Mr. Project 2025

During confirmation hearings, Democratic senators pushed President Trump's more controversial cabinet picks on things they'd allegedly said. Did you say Lyme disease is a highly likely militarily engineered bioweapon? I probably did say that.
On things they'd allegedly done. Another time, a CBA staffer stated that you passed out in the back of a party bus.
Is that true or false? Anonymous smears. But for one nominee, Russell Vogt, Democrats took the step of staging a 30-hour protest, calling him Donald Trump's most dangerous nominee.
Before he was easily confirmed by the Republican Majority Senate. The low-key Mr.
Vogt now leads the low low key Office of Management and Budget. And while he's short on razzle dazzle, he's been very, very, very effective so far.
What Russ wants coming up on Today Explained. With a Spark Cash Plus card from Capital One, you earn unlimited 2% cash back on every purchase.

And you get big purchasing power, so your business can spend more and earn more. Capital One, what's in your wallet? Find out more at CapitalOne.com slash Spark Cash Plus.
Terms apply. at UC San Diego, research isn't just about asking big questions.
It saves lives and fuels innovation, like predicting storms from space, teaching T-cells to attack cancer, and eliminating cybersecurity threats with AI. As one of America's leading research universities, they are putting big ideas to work in new and novel ways.
At UC San Diego, research moves the world forward. Learn more at ucsd.edu slash research.
You're listening to Today Explains. Is it Today Explain or Che Explains? Explain Duh.
Explain Duh. My name is Simon Rabinovich, and I'm the U.S.
economics editor with The Economist. So there are a lot of outsized personalities in Donald Trump's second administration, starting with Donald Trump.
We also have Elon Musk, RFK, Tulsi Gabbard, just a lot of character. Why do you think Russell Vogt is worth understanding? Well, Russ Vogt, he's not outsized in terms of his personality, but I think he is outsized in terms of his influence.
He was there in the first Trump administration. He's a returnee, obviously, in the second.
And he really is the architect of a lot of the chaos and disruption that we've seen in the last few weeks. It's his idea to, you know, dramatically shrink the civil service, to bend it to President Trump's will, to reshape the way that the presidency operates to make it that much more powerful.
So, you know, in many respects, he really is sort of the power behind the throne. Okay, so when we say Elon Musk is the power behind the throne, he's the one dismantling the civil service.
That's not exactly right. It's not exactly right.
Elon Musk obviously has a great deal of influence, a great deal of power. But I think you can almost view Elon Musk and Doge, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, as Russ Vogt's shock troops.
They both agree that they want to reduce the size of the federal government to cut federal spending. Musk is kind of hyperactive in moving every which way, every direction, but ultimately kind of the general, the person who's really leading this, is Russ Vogt.
And he's the general. He's also the scholar because what they're doing will be challenged in courts.
It will be challenged in Congress. But to the extent that there is a legal justification, this is something that Russ Vogt is working on and has been working on for years leading up to the moment that we now face today.
What's his lore? Where's he come from? So, Rosvo has something of a blue-collar background, you could say. He had a big family, youngest of seven children.
Growing up as the son of an electrician and a schoolteacher, I saw firsthand the sacrifices my parents made to balance their budget and save for the future. They are a reminder of the burden government spending can place on everyday Americans.

He himself has talked about having a very strong Christian upbringing.

He went to college at an evangelical Christian school.

All this matters because part of the way that he views his role in government

is not just trying to change the way the presidency operates,

but also trying to infuse Christian nationalism, his kind of self-defined ideology. Nationalism is not just patriotic love for one's country, but a commitment to prioritize the needs and interests of one's own country over others.
Not unlike how a parent prioritizes their family over others, or a pastor who prioritizes their church over others.

He spent many, many years as a staffer for Republicans in Washington, D.C.,

and so kind of worked his way up the totem pole, if you will.

And then he was a key player in Trump 1.0,

and he's one of the few returnees in Trump 2.0. And I think also what's

notable is that not only has he returned to the administration, he's back in the very role that

he was in at the end of Trump's first term. He's the director of the Office of Management and Budget.

It's one of these agencies that not many people have heard of, but it actually wields a great

