobbes2702

[ROFL BOX 6622]

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Republicans don’t believe in democracy and plan to stage a coup… again.

[WhatTheBuck 28604]

39 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Still wondering why Dixon Hurr is an independent.  What that means to me is someone is unwilling to commit to a side until they get promised something.  You as an independent will not get shit.   Your indecision will fuck the rest of us over.   You have a right to vote, but yo don’t deserve one.  

That’s a pretty fucked up take. I think we’d be better off if more people identified as independents rather than tying themselves to one or another political party like it’s their favorite sports team. I don’t see the point in considering myself a “Republican” or a “Democrat” unless I’m running for political office and actually joining a party. I’m not running for office. I’m just a citizen who knows what his values are. I don’t get them from a political party. 

[tx 3 putt 75228]

8 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Republicans don’t believe in democracy and plan to stage a coup… again.

MAGA election officials will refuse to cetify results at the precinct level on up. They’ve already tried this tactic in the past year. They request to have access to all voting data before certifying the election ….
 

also ….

 

[Pescado_Rojo 19235]

45 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

MAGA election officials will refuse to cetify results at the precinct level on up. They’ve already tried this tactic in the past year. They request to have access to all voting data before certifying the election ….
 

also ….

 

Leopards/faces, part eleventy billion

[Js1 82948]

No you see, Project 2025 only removes protections on libtard savings. Daddy Trump will protect theirs and not steal it for any reason. Their life savings of $370 is safe

And if it disappears, well it was those dirty Jews who control the banking industry 

Edited July 13 by Js1

[tx 3 putt 75228]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

No you see, Project 2025 only removes protections on libtard savings. Daddy Trump will protect theirs and not steal it for any reason. Their life savings of $370 is safe

And if it disappears, well it was those dirty Jews who control the banking industry 

trump banks will be booming 

[tx 3 putt 75228]

 

[mchookem 15535]

Pete should be doing all the veterans outreach.

in fact, there's literally nobody that would be better at explaining Project2025 details in non-emotional and non-hyperbolic language to the country. Dixon should call him up. 

[Sawbonz 26808]

I can see where Dixon wants to push back when he sees something that appears to be hyperbolic or even outright propagandistic. When I see a tweet and dig a little and it’s misleading or even bullshit I get pissed off at whoever is behind it.
 

The difference here is we have a binary choice, and one is an existential threat not only to my way of life, but more importantly the way of life my kids (and hopefully grandkids) will have.
 

Trump has to be defeated. And if that takes propaganda- or even outright lies - to ensure that, then that’s what I want to see. Maybe we can sort it out after the existential threat is behind us. Or maybe it’s the new normal, and a personality cult from the left will arise, and what we do now just delays the inevitable. We will see, but for now I’m ok with living to fight another day 

[TwiceHorn 30834]

3 hours ago, bolverk said:

Lengthy article about the GQP fucking up the entire election.

Unbowed by Jan. 6 Charges, Republicans Pursue Plans to Contest a Trump Defeat
Mr. Trump’s allies are preparing to try to short-circuit the election system, if he does not win.

The Republican Party and its conservative allies are engaged in an unprecedented legal campaign targeting the American voting system. Their wide-ranging and methodical effort is laying the groundwork to contest an election that they argue, falsely, is already being rigged against former President Donald J. Trump.

The campaign involves a powerful network of Republican lawyers and activist groups, working loosely in concert with the Republican National Committee. Many of the key players were active in Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

But unlike the chaotic and improvised challenge four years ago, the new drive includes a systematic search for any vulnerability in the nation’s patchwork election system.

Mr. Trump’s allies have followed a two-pronged approach: restricting voting for partisan advantage ahead of Election Day and short-circuiting the process of ratifying the winner afterward, if Mr. Trump loses. The latter strategy involves an ambitious — and legally dubious — attempt to reimagine decades of settled law dictating how results are officially certified in the weeks before the transfer of power.

At the heart of the strategy is a drive to convince voters that the election is about to be stolen, even without evidence. Democrats use mail voting, drop boxes and voter registration drives to swing elections, they have argued. And Mr. Trump’s indictments and criminal conviction are a Biden administration gambit to interfere with the election, they claim.

“As things stand right now, there’s zero chance of a free and fair election,” Mike Howell, a project director at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said at an event this week. “I’m formally accusing the Biden administration of creating the conditions that most reasonable policymakers and officials cannot in good conscience certify an election.”

The legal campaign, which has come into focus as Republicans prepare to nominate Mr. Trump at their convention next week, has been quietly playing out in courts, statehouses and county boards for months, and is concentrated in critical battlegrounds.

In Nevada and several other states, Republicans have sued to tighten rules for voting by mail — currently a method preferred by Democrats. In Georgia and Arizona, they have filed lawsuits that, if successful, would effectively give local election board members the right to hold up certification and even conduct their own personal investigation into the vote.

Republicans say that their only goal is to bolster the system and build trust, especially after changes during the coronavirus pandemic made it easier to vote.

“The way we honestly think about this is making sure that every legal vote is counted legally,” an R.N.C. spokeswoman, Claire Fortenberry Zunk, said. “It essentially empowers all Americans, so that at no point in the system would you have someone whose vote is diluted or compromised.”

But Democrats, civil rights lawyers and even some Republicans say that the threat is clear: Even if the cases fail, Mr. Trump’s allies are building excuses to dispute the results, while trying to empower thousands of local election officials to disrupt the process. Already, election board members in several states have moved to block certification of primary election tallies, including in a major swing county in Nevada last week.

“The fundamental principle of the system — the rule of law, the finality of the results, the ability to challenge an election but then accept the results if the challenges fail — is being stood on its head,” said Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election lawyer who broke with his party over Mr. Trump.

Mr. Ginsberg and other election lawyers said they were confident that the system had enough checks and balances to hold, as it did in 2020.

Calling the effort “unlawful and undemocratic,” the Biden campaign has put in place a field army of lawyers to counter the Republican moves in every swing state, a level of concerted legal activity that has never happened this early in an election cycle.

cont'd

  Hide contents

Some 2020 Veterans Return
A partisan tug of war over voting laws ahead of a major election is nothing new. The parties have long clashed in the courts over rules they hope may give them an edge. But the scope and the leadership of Republicans’ current campaign sets it apart.

The effort involves a sprawling network of groups and includes some people that worked to overturn the results in 2020 — a campaign that led to federal and state criminal charges against Mr. Trump and several of his associates.

Mr. Trump’s own homeland security officials called that election the “most secure in American history”; his attorney general said there was no evidence of substantial fraud, and Mr. Trump’s legal team lost all but one of the dozens of lawsuits it filed disputing results.

But this year, the R.N.C. has worked to align Trump allies behind a more coherent strategy. Its new leaders — Michael Whatley and his co-chair, Lara Trump, who is Mr. Trump’s daughter-in-law — have vowed to turn the party more fully toward preventing what they call “cheating.”

They have installed a new “senior counsel for election integrity” at the Republican Party headquarters: Christina Bobb, a lawyer indicted in Arizona on charges related to Mr. Trump’s attempt to dispute his defeat there. She has pleaded not guilty.

Cleta Mitchell, a Republican lawyer who was part of Mr. Trump’s push to overturn his loss in Georgia now runs the Election Integrity Network, a group that is advising activists on how to challenge voters’ eligibility.

The Heritage Foundation has provided institutional support and planning. Last month, the group war-gamed exercises exploring scenarios in a disputed election.

“What we need is everybody to be in the same boat, in the same direction and rowing at more or less the same time,” Mr. Whatley told reporters recently, adding that the party was working with governors, legislators and local boards of election. “Where we can’t get what we need in terms of our comfort level with state laws, we’re going to be filing those lawsuits.”

An Avalanche of Litigation
The party says it has filed more than 90 lawsuits on election rules. Allied groups have filed dozens more. Both Democrats and Republicans described the legal blitz as the most lawsuits ever filed before an election.

Many of these cases are continuing or caught up in the appeals process. Final decisions are unlikely to be reached until closer to the election. But the outcomes could affect election results.

In Nevada, the R.N.C. is suing to do away with a grace period that allows mail ballots sent by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within four days of the election. Voting rights advocates say that window ensures that voters aren’t disenfranchised by postal delays. Republicans argue, however, that the grace period runs counter to the concept of a national “Election Day” and only increase chances that votes cast late are counted.

In 2022, 40,000 ballots from the state’s two most populous counties arrived within that grace period; the margin of victory for the Democratic incumbent in the Senate, Catherine Cortez Masto, was 8,000 votes.

In a similar case in Mississippi, the R.N.C. has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to eliminate the state’s five-day grace period — an attempt, lawyers with the Biden campaign believe, to get the case before the nation’s most conservative federal appellate court, the Fifth Circuit, and invalidate grace periods altogether.

Activists across the country, often with guidance from the Election Integrity Network, have been challenging voter registrations en masse, often using faulty databases to question voters who are eligible to vote.

Democrats are particularly concerned about the tactic in Georgia, where a new law has made it far easier for one voter to challenge another’s registration. Two days after the new law went into effect, the Republican county chair in Bibb County challenged the eligibility of 243 voters.

Marc Elias, a leading Democratic election lawyer, said he believed that the Republican lawsuits were not about curbing fraud, and not just about keeping Democratic votes from being counted.

