Peaceworks

Does Nonviolent Direct Action Work? Yes.

2025-08-12T15:58:00.001-04:00

Note: This post was originally published on November 8, 2011, which was during the "occupy" movement. The linked article became unavailable at the original source, so I reverted it to draft and am now republishing with an updated link to the article, "Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict."

I heard a rumor today that the term “occupy” has now been blocked from internet searches in China, thanks to the “occupy Wall Street” movement in the USA. This, along with all of the protests associated with what is now known as the Arab Spring, seems to have left the Chinese government just a bit concerned. Is there a reason to be concerned? Maybe.

Not every revolution is successful. However, nonviolent revolutions have about double the success rate of those marked by violent means. The rates of success were documented in a study by Maria J. Stephan and Erica Chenoweth, "Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict." International Security 33, no. 1 (Summer 2008): 7-44.

According to Stephan and Chenoweth, of 323 violent and nonviolent movements between 1900 and 2006, 53% of the nonviolent ones succeeded as compared to only 26% of the violent ones. What’s even more telling is that when the movements were repressed, the nonviolent movements were 6 times more likely to succeed.

The article can be accessed at the following link:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240678278_Why_Civil_Resistance_Works_The_Strategic_Logic_of_Nonviolent_Conflict

The Pink Panzer

Technorati Tags: nonviolence,nonviolent direct action,arab spring,ows

PROJECT 2025 BROKEN OUT BY TOPIC

2024-11-03T15:46:00.001-05:00

WHAT IS PROJECT 2025?

(Numbers in brackets are references to page numbers in the Project 2025 document itself. )

1. What is Project 2025: Embodied in a 900-page document entitled “Mandate for Leadership – The Conservative Promise,” developed in collaboration with more than 100 right wing organizations, Project 2025 is a blueprint for how the right wing hopes to remake / reinvision federal government PLUS an actual roadmap and action plan for how to do it.

a. What’s under attack, in general:

i. Independence of the civil service

ii. Rulemaking / policy ability of federal agencies

iii. The tradition of ensuring continuity of governance of the basic functions of government no matter what party is in political office

iv. Specific programs and (in general) the scope and work of the federal agencies, to further the Republican agenda of stripping government of power

b. More detail about this agenda, from Page xiv: "Our goal is to assemble an army of aligned, vetted, trained, and prepared conservatives to go to work on Day One to deconstruct the Administrative State."

i. The term "Administrative State" has become a scornful description used to stigmatize workers who perform duties for the administrative agencies of the federal government. The functions being attacked include things like: national defense; law enforcement; protection of public health and the environment; the postal service; public works; all forms of public transportation, including rail and air travel; educational policy.

ii. Project 2025 seeks to upend the checks and balances that have been developed over a long period of time to ensure continuity between elected political administrations and also to ensure the political neutrality of the administrative side of civil service.

iii. It specifically seeks to remove thousands of career civil service employees with political appointees who will serve the agenda of the current chief executive (President) and whose loyalty is to the current political administration rather than to the Constitution of the United States.

iv. Project 2025 envisions measures far beyond personnel changes, however. It advocates measures that, if enacted, would have a dramatic impact on our democracy and on our freedoms.

AREAS OF PROJECT 2025 BROKEN DOWN BY SPECIFIC TOPIC

2. Democracy

a. Project 2025 would concentrate power in the executive branch by advocating for expanding presidential power over agencies, including independent agencies, and for making it easier to fire career civil servants. This could concentrate power in the executive branch and make it harder for Congress and the courts to check presidential power. [43] [825]

b. Project 2025 would weaken independent agencies like the Federal Reserve and the FCC and propose to bring them under political control. This would impair the agencies' ability to act impartially and make decisions based on expertise rather than political pressure. [731] [845]

c. Project 2025 would make it easier for the President to fire government workers who are not political appointees. This would give the President more power over the people who work for the government and make it harder for them to do their jobs without worrying about being fired for political reasons. [80]

d. Project 2025 would allow religious organizations to discriminate against people they don't agree with. This would violate the rights of people who are discriminated against. [586]

e. Project 2025 would allow the government to use taxpayer money to support religious organizations. [261] [481]

f. Project 2025 would advance the agenda of the “right wing,” including by selectively enforcing laws and prioritizing funding for certain groups. This could undermine the principle of impartial government and create a two-tiered system of justice. [545]

g. Overall, Project 2025 seeks to dismantle and disempower virtually all government agencies. While often inefficient and bureaucratic, these agencies are also a key mechanism for implementing laws passed by Congress and protecting the public interest. Weakening these agencies could lead to less accountability and weaker enforcement of laws, particularly in areas like environmental protection, consumer safety, and worker rights. [6]

3. Civil Rights: On the topic of civil rights, Project 2025 is overtly hostile to anything related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

a. US Justice Department Civil Rights Division:

i. As an example of its hostility to civil rights, Project 2025 proposes to reverse the Division’s mission. Rather than prosecute public and private entities which discriminate against people of color and women, the Justice Department Civil Rights Division would be compelled to utilize “the full force of federal prosecutorial resources” against employers that promote diversity in their workforce. The express premise is that any policy promoting diversity in the workforce necessarily constitutes “affirmative discrimination” against white people.

ii. Where does it say this? At pages 561-562, it states: “Even though numerous federal laws prohibit discrimination based on notable immutable characteristics such as race and sex, the Biden Administration— through the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and other federal entities— has enshrined affirmative discrimination in all aspects of its operations under the guise of ‘equity.’ Federal agencies and their components have established so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices that have become the vehicles for this unlawful discrimination, and all departments and agencies have created ‘equity’ plans to carry out these invidious schemes. To reverse this trend, the next conservative Administration should: Reorganize and refocus the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division to serve as the vanguard for this return to lawfulness. The Attorney General and other DOJ political leadership should provide the resources and moral support needed for these efforts. The Civil Rights Division should spend its first year under the next Administration using the full force of federal prosecutorial resources to investigate and prosecute all state and local governments, institutions of higher education, corporations, and any other private employers who are engaged in discrimination in violation of constitutional and legal requirements.”

b. Project 2025 promotes "school choice" and suggests phasing out federal funding for public education. Allowing taxpayer money to fund private schools and charter schools (which do not have a mandate of accepting and educating every student regardless of ability) would intensify existing inequalities in educational opportunities. This would remove important funding from public schools and would also reduce access to quality education for marginalized communities such as students who have disabilities or who are economically disadvantaged. [5] [319] [351]

c. Project 2025 allows colleges to discriminate against students based on their race and sex. This would mean that some students would be treated unfairly when applying to college, limiting opportunities for marginalized groups. [352]

d. Project 2025 advocates the use of public, taxpayer money for private religious schools. This would blur the line between government and religion, enable discrimination in admissions, hiring and curriculum based on religious beliefs, potentially infringing on the religious freedom of students and families, and reduce funding for and undermine public education. [351]

e. Project 2025 advocates restrictions on the application of the Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision, by revoking workplace protections against sex discrimination that were extended to LGBTQ+ employees. This enables discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. [584]

f. Project 2025 advocates rescission of regulations prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, and sex characteristics. This means that the government will no longer try to protect citizens who do not conform to Project 2025's notion of "normal,” potentially leading to discrimination in various sectors like healthcare, housing, and employment. [584]

g. Project 2025 calls for elimination of the terms sexual orientation and gender identity, diversity, equity, and inclusion, gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, and reproductive rights among others out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists. This means that these identities, concepts and topics will be "erased" in education, healthcare and cultural institutions and no longer protected or supported by the government. This could severely limit the rights and representation of marginalized groups. [4]

h. Project 2025 advocates allowing religious organizations to discriminate against people they don't agree with. [586]

i. Project 2025 promotes allowing the government to use taxpayer money to support religious organizations. [261] [481]

j. Project 2025 advances the Christian Nationalist agenda, including by selectively enforcing laws and prioritizing funding for certain groups. This could undermine the principle of impartial government and create a two-tiered system of justice, disproportionately affecting marginalized groups. [545]

k. Project 2025's focus on border security and immigration enforcement could lead to increased racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos, immigrants and other people of color who are legally in the USA. [135] [140]

l. Project 2025 promotes policies that favor values and institutions promoted by right-wing religious groups associated with “Christian Nationalism.” This will marginalize other religious groups (including not just other religions but also other Christian groups) and undermine the separation of church and state. [4] [560] [581] [589]

m. Project 2025 promotes policies that reinforce traditional gender roles. This will limit opportunities for women and LGBTQ+ individuals. [451] [481]

n. Project 2025 uses language saying that it supports "traditional family values," that being a code word for right wing policy agenda to delegitimize non-traditional families. This framing often underlies arguments against abortion and comprehensive sex education, suggesting a push to limit reproductive choices and remove women’s bodily autonomy. [451] [489]