degree of power, and even more power in Russ Vogt's hands. When Russ Vogt says his politics are Christian nationalists, what does that mean? Well, the way that he describes it is that he wants to basically bring Christianity into all aspects of society, especially government.
So we talk about being a nation that's for God. That's a consensus that we want to renew in this country, that we have religious liberty, but it cannot come from this notion that a country isn't understanding the reality that it has to obey God, and there is only one true God, and that that is Jesus Christ our Lord.
And I think it's important because it doesn't just give him sort of a guidepost in terms of what he's doing, his views on abortion, which he wants to have a total ban on. It also kind of brings a certain righteousness of conviction to the way that he approaches his work, a belief that in some cases the ends justify the means.
It's one of the reasons why in Trump's first administration, no matter what President Trump did, Russ Vogt stood beside him. He thought that he was a key ally for kind of propelling his vision.
And you can just listen to the way that he talks to, you can read the way that he writes, and it's sort of inflected with these righteous tones. He talks about kind of, quote unquote, the storm clouds being upon us.
And we've got to take measure and be ready to put ourselves in uncomfortable, difficult spots and trust that duty is ours, results are God's. So it's, you know, it's a really, really important motivational force for him.
I've wondered about his speech. He's also quite mean.
He can be quite mean. He talked about wanting to traumatize civil servants, make them realize, you know, that nobody liked them.
We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains.
We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so. We want to put them in trauma.
Some of this language, I mean, if we were five years old, we would say that's not

very nice. Now that we're older, we would say, you know, don't talk about traumatizing people.

It's unnecessary. Yeah.
And it's a really weird contrast because if you meet him, you know,

I've had a long conversation with him and he has this very kind of scholarly demeanor. He's,

you know, always very buttoned up and, you know, very nicely trimmed beard. And he's soft-spoken.
But then when you actually listen to what he's saying, it's really quite radical. And I think it's something that he, you know, this is really just a reflection of the strength of his convictions.
This is stuff that he truly, deeply believes in. And more than that, I think that the manner in which he speaks is something that helps to inspire, you know, people who work with him.
And he does have kind of a devoted group of small allies who kind of share his vision. He's not transactional.
He's, you might say he's not corruptible. This is just stuff that he really wants to do.

Donald Trump famously throughout his life has engaged in a lot of behavior that is not

particularly Christian.

How did these two men get together?

How does he end up with Donald Trump in the first administration?

Well, so Russo has an interesting transition over time from, you know, when he was a young

Republican staffer, he was very much focused on kind of bread and butter fiscal conservatism. But then over the years, he got into more of a, you know, a MAGA style way of looking at government and ideology.
And he was somebody who got involved in the Trump transition team. As you'll remember, there wasn't an incredibly deep bench of people back in 2017.

And so he was appointed to the OMB.

He was a deputy director.

Eventually, in the final year, he became director of OMB.

And I think the thing for Vote is that he sees Trump as a vehicle for pushing forward his ideas.

So he talks about the fact that, you know, for example, abortion, this is something that he's quite passionate about. But yet all of these anti-abortion politicians in the Republican Party who failed to do anything, but it was Trump who ultimately was the one who, you know, through his Supreme Court appointments, was able to kill Roe versus Wade.
He had the most pro-life record ever. I've never seen him take it to stand in the way of a pro-life initiative that actually was real.
And so Vote, I think, sees Trump as just a critical ally, as somebody who's, you know, even if he doesn't agree with him on a day-to-day basis or on many issues, the grand vision is something where he sees alignment. For four years, the Trump vehicle had more or less stalled.
The president lost the 2020 election and was cast out into Florida. What was RussVote doing then? So the first thing to say is that at the very end of Trump 1.0, I think the Trump team began to realize this Russ vote guy has some ideas that are actually very, very powerful and might be electorally useful.
So in his last year, when he was running the office of management and budget, he was the one who wrote a memo saying that the federal government should stop all training and quote, unquote, critical race theory. That obviously became a very powerful trope for Trump in his more recent election campaign.
And he was also the one who was the architect of Schedule F, the idea that you could basically remove all career protections for civil servants. So the Trump team already had the sense that vote was powerful.
He leaves the administration. Trump is out of office.
Vote forms this organization, Center for Renewing America, and basically begins to create the legal blueprint for a lot of the actions that we've seen in the last couple of weeks. So ideas for ways to give the president much more power over spending, which is known as impoundment power, basically the idea that Congress can improve spending, but the president has the ability not to actually execute that spending.
The president ran on the notion that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional. I agree with that.
And then also, you know, thinking about ways to get Schedule F back into power, thinking about ways to shrink the civil service. So basically beginning to create this blueprint for what Trump would do in his current administration.
And one way as well in which vote was very much involved in thinking through Trump 2.0 was that he was one of the driving forces behind Project 2025. Donald Trump had nothing to do with Project 2025.
He thought it was ridiculous and abysmal. They are extreme.
I mean, they're seriously extreme.

Exactly, exactly.

Trump denied on the campaign trail that Project 2025 had anything to do with his administration, his future administration.

I don't know anything about it.

I don't want to know anything about it.

But of course, as we've seen in power, he's appointed many of the people who were involved in drafting Project 2025. And, you know, first and foremost is Ross Vogt.
Coming up, what is Project 2025? JK, JK, JK, you remember what it is. But now it's not just an idea, it is government policy.

Simon returns after the break to identify

all the places where we see the ideas made real.