The disputes provide a pretext for pro-Trump election officials to “challenge votes and not have votes accurately counted and certified,” he said.

Short-Circuiting the System
The process of making a winner official is slow, local and, largely, pageantry.

First, thousands of election boards collect tallies from the voting precincts, certify their accuracy and send them up to the state capitals. There, the numbers are audited, certified again and sent to Washington ahead of the Electoral College vote in mid December. Even after that, Congress must sign off on the final result at a ceremony presided over by the vice president, on Jan. 6, before a new administration can take power.

State and federal laws define this process as ceremonial — prescribing that those involved “shall” certify the vote tallies upon receiving them and checking them. Disputes over alleged fraud or major errors are typically left to recounts and courts.

Voting against certification was practically unheard-of in presidential elections until late in 2020, when Trump allies sought to block certification in Wayne County, Mich. — and until Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of protesters sought to block Congress from certifying the election results.

Since then, members of state and local boards have voted against certification more than 20 times across eight states, according to a list compiled by Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group that tracks antidemocratic trends in the United States. In most cases, the board members were outvoted or, when they weren’t, courts or officials forced them to certify the vote. (In one case, in Arizona, two board members who voted against certification have been criminally charged, pleading not guilty.)

But Republicans and their allies are working to redefine the board members’ duties.

Election lawyers are carefully watching a dispute in Fulton County, Ga. A pro-Trump group, the America First Policy Institute, filed a lawsuit last month on behalf of a conservative member of the local elections board who has refused to certify primary results this year.

The board member, Julie Adams, who has been active with the Election Integrity Network, said that she was not provided with the reams of voter information she wanted to personally determine the results were accurate and not marred by fraud.

The lawsuit said that she was within her rights to conduct such an investigation because, as part of her oath, she swore to “prevent fraud, deceit and abuse.”

The Democratic National Committee, which intervened in the case, countered that “members have no discretion to refuse to certify election results.” Giving them that power, they wrote in court papers, “would invite chaos.”

Chaos has already erupted in northern Nevada’s Washoe County, where a fight over certification has prompted a moderate Republican board member to vote against certifying her own victory.

The board member, Clara Andriola, was seen as a firewall against a right-wing, anti-certification faction on the commission. A group connected to the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State even ran ads supporting her in her primary race, worried that her defeat would jeopardize a smooth approval of presidential results in the fall.

Two weeks ago, Ms. Andriola voted with the two Democrats to certify the election results showing her winning handily. But on Tuesday, after a recount affirmed her victory, she voted against certification, bending to pressure from right-wing protesters.

Nevada’s attorney general and its secretary of state, both Democrats, have since asked the State Supreme Court to compel the commission to certify the election as required by law and to clarify that local officials do not have the right to refuse to advance the process.

The results, meanwhile, remain in legal limbo.

A Ticking Clock
After Trump supporters rioted on Jan. 6, 2021, to disrupt the congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory, leaders in both parties set out to prevent a repeat. In 2022, Mr. Biden signed legislation making it harder to challenge the certification process.

The law set a new hard deadline for states to submit their final certified results; this year’s is Dec. 11. The date was intended to give judges and states incentive to settle disputes before the votes at the Electoral College and Congress.

But the law does not say clearly what would happen if a state misses its deadline.

“When deadlines are so tight, delay could really put us in a land of some legal uncertainty,” said Jessica Marsden, a lawyer who oversees elections work at Protect Democracy. “Bad actors might try to exploit that.”

For instance, if the situation in Washoe unfolded the same way this fall, Nevada would have less than a week to resolve the dispute. A resolution could require a court order — which could be followed by appeals or, potentially, by a refusal to abide a judge’s orders.

If Mr. Biden were to win Nevada, and if the state failed to send complete results on time, Ms. Marsden said that Republicans in the House and the Senate could seize on a missed deadline to justify rejecting Electoral College votes. (Under the law, a majority in both the House and Senate is needed to reject a state’s electors.)

“There is not a legal way to disrupt certification,’’ said Wendy R. Weiser, of the Brennan Center, a group that tracks election issues. “But if people in these positions believe there are fewer limits on what they can do and they have support for taking actions against the law, that will increase the likelihood we end up in a crisis situation.”

Biden campaign advisers say they believe this is unlikely; the law and the courts would intervene to keep the process on course before any worst-case scenarios could come to pass.

For his part, Mr. Whatley, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, was noncommittal when reporters recently asked him if his party would seek to block certification in any states this fall.

“We’re not going to cross any of those bridges right now,’’ he said.

 

Marc Elias vs. Christina Bobb?  I like those odds.

[Neonmoon 38126]

On 7/12/2024 at 2:07 PM, Leeroy Jenkins said:

 

https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

I matched the claim with the text of Project 2025 

To be honest, many of them were mentioned multiple times all over the place. I tried to find the most relevant one

Spoiler

End no fault divorce  - could not find/got tired of looking

Complete ban on abortions without exceptions  - Page 6  

Text: Finally, conservatives should gratefully celebrate the greatest pro-family win in a generation: overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that for five decades made a mockery of our Constitution and facilitated the deaths of tens of millions of unborn children. But the Dobbs decision is just the beginning. Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America. In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion

Ban contraceptives - Page 483-485  

Text: Restore Trump religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate (also a CMS rule). HHS should rescind, if finalized, the regulation titled “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” proposed jointly by HHS, Treasury, and Labor.70 This rule proposes to amend Trump-era final rules regarding religious and moral exemptions and accommodations for coverage of certain preventive services under the ACA. Preventive services include contraception, and Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. One of the emergency contraceptives covered under the HRSA preventive services guidelines is Ella (ulipristal acetate). Like its close cousin, the abortion pill mifepristone, Ella is a progesterone blocker and can prevent a recently fertilized embryo from implanting in a woman’s uterus. HRSA should eliminate this potential abortifacient from the contraceptive mandate

Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1%  - Page 696    

Text: Intermediate Tax Reform. The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions. The 30 percent bracket should begin at or near the Social Security wage base to ensure the combined income and payroll tax structure acts as a nearly flat tax on wage income beyond the standard deduction. The corporate income tax rate should be reduced to 18 percent. The corporate income tax is the most damaging tax in the U.S. tax system, and its primary economic burden falls on workers because capital is more mobile than labor.17 Capital gains and qualified dividends should be taxed at 15 percent. Thus, the combined corporate income tax combined with the capital gains or qualified dividends tax rate would be roughly equal to the top individual income tax rate.18 The system should allow immediate expensing for capital expenditures and index capital gains taxes for inflation. In addition, intermediate tax reform should repeal all tax increases that were passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act,19 including the book minimum tax, the stock buyback excise tax, the coal excise tax, the reinstated Superfund tax, and excise taxes on drug manufacturers to compel them to comply with Medicare price controls. The next Administration should also push for legislation to fully repeal recently passed subsidies in the tax code, including the dozens of credits and tax breaks for green energy companies in Subtitle D of the Inflation Reduction Act.20

Higher taxes for the working class - Page 696    

The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions

Elimination of unions and worker protections  - Page  81    

Text: Executive Order 13836, encouraging agencies to renegotiate all union collective bargaining agreements to ensure consistency with the law and respect for management rights;26 l Executive Order 13837, encouraging agencies to prevent union representatives from using official time preparing or pursuing grievances or from engaging in other union activity on government time;27 and l Executive Order 13839, encouraging agencies both to limit labor grievances on removals from service or on challenging performance appraisals and to prioritize performance over seniority when deciding who should be retained following reductions-in-force.28 Congress should also consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate in the first place. The bipartisan consensus up until the middle of the 20th century held that these unions were not compatible with constitutional government.30 After more than half a century of experience with public-sector union frustrations of good government management, it is hard to avoid reaching the same conclusion

Raise the retirement age   - could not find/got tired of looking

Cut Social Security  - Page 605

Text: Approve non-public worker organizations as UI administrators. DOL should approve, pursuant to § 303(a)(2) of the Social Security Act, nonpublic worker organizations as administrators. l Offer waivers for suitable alternatives. DOL should offer waivers from the standard requirements imposed on unemployment compensation by § 303(a) and § 303(d) of the Social Security Act to states that propose suitable alternatives

Cut Medicare  - Page 466-468  

Text:  Allow states to have a more flexible, accountable, predictable, transparent, and efficient financing mechanism to deliver medical services. This system should include a more balanced or blended match rate, block grants, aggregate caps, or per capita caps. Any financial system should be designed to encourage and incentivize innovation and the efficient delivery of health care services. Federal and state financial participation in the Medicaid program should be rational, predictable, and reasonable. It should also incentivize states to save money and improve the quality of health care. — 467 — Department of Health and Human Services l Direct dollars to beneficiaries more effectively and responsibly. The current funding structure for the Medicaid program rewards expansions, lacks transparency, and promotes financing gimmicks. CMS should: 1. End state financing loopholes. 2. Reform payments to hospitals for uncompensated care. 3. Replace the enhanced match rate with a fairer and more rational match rate. 4. Restructure basic financing and put the program on a more fiscally predictable budget (which should include reform of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments to hospitals).31 l Strengthen program integrity. Make program integrity a top priority and the responsibility of the states. To protect the taxpayers’ investment: 1. Incentivize states. An enhanced contingency fee should be paid to states that successfully increase their efforts to decrease waste, fraud, and abuse. The current system’s IT development 90/10 matching rate should be allowed for improvements in states’ current fraud and abuse and eligibility systems. Innovative programs that show a positive return on investment for both the state and federal governments should be allowed without the onerous waiver process.