4. Climate

a. Project 2025 claims the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) “a colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” Project 2025 therefore wants to disband NOAA and transfer collection and dissemination of information to private industry (notably weather reporting channels). [675]

b. Project 2025 promotes expansion of coal, oil, and natural gas. This would increase greenhouse gas emissions and exacerbate climate change, which could lead to more extreme weather like hurricanes and floods and other negative environmental impacts. [365]

c. Project 2025 proposes weakening the Endangered Species Act. This could make it harder to protect species threatened by climate change and could lead to biodiversity loss. [533]

d. Project 2025 prioritize economics growth over environmental protection. This could lead to policies that favor short-term economic gains over long-term environmental sustainability and could undermine efforts to address climate change. [418]

e. Project 2025 opposes "climate-smart" agricultural practices and withdraws all grants researching climate friendly agricultural policies. This would mean that the U.S. would not support efforts to reduce agriculture's contribution to climate change, potentially leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector. [293]

f. Project 2025 reduces the role of the federal government in addressing climate change. This could lead to a lack of coordinated federal action on climate change and could shift responsibility to states and the private sector, which may not have the resources or incentives to take effective action. [61]

g. Project 2025 shifts environmental policymaking to states and localities, even though commerce is national and international. This could result in a patchwork of regulations, with some states taking stronger action than others, and could undermine efforts to address climate change on a national level. [420]

h. Project 2025 restructures the U.S. Global Change Research Program. This could lead to the downplaying of climate risks in policy decisions and weaken the scientific basis for climate action. [59]

i. Project 2025 would have the US withdraw from international agreements like the Paris Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. This means the U.S. would no longer participate in global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and could face international criticism and isolation. [709]

j. Project 2025 ends funding for "climate reparations." This would mean that the U.S. would no longer provide financial assistance to developing countries to help them address the impacts of climate change, potentially exacerbating global inequalities and hindering international cooperation on climate action. [389]

k. Project 2025 promotes the end of SCC (Social Cost of Carbon) analysis - a dollar estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one additional ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This means that the government will no longer consider the costs of climate change. [61]

l. Project 2025 proposes elimination of government organizations that work on climate related issues, such as clean energy, pollution reduction, and other initiatives to combat climate change. Specific groups it proposes to eliminate include the Clean Energy Corps, the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, and ARPA-E. These groups work on clean energy, pollution reduction, and other initiatives to combat climate change. [369]

m. Project 2025 promotes ending the government's focus on climate change and green subsidies. This would lead to an acceleration in climate change and its associated risks like extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and ecosystem disruption. [378]

n. Project 2025 proposes elimination of energy efficiency standards for appliances. This would lead to increased energy consumption, higher energy bills for consumers, reduced innovation in appliance technology, and a negative impact on the climate. [378]

5. Drug Prices

a. Project 2025 proposes the repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act’s drug price negotiation program in Medicare. This would allow drug companies to charge higher prices for drugs, which would make it more expensive for people to buy them. [465]

b. Project 2025 reduces the government share in the catastrophic tier of Medicare Part D and require manufacturers to bear a larger share. This would make it more expensive for seniors to buy drugs when they reach the catastrophic coverage limit. [465]

6. Education

a. Project 2025 proposes elimination of the Department of Education, putting all educational policy and funding into the hands of state and local governments. This would mean that states would have to pay for all of their schools, which could result in less money for schools in poorer states and rural areas. It also deprives parents, teachers, and schools of the resources from the US Department of Education including guidance and guidelines for best practices in education. [319]

b. Project 2025 eliminates funding for special ed and transfers that to Dept of Health and Human Services to be administered to states through no-strings attached block grants to be used for any purpose the state wishes. [326]

c. Project 2025 prioritizes parents’ rights over the right of every child to a “free and appropriate public education.” From page 5: “In our schools, the question of parental authority over their children’s education is a simple one: Schools serve parents, not the other way around. That is, of course, the best argument for universal school choice—a goal all conservatives and conservative Presidents must pursue. But even before we achieve that long-term goal, parents’ rights as their children’s primary educators should be non-negotiable in American schools. States, cities and counties, school boards, union bosses, principals, and teachers who disagree should be immediately cut off from federal funds.” Parents surely have a strong interest in the education their children are receiving. They always have and they always should. However, this proposal must be viewed against the backdrop of recent efforts to remove professional oversight of education and to instead empower individual parents to veto teaching from or about books they do not like and course components with which they disagree. Such a veto power invites a chaotic free-for-all in which choices made by one parent seriously and adversely affect the freedom other parents have to make a different choice. Elected school boards and administrators have maintained a robust educational system for decades and can continue to ensure that all parental voices be heard in the process of choosing a curriculum and other aspects of a public education.

d. Project 2025 proposes elimination of Title I, which provides extra federal funding for schools in impoverished areas, transfer funding to Health and Human Services block grants which could be used however states want. [325]

e. Project 2025 promotes “school choice" and suggests phasing out federal funding for public education. This could exacerbate existing inequalities in educational opportunities and lead to a decline in the quality of public schools. [5] [319] [351]

f. School Lunches: Project 2025 reduces the free school lunch program. This would mean that many children may not have enough to eat while at school. [303]

g. Head Start: Project 2025 calls for complete elimination of the Head Start program. This would mean that many children from poor families would not have access to preschool. [482]

h. Financial Aid: Project 2025 makes it harder for students to get financial aid for college. This would mean that fewer students from poor families would be able to go to college. [327]

i. Discrimination: Project 2025 would allow colleges to discriminate against students based on their race and sex. [352]

j. Religious Education: Project 2025 allows diversion of public, taxpayer money to private religious schools. This would blur the line between government and religion, enable discrimination in admissions, hiring and curriculum based on religious beliefs, and reduce funding for and undermine public education. [351]

k. Project 2025 specifically prevents the CDC from advising that school children should be masked or vaccinated, saying such decisions should be left to parents and medical providers. This could lead to increased disease outbreaks and a resurgence of preventable diseases like measles and whooping cough. [454]

l. Project 2025 wades deep into “culture wars” by proposing elimination of any education about things like “critical race theory.” [5], [52], [88], [103], [279], [322], [336], [342], [344], [348], [496], [565], [582], [583], [708]

7. Environment

a. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the size and scope of the EPA and eliminate or weaken various environmental regulations. This means that companies will be able to pollute more, which will make the air and water dirtier and could make people sick. [420]

b. Project 2025 proposes to downsize National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to privatize weather reporting and eliminate research. [676]

c. Project 2025 proposes to prioritize industry over the environment by promoting economic growth and energy production over environmental protection. This could lead to a prioritization of short-term economic gains over long-term environmental sustainability. [13] [521]

d. Project 2025 proposes to allow more pollution from cars and trucks. [628]

e. Environmental Impact Studies: Project 2025 proposes to make it easier to build roads and oil pipelines in places where animals live. [61] [533]

f. Project 2025 proposes to make it easier to cut down trees in national forests. [308]

g. Project 2025 proposes to let companies drill for more oil and gas on public lands. [521]

h. Project 2025 proposes to weaken rules that protect endangered animals. [534]

i. Project 2025 proposes to stop the government from studying climate change. [61]

8. Agriculture

a. Project 2025 attempts to eliminate farm subsidies like the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program. This means that farmers will no longer get money from the government to help them when prices for the crops they grow go down or when they do not harvest as much as they expected. [296]

b. Project 2025 proposes to stop paying farmers twice for price and revenue losses during the same year. This means that farmers will get less money from the government to help them when prices for the crops they grow go down or when they do not harvest as much as they expected. [297]

c. Project 2025 proposes to reduce how much the government pays to help farmers buy crop insurance. This means that farmers will have to pay more to buy crop insurance to protect themselves against bad weather or low prices. [297]

d. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Conservation Reserve Program. This means that farmers will no longer get paid to not farm some of their land. [304]

e. Project 2025 proposes to repeal the federal sugar program. This means that sugar farmers will no longer be protected from competition from foreign sugar growers. [296]

f. Project 2025 proposes to oppose "climate-smart" agricultural practices. This would mean that the U.S. would not support efforts to reduce agriculture's contribution to climate change, potentially leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector. [293]

g. Project 2025 proposes to capping and then phasing down the H-2A visa program: This could lead to higher labor costs for farmers, which would make it more difficult for some farmers to stay in business, especially those who operate on thin margins. This could also lead to labor shortages, reduced food production, and higher food prices for consumers. [611]

9. Federal Law Enforcement

a. After the abuses of J. Edgar Hoover came to light, federal law was amended to prevent the Director of the FBI from serving for more than ten years. This proposal is intended to eliminate the FBI Director’s ten-year maximum term of office that was enacted following the 1972 death of J. Edgar Hoover and the revelations that preceded his passing. Equally important, the proposal would take the FBI out of the Department of Justice where, under the supervision and control of law-enforcement professionals, it currently serves as the Department’s principal investigative office. Worse, it would place the FBI under the direct control of a political office-holder with all of the potential for political machinations that would bring, and, in light of the suggestion that the change await the next ‘conservative Administration,’ perhaps is intended to bring.

b. Project 2025 proposes to make Director of FBI directly accountable to the President: The actual words from Project 2025 with reference to this point are: (Page 552) Page 552): “The Director of the FBI must remain politically accountable to the President in the same manner as the head of any other federal department or agency. To ensure prompt political accountability and to rein in perceived or actual abuses, the next conservative Administration should seek a legislative change to align the FBI Director’s position with those of all other major departments and agencies.”