Fox Creative. This is advertiser content brought to you by the all-new Nissan Murano.
Okay, that email is done. Next on my to-do list, pick up dress for Friday's fundraiser.
Okay, all right, where are my keys? Oh, in my pocket. Let's go.
First, pick up dress, then prepare for that big presentation. Walk dog, then...
Okay. Inhale.
One, two, three, four. Exhale.
One, two, three, four. Ooh, who knew a driver's seat could give such a good massage? Wow, this is so nice.
Oops, that was my exit. Oh, well, that's fine.
I've got time. After the meeting, I gotta remember to schedule flights for our girls' trip, but that's for later.
Sun on my skin, wind in my hair, I feel good. Turn the music up.
Your all-new Nissan Murano is more than just a tool to get you where you're going. It's a refuge from life's hustle and bustle.
It's a place to relax, to reset, in the spaces between items on your to-do lists. Oh, wait, I got a message.
Could you pick up wine for dinner tonight? Yep, I'm on it. I mean, that's totally fine by me.
Play Celebrity Memoir Book Club. I'm Claire Parker.
And I'm Ashley Hamilton. And this is Celebrity Memoir Book Club.
Support for this show comes from Indeed. The most exciting part of a heist movie is when the heroes bring together a team of guys.
The best safecracker, the fastest driver. With one montage, they're all assembled.
Unfortunately, in real life, you can't hire people with one simple jump cut. Luckily, there's Indeed, where you can find relevant candidates and qualified talent quickly.
Indeed's Sponsored Jobs allows your listings to jump to the top of the page for your relevant candidates. Plus, with Indeed sponsored jobs, there are no monthly subscriptions, no long-term contracts, and you only pay for results.
Join the 3.5 million employers worldwide that used Indeed to hire great talent fast. Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed, and listeners of the show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at indeed.com slash box business.
Just go to Indeed. And listeners of the show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more

visibility at indeed.com slash box business. Just go to indeed.com slash box business right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast.
Indeed.com slash box business. Terms and conditions apply.
Hiring Indeed is all you need. Hey everyone, Sean here.

I'm really excited to share with you our special... is all you need.
In our first episode, I'll interview futurist and tech pioneer Jaron Lanier about the current state of AI, the potential it can unlock if we manage this technology well, and the implications for humanity if we don't. And then in the second episode, I'll talk to Julia Longoria, host of Vox's Good Robot, about the beliefs and ideologies of the people building, funding, and influencing artificial intelligence.
And how looking at this AI origin story can provide clues into how this technology will change the way we live and work. You can find our special series, AI and Us, right here on The Gray Area.
Today Explained is back with Simon Rabinovich. Simon, you write that we are seeing Project 2025 become U.S.
policy. Where are we seeing it?

Well, I think first and foremost, you know, what Russ Vogt is doing with the OMB, you know, is very much in line with what his blueprint was.

He wrote a chapter in Project 2025 about basically how to use the executive office of the president.

And he was, you know, totally transparent with his intentions. A president today assumes office to find a sprawling federal bureaucracy that all too often is carrying out its own policy plans and preferences.
Or worse yet, the policy plans and preferences of a radical, supposedly woke faction of the country. So he viewed the idea of strengthening the White House as a way of basically returning power to the American people.
And so he laid out a blueprint of how he would use the OMB, how he'd use the agencies under the OMB, including the Office of Personnel Management, to basically shake up the civil service, to traumatize it, to shrink it,

and then to push through very, very robust ideas.

So we've talked a bit about how he'd like a full-on ban on abortion.

That's not something he can do, but he can do things in terms of trying to restrict immigration. And he has a view that

immigration should be dramatically circumscribed, that ideally, in his view, America should primarily be favoring immigrants from Christian nations or Christian immigrants. Not only does the Bible support national sovereignty and borders, but the Bible also has profound principles for thoughtful, limited immigration and emphasizing assimilation.