End the Affordable Care Act - Page 469  

Text:  Remove barriers to direct primary care. Direct primary care (DPC) is an innovative health care delivery model in which doctors contract directly with patients for their care on a subscription basis regardless of how or where the care is provided. The DPC model is improving patient access, driving higher quality and lower cost, and strengthening the doctor– patient relationship. DPC has faced many challenges from government policymakers, including overly exuberant attempts at regulation and misclassification. Changes should clarify that DPC’s fixed fee for care does not constitute insurance in the context of health savings accounts. Separate the subsidized ACA exchange market from the nonsubsidized insurance market. The Affordable Care Act has made insurance more expensive and less competitive, and the ACA subsidy scheme simply masks these impacts. To make health insurance coverage more affordable for those who are without government subsidies, CMS should develop a plan to separate the non-subsidized insurance market — 470 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise from the subsidized market, giving the non-subsidized market regulatory relief from the costly ACA regulatory mandates.39

Raise prescription drug prices  - Page 465-466  

Text:  "Remove restrictions on key benefits and services, including those related to prescription drugs, hospice care, and medical savings account plans. Medicare Part D Reform. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) created a drug
price negotiation program in Medicare that replaced the existing private-sector negotiations in Part D with government price controls for prescription drugs. These government price controls will limit access to medications and reduce patient access to new medication. This “negotiation” program should be repealed, and reforms in Part D that will have meaningful impact for seniors should be pursued. Other reforms should
include eliminating the coverage gap in Part D, reducing the government share in the catastrophic tier, and requiring manufacturers to bear a larger share. Until the IRA is repealed, an Administration that is required to implement it must do so in away that is prudent with its authority, minimizing the harmful effects of the law’s policies and avoiding even worse unintended consequences."

Eliminate the Department of Education - Page 325    

Text: To improve educational opportunities for all Americans, the next Administration should work with Congress to pass a Department of Education Reorganization Act to reform, eliminate, or move the department’s programs and offices to appropriate agencies.

Use public, taxpayer money for private religious schools - Page 351    

Text: To restore state and local control of education and reduce the bureaucratic and compliance burden, Congress should allow states to opt out of the dozens of federal K–12 education programs authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and instead allow states to put their share of federal funding toward any lawful education purpose under state law. This policy has been advanced over the years via a proposal known as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (APLUS) Act.

Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools - could not find/got tired of looking

End free and discounted school lunch programs - Page 303  

Text:  Work with lawmakers to eliminate CEP. The NSLP and SBP should be directed to serve children in need, not become an entitlement for students from middle- and upper-income homes. Congress should eliminate CEP. Further, the USDA should not provide meals to students during the summer unless students are taking summer-school classes. Currently, students can get meals from schools even if they are not in summer school, which has, in effect, turned school meals into a federal catering program.93

End civil rights & DEI protections in government - Page 4,5  

Text:  The next conservative President must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors. This starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion — 5 — Foreword (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.

Ban African American and gender studies in all levels of education - Page 342-343, 346

Text: By its very design, critical race theory has an “applied” dimension, as its founders state in their essays that define the theory. Those who subscribe to the theory believe that racism (in this case, treating individuals differently based on race) is appropriate—necessary, even—making the theory more than merely an analytical tool to describe race in public and private life. The theory disrupts America’s Founding ideals of freedom and opportunity. So, when critical race theory is used as part of school activities such as mandatory affinity groups, teacher training programs in which educators are required to confess their privilege, or school. Department of Education assignments in which students must defend the false idea that America is systemically racist, the theory is actively disrupting the values that hold communities together such as equality under the law and colorblindness. l As such, lawmakers should design legislation that prevents the theory from spreading discrimination. For K–12 systems under their jurisdiction, federal lawmakers should adopt proposals that say no individual should receive punishment or benefits based on the color of their skin. Furthermore, school officials should not require students or teachers to believe that individuals are guilty or responsible for the actions of others based on race or ethnicity. Educators should not be forced to discuss contemporary political issues. The next Administration should take particular note of how radical gender ideology is having a devastating effect on school-aged children today—especially young girls. School officials in some states are requiring teachers and other school employees to accept a minor child’s decision to assume a different “gender” while at school—without notifying parents. In California, New Jersey, and certain districts in Kansas and elsewhere, educators are prohibited from informing parents about children’s confusion over their sex if the children do not want their parents to know. Such policies allow schools to drive a wedge between parents and children. The next Administration should work with Congress to provide an example to state lawmakers by requiring K–12 districts under federal jurisdiction, including Washington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, and Department of Defense schools, with legislation stating that: No public education employee or contractor shall use a name to address a student other than the name listed on a student’s birth certificate, without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public education employee or contractor shall use a pronoun in addressing a student that is different from that student’s biological sex without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public institution may require an education employee or contractor to use a pronoun that does not match a person’s biological sex if contrary to the employee’s or contractor’s religious or moral convictions.

Ban books and curriculum about slavery  - Page 5

Text:  The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women.

Ending climate protections  - Page 61, 257    

Text: The President should issue an executive order establishing a Senior Advisor to coordinate the policy development and implementation of relevant energy and environment policy by officials across the EOP (for example, the policy staff of the NSC, NEC, DPC, CEQ, and OSTP) and abolishing the existing Office of Domestic Climate Policy. USAID should cease its war on fossil fuels in the developing world and support the responsible management of oil and gas reserves as the quickest way to end wrenching poverty and the need for open-ended foreign aid. The next conservative Administration should rescind all climate policies from its foreign aid programs (specifically USAID’s Climate Strategy 2022–20307 ); shut down the agency’s offices, programs, and directives designed to advance the Paris Climate Agreement; and narrowly limit funding to traditional climate mitigation efforts. USAID resources are best deployed to strengthen the resilience of countries that are most vulnerable to climatic shifts. The agency should cease collaborating with and funding progressive foundations, corporations, international institutions, and NGOs that advocate on behalf of climate fanaticism

Increase Artic Drilling  - Page 530    

Text: Approve the 2020 Willow EIS, the largest pending oil and gas projection in the United States in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and expand approval from three to five drilling pads.59

Deregulate big business and the oil industry - Page 705, 369,  379, 407  

 Text: "Dodd–Frank Revisions. Congress should repeal Title I, Title II, and Title VIII of the Dodd–Frank Act.52 Title I of Dodd–Frank created the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a kind of super-regulator tasked with identifying so-called systemically important financial institutions and singling them out for especially stringent regulation. The problem, of course, is that this process effectively identifies those firms regulators believe are “too big to fail.”53 Eliminate political and climate-change interference in DOE approvals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In addition, Congress should reform the Natural Gas Act to expand required approvals from
merely nations with free trade agreements to all of our allies, such as NATO countries. Eliminate energy efficiency standards for appliances. The next Administration should work with Congress to modify or repeal the law mandating energy efficiency standards. Recommit itself to the NGA’s purpose of providing the American people with access to affordable and reliable natural gas. Limit its NGA decision-making on natural gas pipeline certificates to the question of whether there is a need for the natural gas. Limit its NEPA analysis to the impacts of the actual pipeline itself, not indirect upstream and downstream effects"

Promote and expedite capital punishment  - Page 554  

Text:  Enforce the death penalty where appropriate and applicable. Capital punishment is a sensitive matter, as it should be, but the current crime wave makes deterrence vital at the federal, state, and local levels. However, providing this punishment without ever enforcing it provides justice neither for the victims’ families nor for the defendant. The next conservative Administration should therefore do everything possible to obtain finality for the 44 prisoners currently on federal death row. It should also pursue the death penalty for applicable crimes—particularly heinous crimes involving violence and sexual abuse of children—until Congress says otherwise through legislation.45

End marriage equality - Page 481  

 Text: Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; and poor behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes

Condemn single mothers while promoting only "traditional families"   - Page 451    

Text: Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our children’s futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related “boyfriends” present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies.

Defund the FBI and Homeland Security  - Page  133, 549-551    

Text: "Our primary recommendation is that the President pursue legislation to dismantle the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.30 This is an enormous task, but it is necessary to re-earn the American people’s trust in the FBI and its work. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJleadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below). The department should also consider issuing a public report of the findings from this review as appropriate. The next conservative Administration should eliminate any offices within the FBI that it has the power to eliminate without any action from Congress.34 For example, few Americans know that the FBI maintains a core of approximately 300 attorneys within its Office of General Counsel, an office that has been involved in some of the
FBI’s most damaging recent scandals.35 These attorneys are not necessary to the functioning of the FBI in their current capacity. Legal advice should come from attorneys at the DOJ, whether those attorneys are within the
Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the Justice Management Division, or the Office of Legal Counsel. Moving legal review outside the FBI would serve as a crucial check on an agency that has recently pushed past legal boundary after legal boundary. Similarly, the FBI does not need its own Office of Congressional Affairs separate and apart from the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs, nor does it need its own Office of Public Affairs."