10. Food Assistance: major cuts to SNAP and additional red tape for applicants

a. SNAP: Project 2025 proposes cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This means that many people who need help buying food would no longer get money from the government to buy food. [298]

b. Project 2025 proposes to require states to implement work requirements for SNAP recipients. This means that people who are able to work would have to get a job or do some type of work in order to get food stamps. [299]

c. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate broad-based categorical eligibility. This would make it harder for people to get food stamps because they would have to meet more requirements to be eligible. [300]

d. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the heat-and-eat loophole. This would make it harder for people to get the full amount of food stamps they are eligible for. [301]

e. Project 2025 proposes to reform the Thrifty Food Plan. This could lead to people getting less money in food stamps because the government would change how it calculates the amount of money people need to buy food. [300]

f. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate CEP. This would mean that some children who currently get free school meals would have to pay for them. [303]

11. Freedom of Speech

a. Enable use of military against protesters (not verified, denied by Heritage Foundation but purportedly Executive Orders pre-drafted for President to sign include use of Insurrection Act to enable President to call up military to quell protests.) Further, Donald Trump has promoted this in his speeches.

b. Project 2025 proposes to limit online platforms' ability to moderate content. This will lead to a proliferation of hate speech and misinformation. [849]

c. Project 2025 proposes to remove protections for online platforms from being held legally responsible for user-generated content on their sites. This will cause these online platforms to either shut down or implement strict moderation and censorship. [847]

d. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency's (CISA) involvement in countering misinformation and disinformation. This means that the government will abandon its role as "the arbiter of truth" and the American people will be more exposed to lies and manipulation. [155]

e. Project 2025 proposes to prohibit the FBI from engaging in activities related to combating the spread of misinformation and disinformation by Americans. This means that the government will abandon it's role as "the arbiter of truth" and the American people will be more exposed to lies and manipulation. [550]

f. Project 2025 proposes to ban pornography, imprison the people who produce and distribute it, shut down the telecom and tech firms that facilitate its spread, and register as sex offenders any educators and public librarians who purvey it. This sounds great, except there’s no definition of what is “pornography.” Some extremists (as just one example) advocate labeling any reference to LGBT as “pornography.” Overly broad categories threaten to curtail freedom of speech, create a chilling effect on artists, writers and filmmakers, enable disproportionate punishment for non-violent offenses, stifle innovation, lead to job losses and economic disruption, and lead to censorship and moral policing. [5]

12. Gun Rights: representations have been made that Project 2025 includes this, but I have not found it.

13. Health Care

a. Project 2025 proposes to promote a free market for Health Care: reform U.S. healthcare into a free market mostly regulated by states. This means patients will need to develop more healthcare expertise, rural areas may be underserved, low-income and vulnerable populations may be underserved, sicker patients may pay more, the system may be ill-equipped to handle public health emergencies, and it could lead to an overall decline in quality and safety standards. [450]

b. Project 2025 proposes to cut the Affordable Care Act. This could lead to loss of coverage, reduced consumer protections and an increased financial burden for Americans. [469]

c. Project 2025 proposes to Reduce Funding for Public Health by splitting the CDC and reducing its funding. This could weaken the nation's ability to respond to public health emergencies and address critical health issues. [452]

d. Project 2025 proposes to prevent the CDC from advising that school children should be masked or vaccinated, saying such decisions should be left to parents and medical providers. This could lead to increased disease outbreaks and a resurgence of preventable diseases like measles and whooping cough. [454]

e. Project 2025 proposes to tax employers on workplace benefits that exceed $12,000 per worker annually. This would lead to employers cutting back on these benefits and workers paying more taxes, and would be damaging for millions of families who rely on one working adult's employer-provided health insurance to cover dependents, such as children. [697]

f. If this tax was enacted, it is estimated that just based on health insurance benefits in 2022 alone: (1) More than 15 million workers would see their benefits taxed. (2) Their taxes would rise by more than $12 billion if employers shifted away from benefits to other forms of taxable compensation. https://epiaction.org/2024/08/14/the-little-known-project-2025-tax-on-employee-benefits/

g. See Medicaid

h. See Medicare

14. LGBTQIA+

a. Project 2025 proposes to gut protections for the LGBTQ+ community, including eliminating the Gender Policy Council. This means that the government will no longer try to protect people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer. [62]

b. Project 2025 proposes to stop workplace oversight: restrict the application of the Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision. This will restrict workplace protections against sex discrimination that were extended to LGBTQ+ employees. [584]

c. Project 2025 proposes to rescind regulations prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, and sex characteristics. This means that the government will no longer try to protect citizens who do not conform to Project 2025's notion of "normal". [584]

d. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the terms sexual orientation and gender identity, diversity, equity, and inclusion, gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, and reproductive rights among others out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists. This means that these identities, concepts and topics will be "erased" in education, healthcare and cultural institutions and no longer protected or supported by government. [4]

e. Military: Project 2025 proposes to reverse policies that allow transgender individuals to serve in the military. [104]

f. Medicaid / Medicare: Project 2025 proposes to restrict transgender health care in Medicare and Medicaid [474]

g. Project 2025 proposes to deny transgender health care or abortion access to service members using public funds. [104]

h. Project 2025 proposes to end anti-discrimination rules based on gender identity and sexual orientation. This will significantly weaken anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ individuals in healthcare settings. [495]

i. Project 2025 proposes to expand religious exemptions that will allow businesses and organizations to discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals based on religious beliefs. This will limiting access to services and opportunities for LGBTQ+ individuals. [586]

j. Project 2025 proposes to restrict adoption and foster care by supporting faith-based adoption agencies that may discriminate against LGBTQ+ couples. This will limit their ability to adopt or foster children. [477]

k. Project 2025 proposals will embolden Anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment and create a more hostile environment for LGBTQ+ individuals. This could lead to increased harassment, violence, and discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations. [451]

15. Low-income families

a. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate food stamps for people who do not have a job or are not looking for a job. This means that people who are out of work and do not have enough money to buy food will not be able to get help from the government. [299] (Not everyone who is out of work is employable or can get a job.)

b. Project 2025 proposes to reduce access to public housing through major program changes including elimination of housing for families that include a non-US citizen, placing time limits on public housing, and forcing recipients of public housing to participate in the workforce. [503 et seq]

c. Project 2025 proposals will make it harder for people to get affordable health care. See Healthcare, Medicaid, Medicare

d. Project 2025 proposals will make it harder for underprivileged people and those who have been discriminated against to get a good education. [482] [327]

e. See Taxes

16. Medicaid

a. Project 2025 proposes to shrink the scope and scale of Medicaid. This could result in millions of Americans losing access to affordable healthcare, potentially leading to a decline in overall health outcomes. [466]

b. Project 2025 proposes to make it easier for states to kick people off Medicaid. This means that people could lose their health care if they don't follow all the rules. [467]

c. Project 2025 proposes to let states make people work to get Medicaid. This means that people who can't find a job could lose their health care. [468]

d. Project 2025 proposes to let states charge people more for Medicaid. This means that people will have to pay more for their health care. [468]

e. Project 2025 proposes to let states put time limits on how long people can be on Medicaid. This means that people could lose their health care after a certain amount of time, even if they still need it. [468]

f. Project 2025 proposes to make it harder for people to get on Medicaid if they have some money saved up. This means that people who have saved some money might not be able to get health care from the government. [467]

g. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to charge premiums and co-pays to people who receive Medicaid. This means that many people who are currently eligible for Medicaid would have to pay for some of their health care costs. [468]

h. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to eliminate certain benefits from Medicaid. [468]

i. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to use Medicaid funds to provide private health insurance. [468]

j. Project 2025 proposes to cap Medicaid payments to states without regard for their actual spending needs on health and long-term care. This could force states to outright deny coverage of particular benefits, especially costly services such as long-term care. [466]

17. Medicare

a. Under Project 2025, Medicare Advantage plans (privatization of Medicare) would become the default option.