These are things that, you know, obviously it's not just vote himself. People like Stephen Miller are integral to doing this, but, you know, this is what he talked about in Project 2025.
I think you can go back and look at Project 2025 and see that, you know, much of what it was doing was, you might say, one, writing out a blueprint, but two, also kind of channeling the ideology of the Trump world. And so they're therefore giving us a fairly clear idea of what President Trump was actually going to do.
I haven't read it. I don't want to read it purposely.
I'm not going to read it. Now, much of what the Trump administration is doing is better described as trying to do because it is running into fierce opposition from the courts.
We have the elected vice president, J.D. Vance, saying, intimating, I guess might be a better way of putting it, that the president ultimately has more power than the courts.
Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power. What is Russell Vogt's plan to deal with that, to deal with all these lawsuits? I'm assuming he's thought this through.
He's certainly no dummy. So he knows that what he's doing does amount to radical reform, radical change, and therefore that there will be all kinds of opposition.
It's not going to be a smooth road. And so, you know, he's anticipated that what they've done, the executive orders trying to revive presidential power of empowerment, all of that will end up in the courts and probably ultimately will end up at the Supreme Court.
And so it's not that he's afraid that the courts are going to block his agenda. I think rather he wants the courts to ultimately be the jurisdiction that determines whether or not his interpretation of the law is the correct one.
And if he succeeds when these cases work their way up to a Supreme Court argument, if he succeeds, then he will have fundamentally redrawn the bounds of presidential power and brought America back to kind of a late 19th century version of the way that the White House could operate. The loss of impoundment authority, which 200 years of presidents enjoyed, was the original sin in eliminating the ability from a branch on branch to control spending.
And we're going to need to bring that back. In a way, all of these lawsuits aren't necessarily a bad thing.
All of these lawsuits might be driving toward what Russ Vot wants. That's right.
Driving towards the kind of the fundamental confrontation to the judgment day, if you will. Now, of course, there still is concern and some of what J.D.
Vance has said has animated those concerns that, you know, will the Trump administration abide by court rulings that don't go in their favor? But I think as far as Russ Vod is concerned, you know, he has the confidence, the optimism that the courts will ultimately side with them. And I think legal scholars who've looked at empowerment power, for example, you know,

it's not clear exactly how the courts will rule. There's many people who think that what they're trying to do is unconstitutional, is illegal, but it's not a slam dunk.
And so I think Razvot is spoiling for a fight. There are two other men in a driver's seat in this administration.
One of them is Vice President J.D. Vance, who seems very interested in using the power of the federal government to push for conservative ends.
Things like making policy that would support families. J.D.
Vance going head to head with the courts right now. And then you have Elon Musk, who is the unelected vice president, and he just simply seems to want to tear the government up, just shrink it, shrink it, shrink it.

So these two guys both have a lot of power. They seem interested in handling it in different ways.
Where does Russ Vogt fall in that spectrum? How does he navigate what seems to me like a tension? Yeah, and I think you're right that there are tensions, and I think we'll kind of see those tensions come to the surface more and more as time moves on. I think for the time being, the way I would see it is that Russ Vogt sort of, it's not that he's necessarily anywhere specifically on that spectrum, but he shares bits and pieces with all of them.
So, you know, for example, specifically, if you look at J.D. Vance and how he's been very suspicious of big tech, I mean, Russ Vot also is suspicious of big tech.
His specific concern is that big tech has been too woke and has been sort of forcing this woke agenda on the American people. So to the extent that J.D.
Vance wants to cut down Silicon Valley, this is something that

Rosvote certainly buys into as well.

And then like Elon Musk, you know, he also really wants to shrink down Silicon Valley. This is something that Russ Votes certainly buys into as well.
And then like Elon Musk, he also really wants to shrink government as we've discussed. So I think to the extent that they are doing things that align with Russ Votes' ideas, he's very much happy to just kind of go along with both of them.
And whatever the tension is, he thinks the bigger vision is, you know, a much stronger White House, President Trump being relatively unencumbered. And he sees that both Vice President Vance and Elon Musk are pushing in that same direction.
So I guess, I suppose one way that you might see it is that it's not that vote sees himself specifically as a handmaiden of whatever happens to be the Trumpian vision of government, but rather he sees Trump and Trump's allies as basically being battering rams to destroy the status quo in government, especially the status quo in the bureaucracy, and to push through hopefully many of his beliefs. He really wants the president to have more power.
He really wants much in the government to bend to the executive. And he wants to make changes that would do that.
And he appears to be making changes that would do that. But what happens when the next time a Democrat is elected president? Like, has he thought through the implications of what he wants to do here? No doubt the implication would be that you'd begin to have this whip-sawing between, you know, potentially an extreme Republican agenda followed by something that would be much more appealing towards Democratic voters.
Having said that, I think that, you know, he believes that his role is not just to do something that's a corrective for the last four years, but to do something that's a corrective for the last century. So I think, you know, he's aware that a Democrat could begin to unwind some of his agenda, but he wants to demolish the civil service that's been built up, that's been strengthened and expanded, you know, going back to the time of Teddy Roosevelt, you know, well before even FDR.

So, you know, if he's able to dramatically shrink the government, to dramatically assert the president's power to not spend all the money that's been appropriated, I think his belief would be that even if you have a Democratic president, they would not be able to just completely reverse everything that he's done.

So, I mean, yes, that's a risk to his agenda, but still, I think, you know, this is something that he thinks is required. Simon Rabinovich is the U.S.
economics editor for leading magazine The Economist.

Miles Bryan produced today's show and Amina El-Sadi edited.

Andrea Kristen's daughter engineered.

Laura Bullard is our fact checker.

And I'm Noelle King. It's Today Explained.