Use the military to break up domestic protests   - Page  107, 129  

Text:  Establish true alignment between DOD and DHS both to improve the defense of critical U.S. infrastructure and national border integrity and to develop vital information that enables defense against foreign targeted disruptions.  The U.S. military has a long history of providing support to civil authorities, particularly in response to disasters but for other purposes as well. The Defense Department currently defines defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) as “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in Title 32, U.S.C., status) in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. 

Mass deportation of immigrants and incarceration in "camps"  - Page  147, 150  

Text:  "Create an authority akin to the Title 42 Public Health authority that has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to expel illegal aliens across the border immediately when certain non health conditions are met, such as loss of operational control of the border.  Mandatory detention. Congress should eliminate ambiguous
discretionary language in Title 8 that aliens “may” be detained and clarify that aliens “shall” be detained. This language, which contrasts with other “shall detain” language in statute, creates unhelpful ambiguity and allows the executive branch to ignore the will of Congress"

End birth right citizenship - could not find/got tired of looking

Ban Muslims from entering the country  - Page  141    

Text: Prioritize national security in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). ICE should end its current cozy deference to educational institutions and remove security risks from the program. This requires working with the Department of State to eliminate or significantly reduce the number of visas issued to foreign students from enemy nations.

Eliminates federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA and more  - Page  420, 664    

Text: EPA’s structure and mission should be greatly circumscribed to reflect the principles of cooperative federalism and limited government. This will require significant restructuring and streamlining of the agency to reflect the following. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories
Continues to pack the Supreme Court, and lower courts with right-wing judges        

 

 

[Pancho 42227]

 

[F250 28471]

8 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

I matched the claim with the text of Project 2025 

To be honest, many of them were mentioned multiple times all over the place. I tried to find the most relevant one

  Hide contents

End no fault divorce  - could not find/got tired of looking

Complete ban on abortions without exceptions  - Page 6  

Text: Finally, conservatives should gratefully celebrate the greatest pro-family win in a generation: overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that for five decades made a mockery of our Constitution and facilitated the deaths of tens of millions of unborn children. But the Dobbs decision is just the beginning. Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America. In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion

Ban contraceptives - Page 483-485  

Text: Restore Trump religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate (also a CMS rule). HHS should rescind, if finalized, the regulation titled “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” proposed jointly by HHS, Treasury, and Labor.70 This rule proposes to amend Trump-era final rules regarding religious and moral exemptions and accommodations for coverage of certain preventive services under the ACA. Preventive services include contraception, and Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. One of the emergency contraceptives covered under the HRSA preventive services guidelines is Ella (ulipristal acetate). Like its close cousin, the abortion pill mifepristone, Ella is a progesterone blocker and can prevent a recently fertilized embryo from implanting in a woman’s uterus. HRSA should eliminate this potential abortifacient from the contraceptive mandate

Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1%  - Page 696    

Text: Intermediate Tax Reform. The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions. The 30 percent bracket should begin at or near the Social Security wage base to ensure the combined income and payroll tax structure acts as a nearly flat tax on wage income beyond the standard deduction. The corporate income tax rate should be reduced to 18 percent. The corporate income tax is the most damaging tax in the U.S. tax system, and its primary economic burden falls on workers because capital is more mobile than labor.17 Capital gains and qualified dividends should be taxed at 15 percent. Thus, the combined corporate income tax combined with the capital gains or qualified dividends tax rate would be roughly equal to the top individual income tax rate.18 The system should allow immediate expensing for capital expenditures and index capital gains taxes for inflation. In addition, intermediate tax reform should repeal all tax increases that were passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act,19 including the book minimum tax, the stock buyback excise tax, the coal excise tax, the reinstated Superfund tax, and excise taxes on drug manufacturers to compel them to comply with Medicare price controls. The next Administration should also push for legislation to fully repeal recently passed subsidies in the tax code, including the dozens of credits and tax breaks for green energy companies in Subtitle D of the Inflation Reduction Act.20

Higher taxes for the working class - Page 696    

The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions

Elimination of unions and worker protections  - Page  81    

Text: Executive Order 13836, encouraging agencies to renegotiate all union collective bargaining agreements to ensure consistency with the law and respect for management rights;26 l Executive Order 13837, encouraging agencies to prevent union representatives from using official time preparing or pursuing grievances or from engaging in other union activity on government time;27 and l Executive Order 13839, encouraging agencies both to limit labor grievances on removals from service or on challenging performance appraisals and to prioritize performance over seniority when deciding who should be retained following reductions-in-force.28 Congress should also consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate in the first place. The bipartisan consensus up until the middle of the 20th century held that these unions were not compatible with constitutional government.30 After more than half a century of experience with public-sector union frustrations of good government management, it is hard to avoid reaching the same conclusion

Raise the retirement age   - could not find/got tired of looking

Cut Social Security  - Page 605

Text: Approve non-public worker organizations as UI administrators. DOL should approve, pursuant to § 303(a)(2) of the Social Security Act, nonpublic worker organizations as administrators. l Offer waivers for suitable alternatives. DOL should offer waivers from the standard requirements imposed on unemployment compensation by § 303(a) and § 303(d) of the Social Security Act to states that propose suitable alternatives

Cut Medicare  - Page 466-468  

Text:  Allow states to have a more flexible, accountable, predictable, transparent, and efficient financing mechanism to deliver medical services. This system should include a more balanced or blended match rate, block grants, aggregate caps, or per capita caps. Any financial system should be designed to encourage and incentivize innovation and the efficient delivery of health care services. Federal and state financial participation in the Medicaid program should be rational, predictable, and reasonable. It should also incentivize states to save money and improve the quality of health care. — 467 — Department of Health and Human Services l Direct dollars to beneficiaries more effectively and responsibly. The current funding structure for the Medicaid program rewards expansions, lacks transparency, and promotes financing gimmicks. CMS should: 1. End state financing loopholes. 2. Reform payments to hospitals for uncompensated care. 3. Replace the enhanced match rate with a fairer and more rational match rate. 4. Restructure basic financing and put the program on a more fiscally predictable budget (which should include reform of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments to hospitals).31 l Strengthen program integrity. Make program integrity a top priority and the responsibility of the states. To protect the taxpayers’ investment: 1. Incentivize states. An enhanced contingency fee should be paid to states that successfully increase their efforts to decrease waste, fraud, and abuse. The current system’s IT development 90/10 matching rate should be allowed for improvements in states’ current fraud and abuse and eligibility systems. Innovative programs that show a positive return on investment for both the state and federal governments should be allowed without the onerous waiver process.

End the Affordable Care Act - Page 469  

Text:  Remove barriers to direct primary care. Direct primary care (DPC) is an innovative health care delivery model in which doctors contract directly with patients for their care on a subscription basis regardless of how or where the care is provided. The DPC model is improving patient access, driving higher quality and lower cost, and strengthening the doctor– patient relationship. DPC has faced many challenges from government policymakers, including overly exuberant attempts at regulation and misclassification. Changes should clarify that DPC’s fixed fee for care does not constitute insurance in the context of health savings accounts. Separate the subsidized ACA exchange market from the nonsubsidized insurance market. The Affordable Care Act has made insurance more expensive and less competitive, and the ACA subsidy scheme simply masks these impacts. To make health insurance coverage more affordable for those who are without government subsidies, CMS should develop a plan to separate the non-subsidized insurance market — 470 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise from the subsidized market, giving the non-subsidized market regulatory relief from the costly ACA regulatory mandates.39

Raise prescription drug prices  - Page 465-466  

Text:  "Remove restrictions on key benefits and services, including those related to prescription drugs, hospice care, and medical savings account plans. Medicare Part D Reform. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) created a drug
price negotiation program in Medicare that replaced the existing private-sector negotiations in Part D with government price controls for prescription drugs. These government price controls will limit access to medications and reduce patient access to new medication. This “negotiation” program should be repealed, and reforms in Part D that will have meaningful impact for seniors should be pursued. Other reforms should
include eliminating the coverage gap in Part D, reducing the government share in the catastrophic tier, and requiring manufacturers to bear a larger share. Until the IRA is repealed, an Administration that is required to implement it must do so in away that is prudent with its authority, minimizing the harmful effects of the law’s policies and avoiding even worse unintended consequences."

Eliminate the Department of Education - Page 325    

Text: To improve educational opportunities for all Americans, the next Administration should work with Congress to pass a Department of Education Reorganization Act to reform, eliminate, or move the department’s programs and offices to appropriate agencies.

Use public, taxpayer money for private religious schools - Page 351    

Text: To restore state and local control of education and reduce the bureaucratic and compliance burden, Congress should allow states to opt out of the dozens of federal K–12 education programs authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and instead allow states to put their share of federal funding toward any lawful education purpose under state law. This policy has been advanced over the years via a proposal known as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (APLUS) Act.

Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools - could not find/got tired of looking

End free and discounted school lunch programs - Page 303  

Text:  Work with lawmakers to eliminate CEP. The NSLP and SBP should be directed to serve children in need, not become an entitlement for students from middle- and upper-income homes. Congress should eliminate CEP. Further, the USDA should not provide meals to students during the summer unless students are taking summer-school classes. Currently, students can get meals from schools even if they are not in summer school, which has, in effect, turned school meals into a federal catering program.93

End civil rights & DEI protections in government - Page 4,5  

Text:  The next conservative President must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors. This starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion — 5 — Foreword (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.