b. Medicare Advantage plans can require prior authorizations, making it harder for patients to access care, and they can restrict enrollees' choices of physicians, hospitals, and treatments. [465]

c. Project 2025 proposes to repeal the drug price negotiation program in Medicare. This program lowers the cost of prescription drugs, and getting rid of it will likely mean that prescription drugs will cost more. [465]

d. Project 2025 proposes to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act. This law lowers the cost of prescription drugs for people on Medicare, and getting rid of it will likely mean that prescription drugs will cost more. [465]

e. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Medicare Shared Savings Program. This program helps to lower the cost of Medicare, and getting rid of it will likely mean that Medicare will cost more. [465]

f. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the government share in the catastrophic tier of Medicare Part D. This means that people on Medicare will have to pay more for their prescription drugs. [465]

g. Project 2025 proposes to restructure 340B drug subsidies toward beneficiaries rather than hospitals. This program helps hospitals provide lower-cost drugs to low-income patients, and changing it could mean that those patients will have to pay more for their medications. [465]

18. Overtime

a. Project 2025 proposes to raise the overtime pay threshold. This means that fewer people will qualify for overtime pay. [592]

b. Project 2025 proposes to allow employers and workers to agree that overtime will be calculated over two weeks or four weeks instead of one week. This means that if you work a lot of extra hours one week, but then work fewer hours the next week, your boss might not have to pay you overtime if the total number of hours you worked over the two weeks or four weeks is less than 80. [592]

c. Project 2025 proposes to change the rules about overtime pay for people who work from home. This means that if you work from home, your boss might not have to pay you overtime unless you work more than 10 hours in a day. [589]

d. Project 2025 proposes to make it easier for businesses to classify workers as independent contractors. This means that if you are classified as an independent contractor, you will not be eligible for overtime pay. [591]

e. Project 2025 proposes to allow businesses to not pay overtime for certain benefits they provide to workers, such as help paying for school or childcare. [592]

f. Project 2025 proposes to weaken unions, including potentially eliminating public sector unions altogether. Unions are often instrumental in negotiating and protecting overtime pay provisions in collective bargaining agreements. [599] [82]

19. Public Transportation

a. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the federal government's role in funding public transportation. This means that there will be less money to build and run buses, trains, and subways. [636]

b. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Capital Investment Grants program. This program provides money for new public transportation projects, so eliminating it would mean that there would be less money for new projects. [635]

c. Project 2025 proposes to allow transit agencies to reduce worker pay and benefits. [635]

d. Project 2025 proposes to stop using money from the Highway Trust Fund for public transportation. This would mean that there would be less money for public transportation. [636]

e. Project 2025 proposes to require new public transportation projects to meet strict economic standards that would make it harder to get funding for new projects, especially in areas that are not already well-served by public transportation. [635]

f. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to use federal transportation money for any purpose they want. This means that states could choose to spend the money on things other than public transportation, such as roads or bridges. [621]

20. Reproductive Rights

a. From Page 6: “[C]onservatives 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. Conservatives should ardently pursue these pro-life and pro-family policies while recognizing the many women who find themselves in immensely difficult and often tragic situations and the heroism of every choice to become a mother. Alternative options to abortion, especially adoption, should receive federal and state support.”

b. Project 2025’s proposal for a universal ban on abortion would not only take the family-planning decision away from women and places it in the hands of the state but would similarly control other reproductive health decisions.

c. Project 2025 promotes using the Comstock Act (Page 459) to “Stop promoting or approving mail-order abortions in violation of long-standing federal laws that prohibit the mailing and interstate carriage of abortion drugs.”

d. Comstock’s law purports to prohibit mailing anything that could be used in an abortion – even ordinary surgical supplies such as gloves and sutures. For more than 100 years, however, the courts and the Justice Department have consistently ruled that the law does not apply to mailing items for a lawful purpose.

e. Project 2025 would reverse this understanding and prosecute people if they mailed FDA-approved abortion medicines, even to states where abortion is legal. This would effectively institute a national abortion ban, depriving women of their rights under state law. It also raises the specter of a President resurrecting and reinterpreting other laws to destroy freedoms.

f. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the requirement that health insurance plans cover birth control. This means that women may have to pay more for birth control. [483]

g. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate coverage for male contraceptives such as condoms. This means that men may have to pay more for birth control. [485]

h. Project 2025 proposals would make it harder for women to get birth control through Title X family planning clinics. This means some women might have fewer choices for where to get birth control. [491]

i. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to require Title X family planning clinics to provide information about the importance of marriage. This means that some women may feel pressured to get married in order to receive family planning services, including contraception. [480]

j. Project 2025 proposes to allow religious employers to refuse to provide contraception coverage to their employees. This means that some women may have to pay out of pocket for contraception if their employer objects to it on religious grounds. [483]

k. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. This would make it harder for women to get emergency contraception, which can help prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex. [485]

l. Project 2025 proposes to increase medical requirements to get abortion pills, even in states where abortion is legal. [458]

m. Project 2025 proposes to stop promoting or approving mail-order abortions. This would make it harder for women to get abortion pills, even in states where abortion is legal. [459]

n. Project 2025 proposes to reverse its approval of chemical abortion drugs. This would make it much harder for women to get abortions, especially in states where abortion is illegal. [458]

o. Project 2025 proposes to prohibit abortion travel funding. This would make it harder for women to get abortions, especially those who live in states where abortion is illegal. [471]

p. Project 2025 proposes to prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds. This would make it harder for women to get affordable health care, including cancer screenings and contraception. [471]

q. Project 2025 proposes to withdraw Medicaid funds for states that require abortion insurance or that discriminate in violation of the Weldon Amendment. This would punish states that try to protect women's access to abortion care. [472]

r. Project 2025 proposes to rewrite the ACA abortion separate payment regulation. This would make it harder for women to get insurance coverage for abortion care. [473]

s. Project 2025 proposes to audit Hyde Amendment compliance. This could lead to cuts in funding for programs that provide health care to low-income women, including those that provide abortion care. [473]

t. Project 2025 proposes to promote "fetal personhood" from the moment of conception. This would mean abortion would no longer be considered healthcare, women presenting with miscarriages could become subject to criminal investigation, and IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) becomes illegal because it involves destruction of unused embryos. [450]

u. Project 2025 proposes to reverse guidance that enables hospitals receiving Medicare funds to perform emergency abortions. This would enable hospitals in pro-life states to refuse to perform abortions, even when it is necessary to save a woman's life. [473]

v. Project 2025 proposes to collect data on abortion, including requiring states to report detailed information about abortion procedures and patients. This could be used to stigmatize abortion and create a chilling effect on providers, further limiting access to care. [455]

21. Rural Issues

a. Project 2025 proposes to abolish the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This would make it harder for people to get life-saving forecasts and information about hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, heat waves, and other extreme weather events [674]

b. Project 2025 proposes to raise the FEMA threshold for public assistance and end Small Business Administration (SBA) direct lending such as disaster loans, which help businesses and homeowners recover from declared disasters. This would leave communities with fewer resources to rebuild after disasters like catastrophic hurricanes and tornadoes. [153] [750] [754]

c. Project 2025 proposes to erode public education and eliminate the Department of Education. Project 2025 suggests phasing out federal funding for public education. This would mean that states would have to pay for all of their schools, which could result in less money for schools in poorer or less populated areas. [5] [319] [351]

d. Project 2025 proposes to significantly restrict the free school lunch program. This would mean that many children may not have enough to eat at school. Some children who currently get free school meals would have to pay for them. [303]

e. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Head Start program. This would mean that many children from low-income families would not have access to preschool. [482]

f. Project 2025 proposes to re-evaluate regulation for baby formula. This could lead to unsafe baby formula. [302]

g. Project 2025 proposes to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds PBS and NPR. This would remove a vital source of educational and cultural programming, especially in rural and underserved communities where commercial options are limited. [246]

h. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate federal rules that protect children from working in mines, meatpacking plants and other dangerous workplaces. This could lead to exploitation, interference with education, normalization of child labor, and an increased risk of injury or death for children. [595]

i. Project 2025 proposes to make it harder for students to get financial aid for college. This would mean that fewer students from low-income families would be able to go to college. [327]

j. Project 2025 proposes to attempt to eliminate farm subsidies like the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program. This means that farmers will no longer get money from the government to help them when prices for the crops they grow go down or when they do not harvest as much as they expected. [296]

k. Project 2025 proposes to reduce how much the government pays to help farmers buy crop insurance. This means that farmers will have to pay more to buy crop insurance to protect themselves against bad weather or low prices. [297]

l. Project 2025 proposes capping and then phasing down the H-2A visa program: This could lead to higher labor costs for farmers, which would make it more difficult for some farmers to stay in business, especially those who operate on thin margins. This could also lead to labor shortages, reduced food production, and higher food prices for consumers. [611]

m. Project 2025 proposes cuts and work requirements to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This means that many people who need help buying food would no longer get money from the government to buy food. [298] [299]

n. Project 2025 proposes to shrink the scope and scale of Medicaid. This could result in millions of Americans losing access to affordable healthcare, potentially leading to a decline in overall health outcomes. [466]

