How Trump's policies and Project 2025 proposals match up after first 100 days

On the campaign trail, President Trump repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025, claiming that he had "nothing to do with" the Heritage Foundation-led initiative, had not read it, and had no intention of reading it. But as the president marks 100 days in the White House, many of the plans he has rolled out since the start of his second term closely align with those in the pages of Project 2025's sprawling, 900-page policy blueprint, which lays out an overhaul of the executive branch.

Overseen by the Heritage Foundation, Project 2025 was an initiative that was designed to provide a roadmap for the next Republican president, now Mr. Trump. On the campaign trail, the president called some of its proposals "abysmal" and said he knew nothing about it, though CBS News' analysis showed many of its proposals were similar to his own.

The authors of some of the policy guide's chapters served in his first administration and have returned for the second. Russ Vought is leading the Office of Management and Budget, and John Ratcliffe is in place as CIA director, while Peter Navarro, who was a top trade adviser to Mr. Trump in his first administration, returned for a second stint in the White House.

Some of Mr. Trump's actions taken in his first days in office reinstate measures he put in place during his first term that were revoked by President Biden. In other instances, however, Mr. Trump has taken new executive actions that echo policies outlined in Project 2025's policy book.

Abolishing the Department of Education

In Project 2025, it was stated that "federal education policy should be limited and, ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated." Republicans have long advocated for the Department of Education's demise. Mr. Through the signing of an executive order in March, Trump made preparations to begin that process. The administration has already cut the Education Department's staff and is making plans to move some of its functions to other agencies.

Shuttering the Department of Education, however, would require an act of Congress.

Ending diversity, equity and inclusion practices

The president frequently rails against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices, and on the day he returned to the White House, he signed an executive order that ended all federal DEI programs. Mr. In his order, Trump stated that DEI policies have the potential to infringe on federal civil rights laws and exclude Americans "who deserve a shot at the American dream" due to their race or sexual orientation. Project 2025 likewise calls for the "DEI apparatus" at a variety of agencies to be dismantled.

A number of terms, such as DEI, abortion, and gender equality, should be eliminated "from every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists" according to the policy book for Project 2025. Mistakes in the Trump administration's initial efforts to eliminate references to race or gender led to public outcry and were later reversed. transferring FEMA expenses to the states Soon after beginning his second term, Mr. Trump established a review council to advise him on the ability of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, "to capably and impartially address disasters occurring within the United States." The council will also advise the president on recommended changes related to FEMA, his order states.

Mr. Trump's directive came after he suggested that he could "get rid" of FEMA and leave disaster response management to the states.

"That's what states are for, to take care of problems," he said in late January.

Mr. Trump also signed an executive order in March that declares it is the policy of the U.S. that "state and local governments and individuals play a more active and significant role in national resilience and preparedness," and says that his administration will "enable state and local governments to better understand, plan for and ultimately address the needs of their citizens."

The overhaul at FEMA has sparked concerns about the agency's capabilities to deliver disaster assistance ahead of hurricane season. In response to severe storms and tornadoes in Arkansas, flooding in parts of West Virginia, and storms in Washington, FEMA has already denied requests for federal assistance. "Reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government" is one of the many policy proposals in Project 2025. It also asks Congress to change the cost-sharing arrangement so that the federal government will pay up to 75% of the costs for "truly catastrophic disasters" and 25% for small disasters. Currently, for Public Assistance, which provides financial and direct assistance to state and local governments for disaster response and recovery work, FEMA covers a minimum of 75% of costs, and the president can increase the federal cost-share at his discretion, according to a 2023 report from the Congressional Research Service.

The authors of Project 2025 warned that FEMA is "overtasked," "overcompensates for the lack of state and local preparedness and response," and "regularly in deep debt." This prompted the recommendation. The book Project 2025 also asks Congress to end state and local preparedness grants. "DHS should not be in the business of handing out federal tax dollars: These grants should be terminated," it states.

Targeting PBS and National Public Radio

Brendan Carr, head of the Federal Communications Commission, informed the heads of National Public Radio and PBS in a letter earlier this year that the agency had opened an investigation into the airing of their programming across their roughly 1,500 broadcast member stations, according to The New York Times.