Ban African American and gender studies in all levels of education - Page 342-343, 346

Text: By its very design, critical race theory has an “applied” dimension, as its founders state in their essays that define the theory. Those who subscribe to the theory believe that racism (in this case, treating individuals differently based on race) is appropriate—necessary, even—making the theory more than merely an analytical tool to describe race in public and private life. The theory disrupts America’s Founding ideals of freedom and opportunity. So, when critical race theory is used as part of school activities such as mandatory affinity groups, teacher training programs in which educators are required to confess their privilege, or school. Department of Education assignments in which students must defend the false idea that America is systemically racist, the theory is actively disrupting the values that hold communities together such as equality under the law and colorblindness. l As such, lawmakers should design legislation that prevents the theory from spreading discrimination. For K–12 systems under their jurisdiction, federal lawmakers should adopt proposals that say no individual should receive punishment or benefits based on the color of their skin. Furthermore, school officials should not require students or teachers to believe that individuals are guilty or responsible for the actions of others based on race or ethnicity. Educators should not be forced to discuss contemporary political issues. The next Administration should take particular note of how radical gender ideology is having a devastating effect on school-aged children today—especially young girls. School officials in some states are requiring teachers and other school employees to accept a minor child’s decision to assume a different “gender” while at school—without notifying parents. In California, New Jersey, and certain districts in Kansas and elsewhere, educators are prohibited from informing parents about children’s confusion over their sex if the children do not want their parents to know. Such policies allow schools to drive a wedge between parents and children. The next Administration should work with Congress to provide an example to state lawmakers by requiring K–12 districts under federal jurisdiction, including Washington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, and Department of Defense schools, with legislation stating that: No public education employee or contractor shall use a name to address a student other than the name listed on a student’s birth certificate, without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public education employee or contractor shall use a pronoun in addressing a student that is different from that student’s biological sex without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public institution may require an education employee or contractor to use a pronoun that does not match a person’s biological sex if contrary to the employee’s or contractor’s religious or moral convictions.

Ban books and curriculum about slavery  - Page 5

Text:  The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women.

Ending climate protections  - Page 61, 257    

Text: The President should issue an executive order establishing a Senior Advisor to coordinate the policy development and implementation of relevant energy and environment policy by officials across the EOP (for example, the policy staff of the NSC, NEC, DPC, CEQ, and OSTP) and abolishing the existing Office of Domestic Climate Policy. USAID should cease its war on fossil fuels in the developing world and support the responsible management of oil and gas reserves as the quickest way to end wrenching poverty and the need for open-ended foreign aid. The next conservative Administration should rescind all climate policies from its foreign aid programs (specifically USAID’s Climate Strategy 2022–20307 ); shut down the agency’s offices, programs, and directives designed to advance the Paris Climate Agreement; and narrowly limit funding to traditional climate mitigation efforts. USAID resources are best deployed to strengthen the resilience of countries that are most vulnerable to climatic shifts. The agency should cease collaborating with and funding progressive foundations, corporations, international institutions, and NGOs that advocate on behalf of climate fanaticism

Increase Artic Drilling  - Page 530    

Text: Approve the 2020 Willow EIS, the largest pending oil and gas projection in the United States in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and expand approval from three to five drilling pads.59

Deregulate big business and the oil industry - Page 705, 369,  379, 407  

 Text: "Dodd–Frank Revisions. Congress should repeal Title I, Title II, and Title VIII of the Dodd–Frank Act.52 Title I of Dodd–Frank created the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a kind of super-regulator tasked with identifying so-called systemically important financial institutions and singling them out for especially stringent regulation. The problem, of course, is that this process effectively identifies those firms regulators believe are “too big to fail.”53 Eliminate political and climate-change interference in DOE approvals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In addition, Congress should reform the Natural Gas Act to expand required approvals from
merely nations with free trade agreements to all of our allies, such as NATO countries. Eliminate energy efficiency standards for appliances. The next Administration should work with Congress to modify or repeal the law mandating energy efficiency standards. Recommit itself to the NGA’s purpose of providing the American people with access to affordable and reliable natural gas. Limit its NGA decision-making on natural gas pipeline certificates to the question of whether there is a need for the natural gas. Limit its NEPA analysis to the impacts of the actual pipeline itself, not indirect upstream and downstream effects"

Promote and expedite capital punishment  - Page 554  

Text:  Enforce the death penalty where appropriate and applicable. Capital punishment is a sensitive matter, as it should be, but the current crime wave makes deterrence vital at the federal, state, and local levels. However, providing this punishment without ever enforcing it provides justice neither for the victims’ families nor for the defendant. The next conservative Administration should therefore do everything possible to obtain finality for the 44 prisoners currently on federal death row. It should also pursue the death penalty for applicable crimes—particularly heinous crimes involving violence and sexual abuse of children—until Congress says otherwise through legislation.45

End marriage equality - Page 481  

 Text: Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; and poor behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes

Condemn single mothers while promoting only "traditional families"   - Page 451    

Text: Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our children’s futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related “boyfriends” present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies.

Defund the FBI and Homeland Security  - Page  133, 549-551    

Text: "Our primary recommendation is that the President pursue legislation to dismantle the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.30 This is an enormous task, but it is necessary to re-earn the American people’s trust in the FBI and its work. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJleadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below). The department should also consider issuing a public report of the findings from this review as appropriate. The next conservative Administration should eliminate any offices within the FBI that it has the power to eliminate without any action from Congress.34 For example, few Americans know that the FBI maintains a core of approximately 300 attorneys within its Office of General Counsel, an office that has been involved in some of the
FBI’s most damaging recent scandals.35 These attorneys are not necessary to the functioning of the FBI in their current capacity. Legal advice should come from attorneys at the DOJ, whether those attorneys are within the
Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the Justice Management Division, or the Office of Legal Counsel. Moving legal review outside the FBI would serve as a crucial check on an agency that has recently pushed past legal boundary after legal boundary. Similarly, the FBI does not need its own Office of Congressional Affairs separate and apart from the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs, nor does it need its own Office of Public Affairs."

Use the military to break up domestic protests   - Page  107, 129  

Text:  Establish true alignment between DOD and DHS both to improve the defense of critical U.S. infrastructure and national border integrity and to develop vital information that enables defense against foreign targeted disruptions.  The U.S. military has a long history of providing support to civil authorities, particularly in response to disasters but for other purposes as well. The Defense Department currently defines defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) as “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in Title 32, U.S.C., status) in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. 

Mass deportation of immigrants and incarceration in "camps"  - Page  147, 150  

Text:  "Create an authority akin to the Title 42 Public Health authority that has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to expel illegal aliens across the border immediately when certain non health conditions are met, such as loss of operational control of the border.  Mandatory detention. Congress should eliminate ambiguous
discretionary language in Title 8 that aliens “may” be detained and clarify that aliens “shall” be detained. This language, which contrasts with other “shall detain” language in statute, creates unhelpful ambiguity and allows the executive branch to ignore the will of Congress"

End birth right citizenship - could not find/got tired of looking

Ban Muslims from entering the country  - Page  141    

Text: Prioritize national security in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). ICE should end its current cozy deference to educational institutions and remove security risks from the program. This requires working with the Department of State to eliminate or significantly reduce the number of visas issued to foreign students from enemy nations.

Eliminates federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA and more  - Page  420, 664    

Text: EPA’s structure and mission should be greatly circumscribed to reflect the principles of cooperative federalism and limited government. This will require significant restructuring and streamlining of the agency to reflect the following. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories
Continues to pack the Supreme Court, and lower courts with right-wing judges        

 

 

The cited text sounds worse than the bullet points. The bullet points don't really grasp the seriousness. Reading the actual text brings up some major WTF? thoughts as a broad spectrum of the population would be impacted.

There should be some School House Rock type videos covering all the different areas of Project 2025.

[mchookem 15535]

8 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

I matched the claim with the text of Project 2025 

To be honest, many of them were mentioned multiple times all over the place. I tried to find the most relevant one

  Reveal hidden contents

End no fault divorce  - could not find/got tired of looking

Complete ban on abortions without exceptions  - Page 6  

Text: Finally, conservatives should gratefully celebrate the greatest pro-family win in a generation: overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that for five decades made a mockery of our Constitution and facilitated the deaths of tens of millions of unborn children. But the Dobbs decision is just the beginning. Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America. In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion

Ban contraceptives - Page 483-485  

Text: Restore Trump religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate (also a CMS rule). HHS should rescind, if finalized, the regulation titled “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” proposed jointly by HHS, Treasury, and Labor.70 This rule proposes to amend Trump-era final rules regarding religious and moral exemptions and accommodations for coverage of certain preventive services under the ACA. Preventive services include contraception, and Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. One of the emergency contraceptives covered under the HRSA preventive services guidelines is Ella (ulipristal acetate). Like its close cousin, the abortion pill mifepristone, Ella is a progesterone blocker and can prevent a recently fertilized embryo from implanting in a woman’s uterus. HRSA should eliminate this potential abortifacient from the contraceptive mandate

Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1%  - Page 696    

Text: Intermediate Tax Reform. The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions. The 30 percent bracket should begin at or near the Social Security wage base to ensure the combined income and payroll tax structure acts as a nearly flat tax on wage income beyond the standard deduction. The corporate income tax rate should be reduced to 18 percent. The corporate income tax is the most damaging tax in the U.S. tax system, and its primary economic burden falls on workers because capital is more mobile than labor.17 Capital gains and qualified dividends should be taxed at 15 percent. Thus, the combined corporate income tax combined with the capital gains or qualified dividends tax rate would be roughly equal to the top individual income tax rate.18 The system should allow immediate expensing for capital expenditures and index capital gains taxes for inflation. In addition, intermediate tax reform should repeal all tax increases that were passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act,19 including the book minimum tax, the stock buyback excise tax, the coal excise tax, the reinstated Superfund tax, and excise taxes on drug manufacturers to compel them to comply with Medicare price controls. The next Administration should also push for legislation to fully repeal recently passed subsidies in the tax code, including the dozens of credits and tax breaks for green energy companies in Subtitle D of the Inflation Reduction Act.20

Higher taxes for the working class - Page 696    

The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions

Elimination of unions and worker protections  - Page  81    

Text: Executive Order 13836, encouraging agencies to renegotiate all union collective bargaining agreements to ensure consistency with the law and respect for management rights;26 l Executive Order 13837, encouraging agencies to prevent union representatives from using official time preparing or pursuing grievances or from engaging in other union activity on government time;27 and l Executive Order 13839, encouraging agencies both to limit labor grievances on removals from service or on challenging performance appraisals and to prioritize performance over seniority when deciding who should be retained following reductions-in-force.28 Congress should also consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate in the first place. The bipartisan consensus up until the middle of the 20th century held that these unions were not compatible with constitutional government.30 After more than half a century of experience with public-sector union frustrations of good government management, it is hard to avoid reaching the same conclusion

Raise the retirement age   - could not find/got tired of looking

Cut Social Security  - Page 605

Text: Approve non-public worker organizations as UI administrators. DOL should approve, pursuant to § 303(a)(2) of the Social Security Act, nonpublic worker organizations as administrators. l Offer waivers for suitable alternatives. DOL should offer waivers from the standard requirements imposed on unemployment compensation by § 303(a) and § 303(d) of the Social Security Act to states that propose suitable alternatives

Cut Medicare  - Page 466-468  

Text:  Allow states to have a more flexible, accountable, predictable, transparent, and efficient financing mechanism to deliver medical services. This system should include a more balanced or blended match rate, block grants, aggregate caps, or per capita caps. Any financial system should be designed to encourage and incentivize innovation and the efficient delivery of health care services. Federal and state financial participation in the Medicaid program should be rational, predictable, and reasonable. It should also incentivize states to save money and improve the quality of health care. — 467 — Department of Health and Human Services l Direct dollars to beneficiaries more effectively and responsibly. The current funding structure for the Medicaid program rewards expansions, lacks transparency, and promotes financing gimmicks. CMS should: 1. End state financing loopholes. 2. Reform payments to hospitals for uncompensated care. 3. Replace the enhanced match rate with a fairer and more rational match rate. 4. Restructure basic financing and put the program on a more fiscally predictable budget (which should include reform of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments to hospitals).31 l Strengthen program integrity. Make program integrity a top priority and the responsibility of the states. To protect the taxpayers’ investment: 1. Incentivize states. An enhanced contingency fee should be paid to states that successfully increase their efforts to decrease waste, fraud, and abuse. The current system’s IT development 90/10 matching rate should be allowed for improvements in states’ current fraud and abuse and eligibility systems. Innovative programs that show a positive return on investment for both the state and federal governments should be allowed without the onerous waiver process.

End the Affordable Care Act - Page 469  

Text:  Remove barriers to direct primary care. Direct primary care (DPC) is an innovative health care delivery model in which doctors contract directly with patients for their care on a subscription basis regardless of how or where the care is provided. The DPC model is improving patient access, driving higher quality and lower cost, and strengthening the doctor– patient relationship. DPC has faced many challenges from government policymakers, including overly exuberant attempts at regulation and misclassification. Changes should clarify that DPC’s fixed fee for care does not constitute insurance in the context of health savings accounts. Separate the subsidized ACA exchange market from the nonsubsidized insurance market. The Affordable Care Act has made insurance more expensive and less competitive, and the ACA subsidy scheme simply masks these impacts. To make health insurance coverage more affordable for those who are without government subsidies, CMS should develop a plan to separate the non-subsidized insurance market — 470 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise from the subsidized market, giving the non-subsidized market regulatory relief from the costly ACA regulatory mandates.39

Raise prescription drug prices  - Page 465-466  

Text:  "Remove restrictions on key benefits and services, including those related to prescription drugs, hospice care, and medical savings account plans. Medicare Part D Reform. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) created a drug
price negotiation program in Medicare that replaced the existing private-sector negotiations in Part D with government price controls for prescription drugs. These government price controls will limit access to medications and reduce patient access to new medication. This “negotiation” program should be repealed, and reforms in Part D that will have meaningful impact for seniors should be pursued. Other reforms should
include eliminating the coverage gap in Part D, reducing the government share in the catastrophic tier, and requiring manufacturers to bear a larger share. Until the IRA is repealed, an Administration that is required to implement it must do so in away that is prudent with its authority, minimizing the harmful effects of the law’s policies and avoiding even worse unintended consequences."

Eliminate the Department of Education - Page 325    

Text: To improve educational opportunities for all Americans, the next Administration should work with Congress to pass a Department of Education Reorganization Act to reform, eliminate, or move the department’s programs and offices to appropriate agencies.

Use public, taxpayer money for private religious schools - Page 351    

Text: To restore state and local control of education and reduce the bureaucratic and compliance burden, Congress should allow states to opt out of the dozens of federal K–12 education programs authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and instead allow states to put their share of federal funding toward any lawful education purpose under state law. This policy has been advanced over the years via a proposal known as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (APLUS) Act.

Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools - could not find/got tired of looking

End free and discounted school lunch programs - Page 303  

Text:  Work with lawmakers to eliminate CEP. The NSLP and SBP should be directed to serve children in need, not become an entitlement for students from middle- and upper-income homes. Congress should eliminate CEP. Further, the USDA should not provide meals to students during the summer unless students are taking summer-school classes. Currently, students can get meals from schools even if they are not in summer school, which has, in effect, turned school meals into a federal catering program.93

End civil rights & DEI protections in government - Page 4,5  

Text:  The next conservative President must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors. This starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion — 5 — Foreword (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.

Ban African American and gender studies in all levels of education - Page 342-343, 346

Text: By its very design, critical race theory has an “applied” dimension, as its founders state in their essays that define the theory. Those who subscribe to the theory believe that racism (in this case, treating individuals differently based on race) is appropriate—necessary, even—making the theory more than merely an analytical tool to describe race in public and private life. The theory disrupts America’s Founding ideals of freedom and opportunity. So, when critical race theory is used as part of school activities such as mandatory affinity groups, teacher training programs in which educators are required to confess their privilege, or school. Department of Education assignments in which students must defend the false idea that America is systemically racist, the theory is actively disrupting the values that hold communities together such as equality under the law and colorblindness. l As such, lawmakers should design legislation that prevents the theory from spreading discrimination. For K–12 systems under their jurisdiction, federal lawmakers should adopt proposals that say no individual should receive punishment or benefits based on the color of their skin. Furthermore, school officials should not require students or teachers to believe that individuals are guilty or responsible for the actions of others based on race or ethnicity. Educators should not be forced to discuss contemporary political issues. The next Administration should take particular note of how radical gender ideology is having a devastating effect on school-aged children today—especially young girls. School officials in some states are requiring teachers and other school employees to accept a minor child’s decision to assume a different “gender” while at school—without notifying parents. In California, New Jersey, and certain districts in Kansas and elsewhere, educators are prohibited from informing parents about children’s confusion over their sex if the children do not want their parents to know. Such policies allow schools to drive a wedge between parents and children. The next Administration should work with Congress to provide an example to state lawmakers by requiring K–12 districts under federal jurisdiction, including Washington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, and Department of Defense schools, with legislation stating that: No public education employee or contractor shall use a name to address a student other than the name listed on a student’s birth certificate, without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public education employee or contractor shall use a pronoun in addressing a student that is different from that student’s biological sex without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. No public institution may require an education employee or contractor to use a pronoun that does not match a person’s biological sex if contrary to the employee’s or contractor’s religious or moral convictions.

Ban books and curriculum about slavery  - Page 5

Text:  The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women.