o. Project 2025 proposes to let states make people work to get Medicaid. This means that people who can't find a job could lose their health care. [468]

p. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to charge premiums and co-pays to people who receive Medicaid. This means that many people who are currently eligible for Medicaid would have to pay for some of their health care costs. [468]

q. Project 2025 proposes to repeal the drug price negotiation program in Medicare. This program lowers the cost of prescription drugs, and getting rid of it will likely mean that prescription drugs will cost more. [465]

r. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Medicare Shared Savings Program. This program helps to lower the cost of Medicare, and getting rid of it will likely mean that Medicare will cost more. [465]

s. Project 2025 proposes to push more of the 33 million people enrolled in Original Medicare towards Medicare Advantage by making it the "default enrollment option". Medicare Advantage plans can require prior authorizations, making it harder for patients to access care, and they can restrict enrollees' choices of physicians and hospitals. [465]

t. Project 2025 proposes to turn the U.S. healthcare into a free market mostly regulated by states. Healthcare services would then be provided by companies whose whole goal is to make a profit off you. This means patients will need to develop more healthcare expertise, rural areas may be underserved, low-income and vulnerable populations may be underserved, sicker patients may pay more, the system may be ill-equipped to handle public health emergencies, and it could lead to an overall decline in quality and safety standards. [450]

u. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the requirement that health insurance plans cover birth control and male contraceptives such as condoms. [483] [485]

v. Project 2025 proposes to make it harder for women to get birth control through Title X family planning clinics. [491]

w. Project 2025 would prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds. This would make it harder for women to get affordable health care, including cancer screenings and contraception. [471]

x. Project 2025 promotes "fetal personhood" from the moment of conception. This results in prioritization of fetal health as against maternal health when there is a conflict, and it eliminates access to IVF (In Vitro Fertilization). [450]

y. Project 2025 proposes to reverse guidance that enables hospitals receiving Medicare funds to perform emergency abortions. This would enable hospitals in pro-life states to refuse to perform abortions, even when it is necessary to save a woman's life. [473]

z. Project 2025 proposes to tax employers on workplace benefits that exceed $12,000 per worker annually. This would lead to employers cutting back on these benefits and workers paying more taxes, and would be damaging for millions of families who rely on one working adult's employer-provided health insurance to cover dependents, such as children. [697]

aa. If this tax was enacted, we estimate that just based on health insurance benefits in 2022 alone: (1) More than 15 million workers would have seen their benefits taxed. (2) Their taxes would have risen by more than $12 billion if employers shifted away from benefits to other forms of taxable compensation. Link: https://epiaction.org/2024/08/14/the-little-known-project-2025-tax-on-employee-benefits/

bb. Project 2025 proposes to move from the current 7 income tax brackets ranging from 10%-37% to a two bracket system with flat rates of 15% and 30% (with 30% starting around the Social Security wage base of $168,100) and eliminate most deductions, credits and exclusions. Millions of low- and middle-class households would likely face significantly higher taxes. [696]

cc. From https://www.cbsnews.com/news/project-2025-tax-trump-economy-heritage-foundation-how-it-works/ : “He estimated that a middle-class family with two children and an annual income of $100,000 would pay $2,600 in additional federal income tax if they faced a 15% flat tax on their income due to the loss of the 10% and 12% tax brackets. If the Child Tax Credit were also eliminated, they would pay an additional $6,600 compared with today's tax system,” Duke said.

dd. By comparison, a married couple with two children and earnings of $5 million a year would enjoy a $325,000 tax cut, he estimated.

ee. "That 15% bracket is a very big deal in terms of raising taxes on middle-class families," Duke said. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/project-2025-tax-trump-economy-heritage-foundation-how-it-works/

ff. Project 2025 proposes a consumption tax, such as a national sales tax. This means that everything you buy will have an additional tax on it. [698]

gg. Project 2025 raises the overtime pay threshold. This means that fewer people will qualify for overtime pay. [592]

hh. Project 2025 proposes to let bosses decide if workers are employees or contractors. This means that bosses could call workers contractors even if they are really employees, which would mean they don't have to give them benefits like health insurance and paid time off. [591]

ii. Project 2025 makes it harder for workers to form unions. [602]

jj. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to opt out of federal labor laws. This means that states could pass laws that allow employers not to comply with federal laws that protect workers. [605]

kk. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the size and scope of the EPA and eliminate or weaken various environmental regulations. This means that companies will be able to pollute more, which will make the air and water dirtier and could make people sick. [420]

ll. Project 2025 proposes to allow more pollution from cars and trucks. This means that the air will be dirtier, which could make it harder for people to breathe and could cause more people to get sick. [628]

mm. Project 2025 proposes to make it easier to build roads, build pipelines, log national forests, and drill for oil and gas on public lands. This could destroy rural lands and wildlife habitats, and create more pollution [61] [308] [521] [533]

nn. Project 2025 proposes to subject military promotions to White House review. This would apply subjective, ill-defined criteria to promotions, erode meritocracy in the military, weaken military effectiveness, and politicize the U.S. military. [52]

oo. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP). This means it will be harder for veterans to report problems at the VA. [653]

pp. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate many of the health conditions that qualify veterans for disability benefits: Project 2025 additionally criticizes the 1991 Agent Orange Act and the 2022 PACT Act, which aid veterans exposed to toxic substances. This will greatly restrict disabled veteran's access to life-sustaining benefits. [643] [649]

qq. Project 2025 proposes to make it easier for the President to fire government workers who are not political appointees. This would give the President more power over the people who work for the government and make it harder for them to do their jobs without worrying about being fired for political reasons. [80]

rr. Project 2025 proposes to privatize a number of government services. This subjects our services to companies whose whole goal is to make a profit off you. This has not worked out well in the past, and there is no reason to believe that it will in the future. [83]

22. Social Security: The Project 2025 document does not cover this topic. But here are relevant resources: The Project 2025 document does not cover this topic. But here are relevant resources:

23. House Republican budget calls for raising the retirement age for Social Security

24. NBC News

25. The House Republican Study Committee Budget Proposes Harsh Changes to Social Security

26. The Center for American Progress

27. Days After Trump Calls for Social Security Cuts, Congressional Republicans Release Plan to Slash Benefits by $1.5 Trillion

28. Social Security Works

29. House Republican Budget Plans Would Cut Social Security Benefits

30. House Committee on the Budget

31. The Heritage Foundation is gunning for your Social Security

32. Media Matters for America

33. Social Security Administration funding cuts a disservice to Americans

34. The Hill

a. House Republican budget calls for raising the retirement age for Social Security: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-budget-raise-age-retirement-social-security-medicare-rcna144341

b. The House Republican Study Committee Budget Proposes Harsh Changes to Social Security: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-house-republican-study-committee-budget-proposes-harsh-changes-to-social-security/

c. Days After Trump Calls for Social Security Cuts, Congressional Republicans Release Plan to Slash Benefits by $1.5 Trillion: https://socialsecurityworks.org/2024/03/20/days-after-trump-calls-for-social-security-cuts-congressional-republicans-release-plan-to-slash-benefits-by-1-5-trillion/

d. House Republican Budget Plans Would Cut Social Security Benefits: https://democrats-budget.house.gov/house-republican-budget-plans-cut-social-security-benefits

e. The Heritage Foundation is gunning for your Social Security: https://www.mediamatters.org/heritage-foundation/heritage-foundation-gunning-your-social-security

f. Social Security Administration funding cuts a disservice to Americans: https://thehill.com/opinion/4794442-republican-cuts-social-security/

35. Taxes

a. Project 2025 would introduce a two bracket system with flat rates of 15% and 30% (with 30% starting around the Social Security wage base of $168,100) and eliminate most deductions, credits and exclusions. Millions of low- and middle-class households would likely face significantly higher taxes. [696]

b. From the source CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/news/project-2025-tax-trump-economy-heritage-foundation-how-it-works/

i. He estimated that a middle-class family with two children and an annual income of $100,000 would pay $2,600 in additional federal income tax if they faced a 15% flat tax on their income due to the loss of the 10% and 12% tax brackets. If the Child Tax Credit were also eliminated, they would pay an additional $6,600 compared with today's tax system, Duke said.

ii. By comparison, a married couple with two children and earnings of $5 million a year would enjoy a $325,000 tax cut, he estimated.

iii. "That 15% bracket is a very big deal in terms of raising taxes on middle-class families," Duke said.

c. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the corporate tax rate even further to 18%. Donald Trump's 2017 tax law cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, which meant companies paid $240 billion less in taxes from 2018 to 2021 than they would have paid. This further reduction would lead to even higher corporate profits and even lower government revenue to pay for services for the American people, while also increasing the deficit. [696]

d. Project 2025 proposes to reduce the capital gains rate from 20% to 15%. This would disproportionately benefit the wealthy and lead to a loss of government revenue. [696]

e. Project 2025 proposes a consumption tax, such as a national sales tax. This means that everything you buy will have an additional tax on it. [698]

f. Project 2025 proposes to tax employers on workplace benefits that exceed $12,000 per worker annually.