Those stations are licensed by the FCC to operate, but are limited to operating as noncommercial educational broadcast stations. These stations, or NCEs, are exempt from licensing fees and operate on a specific "reserved" frequency band. Federal law prohibits these noncommercial educational broadcast stations from airing commercial advertisements.

In his letter, Carr wrote that he is "concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials. In particular, it is possible that NPR and PBS member stations are broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements."

Carr also said that he also does not see a reason for Congress to continue approving federal dollars for NPR and PBS "given the changes in the media marketplace." Paula Kerger, chief executive officer of PBS, stated that the reductions "would devastate PBS member stations and the essential role they play in communities, particularly smaller and rural stations." Carr authored the section of Project 2025's policy book that deals with the FCC, but another portion of the blueprint urges Congress to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides grants to NPR and PBS.

According to Project 2025, "stripping public funding would, of course, mean that NPR, PBS, Pacifica Radio, and the other leftist broadcasters would be shorn of the presumption that they act in the public interest and receive the privileges that often accompany so acting." The outlets should therefore no longer be qualified as noncommercial educational broadcast stations, according to the book.

Freezing federal assistance

One of Mr. One of Trump's first acts as president was to create the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, in the White House to reduce spending and regulations and reorganize federal agencies. On the heels of that move, the Office of Management and Budget, or OMB, issued a two-page memo in January that ordered a freeze on grant, loan or federal assistance programs covered by Mr. Trump's executive orders, which would allow his administration "time to review agency programs and determine the best uses of the funding for those programs consistent with the law and the president's priorities."

The memo sparked widespread confusion and prompted concerns about whether programs providing meals for the elderly, pre-school funding for low-income children, medical research and other priorities approved by Congress would be impacted by the order.

The White House then rescinded the memo but maintained the funding pause "to end any confusion" created by a federal court order temporarily pausing implementation of the freeze. Federal courts have since ordered the administration to reinstate any money that was frozen subject to the memo.

Vought, the head of OMB, authored the section of Project 2025's policy book covering the Executive Office of the President, which includes the agency he has been tapped to lead.

"With the ability and charge to ensure that all policy initiatives are flying in sync and with the authority to let planes take off and, at times, ground planes that are flying off course," he says, comparing the budget office to an air traffic control system for the president. The memo may have been aimed at sparking a legal challenge to the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that limits the president's ability to unilaterally freeze certain funds appropriated by Congress, and in most cases requires the president instead to ask Congress to rescind spending legislation.

Vought wrote that the director of OMB must have "sufficient visibility into the deep caverns of agency decision-making" in the policy blueprint for Project 2025. This can be accomplished by ensuring that political appointees on his staff approve funding allocations authorized by Congress. Vought cited a 1870 law known as the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from spending federal dollars in advance and requires funding be doled out in installments.

He wrote, "This process, in which agencies come to OMB for allotments of appropriated funding, is essential to the effective financial stewardship of taxpayer funds." "The OMB can then, on behalf of a president, direct the amount, duration, and purpose of any apportioned funding to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse, and to ensure that it is consistent with the president's agenda and the laws that are in effect." Restricting gender-affirming care for minors

Mr. Trump issued an executive order in January that seeks to bar the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care — puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgical procedures — for people under the age of 19.

Called "Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation," the order directs certain executive agencies to take steps to ensure medical institutions that receive federal grants "end the chemical and surgical mutilation of children."

It also instructs the secretary of defense to take regulatory action to exclude gender-affirming care for minors from insurance coverage provided by TRICARE, the Defense Department's health care program, and federal employee health benefit programs. Mr. The head of the Department of Health and Human Services is required by Trump's order to withdraw guidance on gender-affirming care in March 2022. Project 2025's chapter on the Department of Health and Human Services calls for its Office of Civil Rights to "remove all guidance issued under the Biden administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity," including the March 2022 document.

The book generally criticizes gender-affirming care as causing "irreversible physical and mental