Ending climate protections  - Page 61, 257    

Text: The President should issue an executive order establishing a Senior Advisor to coordinate the policy development and implementation of relevant energy and environment policy by officials across the EOP (for example, the policy staff of the NSC, NEC, DPC, CEQ, and OSTP) and abolishing the existing Office of Domestic Climate Policy. USAID should cease its war on fossil fuels in the developing world and support the responsible management of oil and gas reserves as the quickest way to end wrenching poverty and the need for open-ended foreign aid. The next conservative Administration should rescind all climate policies from its foreign aid programs (specifically USAID’s Climate Strategy 2022–20307 ); shut down the agency’s offices, programs, and directives designed to advance the Paris Climate Agreement; and narrowly limit funding to traditional climate mitigation efforts. USAID resources are best deployed to strengthen the resilience of countries that are most vulnerable to climatic shifts. The agency should cease collaborating with and funding progressive foundations, corporations, international institutions, and NGOs that advocate on behalf of climate fanaticism

Increase Artic Drilling  - Page 530    

Text: Approve the 2020 Willow EIS, the largest pending oil and gas projection in the United States in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and expand approval from three to five drilling pads.59

Deregulate big business and the oil industry - Page 705, 369,  379, 407  

 Text: "Dodd–Frank Revisions. Congress should repeal Title I, Title II, and Title VIII of the Dodd–Frank Act.52 Title I of Dodd–Frank created the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a kind of super-regulator tasked with identifying so-called systemically important financial institutions and singling them out for especially stringent regulation. The problem, of course, is that this process effectively identifies those firms regulators believe are “too big to fail.”53 Eliminate political and climate-change interference in DOE approvals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In addition, Congress should reform the Natural Gas Act to expand required approvals from
merely nations with free trade agreements to all of our allies, such as NATO countries. Eliminate energy efficiency standards for appliances. The next Administration should work with Congress to modify or repeal the law mandating energy efficiency standards. Recommit itself to the NGA’s purpose of providing the American people with access to affordable and reliable natural gas. Limit its NGA decision-making on natural gas pipeline certificates to the question of whether there is a need for the natural gas. Limit its NEPA analysis to the impacts of the actual pipeline itself, not indirect upstream and downstream effects"

Promote and expedite capital punishment  - Page 554  

Text:  Enforce the death penalty where appropriate and applicable. Capital punishment is a sensitive matter, as it should be, but the current crime wave makes deterrence vital at the federal, state, and local levels. However, providing this punishment without ever enforcing it provides justice neither for the victims’ families nor for the defendant. The next conservative Administration should therefore do everything possible to obtain finality for the 44 prisoners currently on federal death row. It should also pursue the death penalty for applicable crimes—particularly heinous crimes involving violence and sexual abuse of children—until Congress says otherwise through legislation.45

End marriage equality - Page 481  

 Text: Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; and poor behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes

Condemn single mothers while promoting only "traditional families"   - Page 451    

Text: Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our children’s futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related “boyfriends” present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies.

Defund the FBI and Homeland Security  - Page  133, 549-551    

Text: "Our primary recommendation is that the President pursue legislation to dismantle the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.30 This is an enormous task, but it is necessary to re-earn the American people’s trust in the FBI and its work. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJleadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below). The department should also consider issuing a public report of the findings from this review as appropriate. The next conservative Administration should eliminate any offices within the FBI that it has the power to eliminate without any action from Congress.34 For example, few Americans know that the FBI maintains a core of approximately 300 attorneys within its Office of General Counsel, an office that has been involved in some of the
FBI’s most damaging recent scandals.35 These attorneys are not necessary to the functioning of the FBI in their current capacity. Legal advice should come from attorneys at the DOJ, whether those attorneys are within the
Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the Justice Management Division, or the Office of Legal Counsel. Moving legal review outside the FBI would serve as a crucial check on an agency that has recently pushed past legal boundary after legal boundary. Similarly, the FBI does not need its own Office of Congressional Affairs separate and apart from the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs, nor does it need its own Office of Public Affairs."

Use the military to break up domestic protests   - Page  107, 129  

Text:  Establish true alignment between DOD and DHS both to improve the defense of critical U.S. infrastructure and national border integrity and to develop vital information that enables defense against foreign targeted disruptions.  The U.S. military has a long history of providing support to civil authorities, particularly in response to disasters but for other purposes as well. The Defense Department currently defines defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) as “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in Title 32, U.S.C., status) in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. 

Mass deportation of immigrants and incarceration in "camps"  - Page  147, 150  

Text:  "Create an authority akin to the Title 42 Public Health authority that has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to expel illegal aliens across the border immediately when certain non health conditions are met, such as loss of operational control of the border.  Mandatory detention. Congress should eliminate ambiguous
discretionary language in Title 8 that aliens “may” be detained and clarify that aliens “shall” be detained. This language, which contrasts with other “shall detain” language in statute, creates unhelpful ambiguity and allows the executive branch to ignore the will of Congress"

End birth right citizenship - could not find/got tired of looking

Ban Muslims from entering the country  - Page  141    

Text: Prioritize national security in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). ICE should end its current cozy deference to educational institutions and remove security risks from the program. This requires working with the Department of State to eliminate or significantly reduce the number of visas issued to foreign students from enemy nations.

Eliminates federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA and more  - Page  420, 664    

Text: EPA’s structure and mission should be greatly circumscribed to reflect the principles of cooperative federalism and limited government. This will require significant restructuring and streamlining of the agency to reflect the following. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories
Continues to pack the Supreme Court, and lower courts with right-wing judges        

 

 

thanks for putting in the effort to do this, seriously.

i'm sure @DixonHurappreciates it. 

[YGIFS 19445]

The no-fault divorce one is still so baffling to me.  A significant portion of the divorces that occur between a politician or police officer spouse are declared "no fault" so the man can save face because he's in fact been abusive or cheating on her or substance abuse, or some combo.  They make a deal to just make it look like "we've grown apart" so the kids and extended family don't read about the real truth in the news.  Now, the actual proof is going to come out.  Family Law Courts will have to be on 24-hour watch and the wait times will be measured in decades, or longer.  I 've also questions about women not working and staying home with the kids, but I'll suppose we flesh that out later on.  

Bottom line---there's a bunch of shit on their list they didn't think through that will hurt them.  Not as much as it will hurt non-psychotic extremists, but there is some shit that has a fuck-ton of unintended consequences for them too, that they merely inserted for political points.  From drug prices to white trash couples having their kids on school lunch programs in rural America, they're gonna fuck over a massive chunk of their base.  Then we get to foreign policy, or lack thereof. 

[Satchel 6901]

If anybody is interested in knowing what P25 will look and feel like when operationalized, look no further than Cannon documents case dismissal. 25 years of precedence down the drain with this decision. Anybody who believes Trump didn’t know she was going to throw this out is not paying attention :

Justice Thomas's 'Cannon-currence' worked,” law professor Leah Litman tweeted after Cannon's ruling came out. “In the Trump immunity case, Justice Thomas wrote separately to suggest the special counsel was unlawfully appointed; the reasoning laid out the roadmap for this (wrong) result/decision.”

https://theintercept.com/2024/07/15/trump-classified-documents-immunity-clarence-thomas/#:~:text=“Justice Thomas's 'Cannon-currence,wrong) result%2Fdecision.”

[tx 3 putt 75228]

 

[Bozo_Casanova 25822]

On 7/13/2024 at 2:27 PM, bolverk said:

Claire Fortenberry Zunk

That’s some name

[tx 3 putt 75228]

 

[tx 3 putt 75228]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28604]

On 7/14/2024 at 7:25 PM, mchookem said:

End no fault divorce  - could not find/got tired of looking

Republicans have been advocating for that outside of Project 2025.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/no-fault-divorce-laws-republicans-repeal/675371/

You can find it in Issue #189 addressed by the 2024 platform of the Texas GOP (p. 31):

“We urge the Legislature to rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws, to support covenant marriage, and to pass legislation extending the period of time in which a divorce may occur to six months after the date of filing for divorce.”

https://texasgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2024-RPT-Platform.pdf

[CooterBrown 17724]

Page 592:  Change the 40 hour work week to the 160 hour work month.

Couple that with eliminating overtime (that's also in the plan).  Now, companies can make those workers do two 80-hour weeks up front while only paying for 40 hours of weekly pay.  Then, they don't put them on the schedule the final two weeks of the month.

No employer would ever do that.

Edited July 17 by CooterBrown

[TwiceHorn 30834]

17 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Republicans have been advocating for that outside of Project 2025.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/no-fault-divorce-laws-republicans-repeal/675371/

You can find it in Issue #189 addressed by the 2024 platform of the Texas GOP (p. 31):

“We urge the Legislature to rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws, to support covenant marriage, and to pass legislation extending the period of time in which a divorce may occur to six months after the date of filing for divorce.”

https://texasgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2024-RPT-Platform.pdf

Yeah, P2025 is mostly federal.  I don't think even the GQP's bizarre views of federalism-when-convenient could attack marriage dissolution laws in the states.

[BamaATL 16008]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, P2025 is mostly federal.  I don't think even the GQP's bizarre views of federalism-when-convenient could attack marriage dissolution laws in the states.

Have you been sniffing glue or huffing paint lately?  While their starting point may well be federal, their intentions are clear.  

[TwiceHorn 30834]

43 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Have you been sniffing glue or huffing paint lately?  While their starting point may well be federal, their intentions are clear.  

Whoosh. 

I never said that wasn't their intention, but merely pointed out that P2025 is a mostly federal thing.

No fault divorce is going to have to come from the states.  QED its absence from P2025 is meaningless.

Edited July 17 by TwiceHorn

[kevwun 15255]

Until the Supreme Court rules it doesn't have to.

[immamac 41617]

15 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Whoosh. 

I never said that wasn't their intention, but merely pointed out that P2025 is a mostly federal thing.

No fault divorce is going to have to come from the states.  QED its absence from P2025 is meaningless.

Dude, you live in a fantasy world where you think laws actually matter. 