i. This would lead to employers cutting back on these benefits and workers paying more taxes, and would be damaging for millions of families who rely on one working adult's employer-provided health insurance to cover dependents, such as children. [697].

ii. If this tax were enacted, we estimate that just based on health insurance benefits in 2022 alone: (1) More than 15 million workers would have seen their benefits taxed. (2) Their taxes would have risen by more than $12 billion if employers shifted away from benefits to other forms of taxable compensation. Link: https://epiaction.org/2024/08/14/the-little-known-project-2025-tax-on-employee-benefits/

36. Unions

a. Project 2025 proposes to require worker centers to file financial disclosures with the government. This could make it harder for worker centers to organize and advocate for workers. [601]

b. Project 2025 proposes to rescind the persuader rule. This means that employers will be able to hire consultants to discourage workers from forming a union without having to tell the government about it. [602]

c. Project 2025 proposes to let bosses decide if workers are employees or contractors. This means that bosses could call workers contractors even if they are really employees, which would mean they don't have to give them benefits like health insurance and paid time off. [591]

d. Project 2025 proposes to make it harder for workers to form unions. This means that it will be harder for workers to join together to form a union and fight for better pay and working conditions. [602]

e. Project 2025 proposes to allow states to opt out of federal labor laws. This means that states could pass laws that make it harder for workers to form a union or make unions weaker. [605]

f. Project 2025 proposes to get rid of unions for security workers in the government. This means that security workers in the government, like TSA agents, will no longer have a union to protect them. [159]

g. Project 2025 proposes to strengthen "management rights" and narrow the scope of issues that are subject to collective bargaining for public sector unions. This could mean less union influence over working conditions, scheduling, and other workplace matters. [81]

h. Project 2025 proposes to narrow the definition of activities that are protected from employer retaliation under the National Labor Relations Act. This could make it riskier for workers to engage in union organizing or other collective action. [601]

i. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which incentivizes a career in public service. This would reduce the incentive to go into public service, exacerbate student debt burden for public service workers, reduce diversity and representation in public service and lead to a "brain drain" from the public sector. [332]

37. Veterans:

a. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Department of Homeland Security and distribute its functions to other departments: This could negatively affect veterans by making it harder for the government to coordinate services for veterans, such as those related to immigration, naturalization, and border protection. Many veterans rely on DHS for support in these areas. [133]

b. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP). This means it will be harder for veterans to report problems at the VA. [653]

c. Many veterans rely on FHA loans to buy their first homes. Project 2025 proposes to restrict eligibility for first-time homebuyers by changing the Federal Housing Administration's statutory restriction of single-family housing mortgage insurance to first-time homebuyers. This could negatively affect veterans by making it harder for them to buy homes. [510]

d. Project 2025 proposes to eliminate many of the health conditions that qualify veterans for disability benefits: Project 2025 additionally criticizes the 1991 Agent Orange Act and the 2022 PACT Act, which aid veterans exposed to toxic substances. This will greatly restrict disabled veteran's access to life-sustaining benefits. [643] [649]

e. Project 2025 puts at risk the jobs of the nearly 637,000 veterans working for the federal government by making it easier to fire federal employees, disbanding agencies like the Department of Education and Department of Homeland Security and privatizing the TSA: This will jeopardize the livelihoods of veterans and undermine the effectiveness of the government. [80] [133] [319]

38. Voting Rights: Project 2025 does not address voting rights, but here are some sources to learn the Republican position:

a. Wikipedia entry on Republican efforts to restrict voting rights since 2020: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_efforts_to_restrict_voting_following_the_2020_presidential_election

b. Article “We're defending the accessibility, integrity, and competitiveness of American elections” https://accountability.gop/rvr/

c. Article: “Under the Radar, Right-Wing Push to Tighten Voting Laws Persists” https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/08/us/politics/voting-laws-restrictions-republicans.html

d. Dark money groups push election denialism on US state officials: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/05/heritage-foundation-election-voting-rights-republican-states?mibextid=Zxz2cZ

e. Column: Why are Republicans making it harder for some people to vote? It’s not just partisanship https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2024-05-26/voter-suppression-race-youth-election-2024-donald-trump-georgia-supreme-court-robin-abcarian

39. Other Proposals

a. abolish the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Because the authors believe that it "has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry", even though the NOAA provides life-saving information about hurricanes, heat waves, and other extreme weather events, which are worsening. [674]

b. privatize a number of government services. This subjects our services to companies whose whole goal is to make a profit off you. This has not worked out well in the past, and there is no reason to believe that it will in the future. [83]

c. politicize science. This could hinder scientific progress and innovation. [460] [674]

d. Reduce regulations for baby formula. [302]

e. repeal the USDA Dietary Guidelines which focus on human health as well as the health of the planet. This could lead to dietary choices that lead to disease for humans and climate change for the planet. [309]

f. promote policies that favor values and institutions of select Christian sects. This will marginalize other religious groups and undermine the separation of church and state. [4] [560] [581] [589]

g. promote policies that reinforce traditional gender roles. This will limit opportunities for women and LGBTQ+ individuals. [451] [481]

h. emphasize "traditional family values" and the importance of marriage and nuclear families. This framing often underlies arguments against abortion and comprehensive sex education, suggesting a push to limit reproductive choices and control women's bodies. [451] [489]

i. oppose sex education and advocate for abstinence-only approaches. This would restrict access to accurate information about contraception, sexually transmitted infections, and healthy relationships, potentially leading to higher rates of unintended pregnancies and STIs. [477]

j. defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds PBS and NPR. This would remove a vital source of educational and cultural programming, especially in rural and underserved communities where commercial options are limited. [246]

k. subject military promotions to White House review. This would apply subjective, ill-defined criteria to promotions, erode meritocracy in the military, weaken military effectiveness, and politicize the U.S. military. [52]

l. eliminate federal rules that protect children from working in mines, meatpacking plants and other dangerous workplaces. This could lead to exploitation, interference with education, normalization of child labor, and an increased risk of injury or death for children. [595]

m. eliminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which incentivizes a career in public service. This would reduce the incentive to go into public service, exacerbate student debt burden for public service workers, reduce diversity and representation in public service and lead to a "brain drain" from the public sector. [332]

n. reject the notion of universal day care in favor of incentivizing "home-based" childcare solutions. This would make affordable child care harder to get and disproportionately hurt low-income, working families. [486]

o. raise the FEMA threshold for public assistance and end Small Business Administration (SBA) direct lending such as disaster loans, which help businesses and homeowners recover from declared disasters. This would leave communities with fewer resources to rebuild after disasters like catastrophic hurricanes and tornadoes. [153] [750] [754]

p. lead to an increase in racial profiling and discrimination. Project 2025's focus on border security and immigration enforcement could lead to increased racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos, immigrants and other people of color. [135] [140]

SOURCES

A really good one, with links: https://www.25and.me/?topics=

In depth, undercover video with key players discussing their agenda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQjdwsZhE_Q

Easy, schoolhouse rock style video you can share with your friends: https://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/project-2025-explained-in-schoolhouse-rock-style/

Snopes discusses what’s in it: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/11/project-2025-explained/

Podcast episode: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6CazgPSsupCsSllpWs5hcx

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-budget-raise-age-retirement-social-security-medicare-rcna144341

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/08/us/politics/voting-laws-restrictions-republicans.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/05/heritage-foundation-election-voting-rights-republican-states?mibextid=Zxz2cZ

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2024-05-26/voter-suppression-race-youth-election-2024-donald-trump-georgia-supreme-court-robin-abcarian

https://epiaction.org/2024/08/14/the-little-known-project-2025-tax-on-employee-benefits/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/project-2025-tax-trump-economy-heritage-foundation-how-it-works/

Throw Out The Bathwater. Keep The Baby.

2024-05-20T00:30:00.001-04:00

DRAFTED IN 2020. THE LAW HAS OBVIOUSLY CHANGED. FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MEDICAL ETHICS, THE FACTS AND ANALYSIS HAS NOT.

In the attached image, one may observe the developing brain, spinal column, liver, digestive system, and lungs of the developing embryo. Probably more. Can you see it? Even with my untrained eye, I can make out these things.

When I was a child, growing up in the 1960's, the library purchased for me by my parents and grandparents had books with artist images of embryonic development. There is even a little tail on a human embryo which disappears as development continues. Can you see the tail, too?

There are lots of people who would say that a human embryo at this stage of development is entitled to all of the protections we give to fully developed humans. They say that this is, in every way that matters, a human. In keeping with this view, the embryo is referred to as an "unborn child," and abortion rights activists all over the country are enacting legislation to force a woman seeking an abortion to view an untrasound image of the embryo's beating heart before she can have an abortion. (For instance, HERE is an article about such legislation, in the New York Times.) Do you agree, that an embryo at this stage of development should be afforded all the same protections as a full term baby?

I'm just curious. Because, when pressed, most people don't. Even "pro-life" people act in ways that demonstrate they don't, really, think this way. When a woman in a pro-life church miscarries an embryo, for instance, I'd almost guarantee that she's not given the same level of grief support that is given to a woman who loses a full-term infant. And I'm not saying that's wrong. Most people can see that the embryo depicted here is not a fully formed human.

While a woman who has a miscarriage may be devastated by the loss, imagine how much more devastating that loss would be for a woman who had actually felt the baby quickening inside her, held an infant, and whose breasts overflowed with milk for her baby who died. To say that the loss of the embryo is equivalent to the loss of a full term infant is to trivialize the loss of the woman who lost the full term infant. I am not saying that miscarriage is not devastating. But what I am saying is that it does not compare, in emotional terms, to loss of a child one has held physically as opposed to emotionally.

The distinction is not just that a human in embryonic stage is incapable of independent life. The argument boils even further down, to disagreement about what it means to be "human." What is it that makes us "human?" By what measure do we determine when someone is fully "here" and entitled to "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?" A human embryo has potential to become human, certainly. But when interests cannot be reconciled, the rights of the embryo must be balanced against someone who is already here.

Most people think of things like breathing, consciousness, feeling, awareness, having preferences, making decisions -- are important kinds of things that distinguish us as humans. Most people would admit that if the interests must be balanced and one give way to the other, it is the mother who is already here -- the mother who has hopes and dreams, fears and pain -- whose rights should trump, unless there is good reason to override her rights. But most of us also recognize there is a point when the rights of the fetus must be protected and respected, and increasingly so as the human potentiality of the fetus becomes more actualized. Most of us -- those of us in the middle -- actually think there should be some balancing of interests, not just the two extremist views of either the embryo as a full fledged human or the view of a viable fetus as being worthless.

The U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Roe v. Wade recognizes this balancing test explicitly. Roe v. Wade does not carte blanche allow all abortions, or restrict all abortions, Rather, what Roe v. Wade does is impose a balancing test to weigh the rights of the mother against the rights of the unborn. Early in pregnancy, in the embryonic stages, the mother's rights always trump. Late in pregnancy, when the fetus would be capable of life outside the womb, a woman must show some compelling interest such as a life threatening medical condition to justify killing the baby. In the middle trimesters, near to the point of viability, there is a balancing test. The anti-abortion forces seek to undo this balancing. Extremists, who do not represent the majority viewpoint, seek to create a legal scenario where the rights of the fertilized egg always trump the rights of the mother, no matter what the circumstances.

To do so, they appeal to emotion. A common theme is that abortion stops a beating heart.

I agree. Abortion does stop a beating heart. But, I counter, so does a person who decides to eat beef or pork or chicken, or a shrimp for that matter. All of these creatures, that many people slaughter and eat for supper, have beating hearts. Having a beating heart is not the essence of what it means to be human.

In fact, a pig and a cow and a chicken, animals we routinely slaughter in massive slaughterhouses, also have fear and pain and a good bit of understanding of things that happen in the world. (If you don't know this, then you haven't spent any time around these animals.) I urge that, even if we do not want to acknowledge animal consciousness as having the same value we ascribe to human consciousness, we would be remiss not to acknowledge that almost any fully developed animal's level of consciousness is greater than the embryo in the picture above. I suggest that, if we are to respect LIFE, we must respect ALL LIFE, not just that which we choose to acknowledge or that which resembles that which we ourselves choose to recognize. How anthropomorphic and what a double standard, to say that only humans have value and also to fail to treat all life with respect.

But anyway, on the subject of respecting life. What do you think of this embryo? What is your view? I'm just curious, because if you think this pig is qualitatively the same think as a hog, then I seriously hope you never invite me to your house for barbecue. And if you weren't aware that this was a pig embryo, that's part of my point.* My point is, simply, this: We can respect life, and we can respect the value of a fetus, without accepting the argument that an embryo is entitled to all of the same protections as a full term infant. It is possible to value life, and at the same time recognize that the "stops a beating heart" is a preposterous oversimplification of the issues. It is possible to value the sanctity of life and at the same time adopt a balanced, intellectually supportable view that a woman should be able to choose early term abortion without undue guilt or concern about "stopping a beating heart."

*The image of this pig is taken from Darkfield Image Gallery: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/optics/olympusmicd/galleries/darkfield/pig1.html

Ayana Elizabeth Johnson on the Importance of Community

2024-05-18T12:46:00.009-04:00

Climate Scientist
Ayana Elizabeth Johnson

(Image by Gilberto Tadday / TED )

Climate Scientist and Marine Biologist Ayana Elizabeth Johnson (editor of the excellent collection of essays "All We Can Save") is publishing a new work, What if We Get it Right? In a NY Times podcast, dated May 18, 2024, she discussed her concerns as well as her optimism. What are motivations for us with regard to addressing climate change, and what are the obstacles to motivation? She believes it boils down to community and a sense of responsibility that arises from that. I was struck by the following quote (bold is my emphasis, of course):

We all want to hold onto our comforts. I think the answer is community. We have to be responsible to more than ourselves. We have to feel an obligation to more than just our children. It can’t just be a selfish desire to hold on to what we currently have, which is - even that is illogical because the world is going to change around us and, the things we have, we won’t be able to hold onto - because we can’t actually control all of society and live in a bubble. And so, you can maybe hold really tightly onto your comforts in the short term, but the more we resist being part of a collective solution, the less likely that collective solution is to happen.

I mean, in a sense, we’re echoing a bit of this bunker mentality where we have these wealthy people buying up land in New Zealand and wherever else, trying to just save themselves. And to me that seems like such a sad way to see the world., right? Like, do you want to live in a bunker for a year eating canned rations? Like, is that the life we want to build, or do we just all try to make sure we have a world where there’s enough for everybody and no one takes too much, and we share what we have? I’d rather share.

Obviously, if I blogged about it, I think it's worth a listen. I've linked using my "gift" of 8 articles per month, so hopefully it's not behind a paywall.

Marchese, D. (2024, May 18). This Scientist Has an Antidote to Our Climate Delusions. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/18/magazine/ayana-elizabeth-johnson-interview.html

Timing is Everything

2024-03-09T22:51:00.066-05:00

This time of year, where I live, we are in the middle of the season of preparation for planting, and early spring gardening. January was the time to send our soil samples to our local extenstion agency for analysis (to learn what needs to be adjusted and added) to plan our garden, and to order seeds. Winter is the time for making the recommended adjustments and additions to the soil, so that we know it will be fertile and loamy and properly prepped for the tiny baby seeds we can't wait to pop into it.

As the above illustration shows, knowing the proper timing of things is important. Many people think only in terms of a summer garden, with plants such as tomatoes, cucumber, and squash. Those plants are only put into the ground after all danger of frost has passed. But did you know that there are some plants that can be planted well before the last frost date? Besides sweet peas, cool weather crops include onions, carrots, beets, turnips, parsnip, cilantro, dill, collards, kale, chard, bok choi, cabbage, and many more. These plants thrive in the cooler weather and will actually not do as well in the hot weather of summer. There are also plants that are perennial such as asparagus, strawberry, blueberry, and blackberry, that are planted now (while they're dormant), from transplanted bare-root plants.

If we put seeds in the ground too soon, early spring frosts may kill them. If we wait too late (especially in my climate that gets very hot, very fast), the fruits and vegetables we plant may not ripen in time for a good spring harvest. What does it take to know and understand this timing? For one, it takes educating one's self. Each of us, if we are interested in gardening, needs to learn about the average date when the last frost occurs where we live. This average date will determine when we plant things that would be killed by such a frost.

If we go get a bit more sophisticated, we can get a soil temperature gauge and measure the temperature of our soil. The germination of seeds is dependent upon the temperature of the soil. Each plant has a different germination temperature. We can time our planting to correspond with the best soil temperature. Many serious gardeners also get a jump start on their spring garden by planting the seeds for their summer crops indoors (often with grow lights and special plant heating pads), so that the plants are actually seedlings several inches tall by the time it's warm enough to plant them outside. If we are industrious, we can also raise the soil temperature and protect tender seedlings from frost damage by covering our garden rows with plastic (called row covers). Row covers capture warmth from the sun and holds it in (raising soil temperature) and also protect young plants from the cold night air. I hope this post will encourage you to plan your garden and to think in terms of a bit longer growing season!

To extend our growing season, we just need to know what seeds to plant when, and also can expand this timing by starting some seeds indoors under grow lights, under row covers or using other "season extenders," so that they'll be larger by the time of the last frost date.