[27-25 2030]

54 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Whoosh. 

I never said that wasn't their intention, but merely pointed out that P2025 is a mostly federal thing.

No fault divorce is going to have to come from the states.  QED its absence from P2025 is meaningless.

They could force the issue by changing the tax code, right?  US declares that married couples in states which do not eliminate no fault divorce will no longer be able to file jointly.  I believe a similar tactic was used with great effect to force the raising of the drinking age to 21.  No federal tax dollars for roads in Louisiana if they did not raise their drinking age.  They complied.

[softlynow 1612]

19 minutes ago, 27-25 said:

They could force the issue by changing the tax code, right?  US declares that married couples in states which do not eliminate no fault divorce will no longer be able to file jointly.  I believe a similar tactic was used with great effect to force the raising of the drinking age to 21.  No federal tax dollars for roads in Louisiana if they did not raise their drinking age.  They complied.

Yes, or they could use the spending clause to coerce state compliance, like when Louisiana had highway money withheld until the increased the drinking age to 21. And no, the conservatives on the Court will not find ANY level of withheld spending to be unconstitutionally coercive in this instance. I'm sure we'd get a very pointed and well-written dissent, so we've got that going for us.

[Pato del Muerto 52036]

Federal laws/rulings are their way of reaching into blue states that would never vote for their agenda on a statewide or smaller scale. 

[WhatTheBuck 28604]

Republicans’ War on Divorce Is Just Christian Nationalism in Disguise

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-07-17/republicans-are-targeting-no-fault-divorce

No-fault divorce is an option available in all 50 states. But it might not be for long if Donald Trump wins a second term, further emboldening a surging Christian nationalist movement that has divorce reform in its sights.

Already, several GOP-led states, including Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Louisiana, are moving to end or restrict the ability of a spouse to exit a marriage without establishing fault.

That’s troubling enough. But what’s even more troubling is that this effort is part of a larger strategy by extreme conservatives to return the US to traditional patriarchy, where their religious views become laws that govern us all.

Spoiler

Sound impossible? Consider that women are already being forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term in states around the country. Some states are moving to restrict access to reliable birth control. What happens when women are trapped in bad or abusive marriages because they’re too hard to escape?

Trump, who is on his third marriage after getting divorced from two previous wives, hasn’t taken a public position on eliminating no-fault divorce. But he is notorious for shifting his positions to suit his base and is loath to lose their support on any issue. And the list of other Republican luminaries who support such a change is lengthy.

Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, who was named Trump’s running mate Monday, has made his position clear, saying that no-fault laws allow people to “shift spouses like they change their underwear.” House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana even preached a sermon on the laws in 2016, claiming they had turned the country into a “completely amoral society.” Johnson and his wife have a “covenant marriage,” a special type of union available in just a few states. It’s based on the concept that marriage is a lifetime commitment and is exceptionally hard to dissolve.

Extreme conservatives argue that abortion, birth control and no-fault divorce have eroded the family, promoted promiscuity, hurt children, and, not incidentally, disfavored men. Society, they say, has suffered from loosening morals.

But whose morals?

No-fault divorce came into being when California Governor Ronald Reagan, who had been divorced and remarried, signed the first no-fault divorce bill into law in 1969.

Before then, a woman seeking a divorce had to prove grounds for it — typically, adultery, extreme cruelty, or abandonment, and the bar was high. Leaving a marriage without a decree usually meant all joint assets were left behind. Women, in particular, often were left destitute and unable to remarry. 

Marital rape wasn’t considered illegal in many states until 1993. And while many states quickly followed California’s example, it was a decades-long battle for some. Shockingly, it was 2010 when New York became the last state to offer a no-fault option. Even today, only 17 states are considered “true no-fault,” meaning it is the only option.

Opponents of no-fault divorce argue that the laws are unconstitutional because they violate the 14th Amendment by depriving a spouse of due process.Beverly Willett, a leader of the Coalition for Divorce Reform, said in a recent article in the Guardian that in such cases, a person “has absolutely no recourse to say ‘Wait a minute, I don’t want to be divorced and I don’t think there are grounds for divorce.’”

But that’s precisely the issue. It’s not uncommon for one spouse — often the one with greater assets — to prefer the status quo. The survival of the partner trapped in an abusive or exploitative marriage may depend on her ability to easily dissolve it and start over. 

Statistics show that as states adopted no-fault laws, rates of domestic violence, suicide and murder within marriage fell. Domestic violence incidents dropped by an estimated 30%.

Regrettably, given the conservative 6-3 makeup of the US Supreme Court, an argument such as Willett’s might find sympathy. A court stacked with even more conservatives, as would likely happen in a second Trump term, could be even friendlier.

If the Supreme Court were to find no-fault divorce laws unconstitutional, it would represent an immediate and dramatic setback for women’s rights. Divorce would become far more adversarial — and costly. 

And women wouldn’t be the only losers in this scenario. Men, too, could find themselves trapped in marriages with little way out. 

Nevertheless, the sentiment for eliminating the practice is growing within a conservative movement now dominated by evangelicals. 

Popular right-wing blogger Matt Walsh has for years called for a return to fault-based divorce. In a January 2023 social media post, he said, “I agree with men who say that the system has been rigged against them. Easiest way to fix this is to get rid of no-fault divorce completely and alimony in most cases.”

 

The Nebraska Republican Party platform calls for fault-based divorce for any couple with children. The Texas Republican Party’s platform goes further, calling for the elimination of no-fault divorce, stating that the state’s “Family Code shall be completely rewritten with regards to No-Fault Divorce and Child Custody … We urge the Legislature to rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws, to support covenant marriage …”

The overturning of Roe vs. Wade should alert all of us to how little long-standing precedent means. 

Christian nationalists are free to live according to their own values — that’s their right. However, they aren't free to impose their values on everyone else. This is the US, where freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion. Women, in particular, have learned the hard way what happens when that standard gets eroded.

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33708]

fucking whyyyyyyy?????????? holy shit I would bet more R's are divorced than D's. even if not, what the fuck is gained there?

[TwiceHorn 30834]

1 hour ago, 27-25 said:

They could force the issue by changing the tax code, right?  US declares that married couples in states which do not eliminate no fault divorce will no longer be able to file jointly.  I believe a similar tactic was used with great effect to force the raising of the drinking age to 21.  No federal tax dollars for roads in Louisiana if they did not raise their drinking age.  They complied.

Sure they could.  But P2025 is not only federal in nature, it is also contemplated as mostly an executive branch thing, not involving or requiring Congressional action (a tax bill has to come from the House).  It's not the be-all, end-all of the fascist agenda.  It's the tip of the iceberg.

[BamaATL 16008]

3 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

fucking whyyyyyyy?????????? holy shit I would bet more R's are divorced than D's. even if not, what the fuck is gained there?

Really?  They want to be able to beat the shit out their wives and face no consequences.  They want women to be nothing more than broodmares, cooks, and maids.  They want white "Christian" men to rule the world.  What they want is to undo hundreds of years of progress so that they, insecure as they are, don't have to compete.  At the end of the day, these people are cowards, who can't fathom having to actually compete and live in a modern world where people that aren't of their gender, aren't of their ilk, and aren't of their color have an equal chance.  They are the snowflakes.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33708]

Just now, BamaATL said:

Really?  They want to be able to beat the shit out their wives and face no consequences.  They want women to be nothing more than broodmares, cooks, and maids.  They want white "Christian" men to rule the world.  What they want is to undo hundreds of years of progress so that they, insecure as they are, don't have to compete.  At the end of the day, these people are cowards, who can't fathom having to actually compete and live in a modern world where people that aren't of their gender, aren't of their ilk, and aren't of their color have an equal chance.  They are the snowflakes.  

I meant besides that 

[Pato del Muerto 52036]

Well I guess fortunately it’s much easier to document abuse or infidelity via tiny cameras and shit than it was before no-fault became standard. 
 

If there are instances of no-fault where alimony and asset division are out of whack, maybe work on that problem instead of ending the entire thing which has proven to be an effective tool against continued violence and abuse. 

[wildcat09 28485]

9 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

fucking whyyyyyyy?????????? holy shit I would bet more R's are divorced than D's. even if not, what the fuck is gained there?

Why do a lot of divorced men want to change the law so that women can’t divorce them? 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21765]

We would be better off if laws were changed to make it harder to get married

[BamaATL 16008]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Why do a lot of divorced men want to change the law so that women can’t divorce them? 

because it cost them money.  They'd much rather the woman be trapped, while the man can run around and do as he pleases.  

[wildcat09 28485]

6 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

because it cost them money.  They'd much rather the woman be trapped, while the man can run around and do as he pleases.  

Yes, my question was rhetorical. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33708]

7 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

We would be better off if laws were changed to make it harder to get married

they're working on that too, only not in the way you're implying

[Aqua Buddha 14107]

End no fault divorce and I would never ever consider getting married for any reason at all.

[Macanudo 12743]

7 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

End no fault divorce and I would never ever consider getting married for any reason at all.

Shit, I'd consider getting divorced now before it's harder to do and I don't even want to get divorced.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33708]

49 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

End no fault divorce and I would never ever consider getting married for any reason at all.

 

40 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Shit, I'd consider getting divorced now before it's harder to do and I don't even want to get divorced.  

The IRS