English peas (and sugar snap peas and snow peas also), can be planted in the garden as soon as the ground "can be worked." (This means they can be planted as soon as the soil is no longer freezing temperature.) White potatoes can be planted any time the soil temperature is above 45 degrees F (7.2 degrees C). Other "cold tolerant" plants include collard greens, kale, turnips, rutabaga, chard, cabbage, beets, carrots, bok choi, and arugula. Spinach and lettuce can be planted after the soil is a little warmer.

Don't take my word for it! To learn more, first learn your planting zone by clicking HERE. Then, do a google search for a "planting calendar," but naming your particular planting zone. I live in planting zone 8b. My planting calendar (pictured above) will look very different from someone who is in a colder planting zone (such as 4A) or a warmer planting zone (such as 9B). But in the meantime, no matter what your planting zone, it's virtually never too soon to prepare your soil, plan your garden (what you want to plant, where and when) and order or acquire your seeds!

Being aware of the importance of planning ahead is also a really good way to approach other tasks in life. Think about where you want to end up (Veggies in June? Well adjusted children successfully launched? Term paper six weeks from now?), and then back up the steps and the timing that will help you get where you want to be, at the time when you want to be there.

Seven "C's" of Effective Communication

2020-09-15T11:36:00.000-04:00

In a webinar that I recently attended, the speaker listed "Seven C's of Effective Communication." I thought it was a good list. Here they are:

Clear
Concise
Concrete
Correct
Coherent
Complete
Courteous

What do you think?

Pandemic as Opportunity?

2020-05-27T11:19:00.004-04:00

The pandemic is tragic. Nothing good can be said for it. Nevertheless, it does give pause. Pause, in itself, creates an unusual opportunity.

The Emperor's Clothing Looks Deplorable

2020-04-04T02:02:00.001-04:00

It's fair to say this pandemic is revealing the emperor's true clothing. Not just Trump's. Yours and mine, too.

Just this very week, I saw a quote from someone who said, "We don't like Trump, but we like his policies." Trump does represent the policy of the Republican party, which obviously a large percentage of voters chose in the last election. So, now we all get to experience Trump's policies when the tire meets the road in pandemicland.

For those who were comfortable and voted for Trump because they wanted to shake things up in Washington, the chickens are now coming home to roost. You wanted less government, you got it. It's readily apparent in the obvious lack of preparedness across the United States to respond to the pandemic.

The stripping away of the ability of the federal government to deal with a pandemic did not happen by accident.

HERE is an article from early 2018, describing the abrupt departure of the head of the White House Team in charge of USA pandemic response. He "resigned" after having his department eliminated, and was forced out of his job by John Bolton. Trump, in closing this office, was doing exactly what the Trump voters wanted. He shook things up! He "drained the swamp" (of expertise and career public servants). He "reduced the size of government!"

What the linked article shows is that Trump directly took action that deprived the federal government of its ability to anticipate, manage, and respond to a pandemic. (Yep, so STFU about blaming it on Obama, who is widely perceived outside the USA of having been instrumental in stopping the pandemic threat of Ebola in Africa, a move Trump tweeted wildly in opposition to when Obama was taking the anti-pandemic action.) This same general scenario, of stripping the power of government to protect human beings, has been played out by Trump and his cronies in every one of the United States federal administrative agencies.

So, if you are a Trump supporter, this is why you voted for him, is it not? You've been happy to see a concerted, deliberate strategy of stripping expertise and crippling agencies and emasculating the power of federal agencies whose regulations were pesky to business and libertarians.

The Republican philosophy is to let mega corporations have whatever they want. Give them tax cuts, get rid of regulations, in order to enable them to profit their shareholders. Don't even mention what happened in protecting democracy from Russian meddling, in foreign policy, in the Justice Department, the FBI, the State Department. Beginning with Watergate and continuing through today, the Republican party has made a decision that it will do anything to stay in power, at any cost, even if keeping power means sacrificing the integrity of the electoral process.

The goal has been to open the door to unfettered corporate control and activity in many areas: environmental protections, banking regulations, health and safety protection for workers, educational resources for students, disability rights (within weeks of Trump's election, guidance for parents of special ed students was wiped off the US Department of Education web sites), research on climate change (decades of climate data was literally wiped off federal computers). Governmental protections for human beings got in the way of that goal, and so became targets for deregulation.

In almost every agency, the fox has been put in charge of the henhouse under the Trump administration. For example, Trump's present chief administrator of EPA is a climate denier who is a past vice president of the Washington, D.C. "Coal Club." Trump's chief administrator of the US Department of Education is a woman who has no credentials in education, who sent her own children to private school, and whose "charter school" policies she championed in her home state are associated with educational decline there. Career diplomats who have spent their lives becoming subject matter experts and who speak several languages are fired and replaced with political appointees. Every federal agency repeats this theme.

Trump supporters, you voted for this, did you not? You liked it! You felt you won something. Power! Vindication over the left-wing, snobby liberals who thought they knew everything and were trying to tell you what to do. To heck with the fact that maybe they do have expertise.

In contrast to your exhilaration over your power, the experience for "liberals" who have been forced to watch this process unfold has been compared to feeling as if one were tied into a chair with their hands behind their back, in the same room with a toddler who was wielding a loaded gun.

When you declared that you were deplorable and proud of it, you voted for the political party that supports cutting the social safety net out from under hungry children. You wanted drug testing for recipients, even though drug testing cost way more than the estimated cost of fraud, on account of the fact that you wanted to make sure that not one undeserving person received one single penny.

You might not have liked the idea of putting unaccompanied refugee children in cages, but you held your nose and thought it was justified. You might not have liked pulling the rug out from the Kurds as they fought our war on the battlefield, but hey, that's a long way away from here, and it cost a lot of money. (No matter that no ally will ever feel able to trust the USA again.) When our very own intelligence agencies said there had been foreign interference in our elections, you decided that overlooking it was an acceptable trade-off for having your candidate "win" the election.

Instead of investigating the meddlers, you supported demonization of career law enforcement officials at the FBI.
When evidence was produced that Trump conditioned aid for Ukraine on the shakedown of his personal political rival, you claimed it was fake news and (calling the investigation merely political grandstanding) put on blindfolds to make sure you didn't see it. When the US Supreme Court ruled that corporations had the same rights as people and could put unlimited slush fund "dark money" into political campaigns, you looked the other way and said the only litmus test for a Supreme Court Justice should be whether they would vote your way on the abortion debate.

In the meanwhile, you joked about me and other citizens who, in another era, you would have considered to be someone with whom you had a friendly political disagreement. Instead of making any effort to understand my concern, you decided to view me as some sort of a cartoon character demon who must be morally bankrupt or stupid, or both. You called me names like "libtard." You claimed that I was un-American and unpatriotic. You lied and claimed that I believe in killing babies (on account of the fact that I believe there are two lives at stake and that abortion decisions should not be dictated by men in suits and state capitols). You claimed that abortion was the same as genocide and that taking a morning-after pill was the same thing as killing a baby, and you claimed I supported killing babies. While deliberately misrepresenting my views, you claimed that abortion was singular, sole issue you cared about.

In actuality, It appears to me, you could care less about the life of the woman who is pregnant. Why do I think this? Because it's obvious through the policies you support. You don't care whether she receives food or medical care or support to raise a child, or whether her child receives food or medical care or the things it needs for a healthy life. When you proclaim bright line views that all abortion should be prohibited, you indicate that you don't even care whether a woman lives or dies as a result of the pregnancy. And then, you have the gall, the unmitigated gall, to claim that you are "pro life."

All of this, topped off with the icing on the cake:

You lie and claim that everything I object to about these policies, and all my concern, arises merely because I have a personal hatred for Trump.

You have the gall to claim that -- because I care about the life of the woman, because I care about voting rights, because I care about the environment, because I care about education, because I want all people to have access to medical care, because I want a social safety net -- that makes me a "hater."

You went even further than calling me, individually, a "hater," however. You went so far as to say that news outlets that spoke the truth were engaging in "fake news," that they hated Trump, too. That somehow after decades and sometimes even centuries of being venerable, respected news outlets, that suddenly all the "mainstream news media" (you know, the ones that actually fact check) were part of a vast, left-wing conspiracy to undermine poor little Trump. Fox entertainment and its blowhard talking heads became the expert. (It's too bad you also believed it when FOX told you that this virus was fake, as well, because it's not, and that disinformation might cost someone their life.)

The fact is, I can't understand for the life of me why you aren't as concerned as I am to protect this government "of the people, by the people, for the people" that we have worked so hard to attain. Why do you not cherish our government, including the federal administrative agencies that conduct research and implement policy to keep us safe? Why do you not cherish the neutrality of the federal courts? Why do you not cherish the integrity of judicial, executive and administrative, and legislative processes? Why did you not care about the integrity of the voting process? I'm not claiming they're perfect (I'm not a fool), but this is the best we have. Our goal should be to make it better, not destroy the foundation that supports our free society. The integrity of our governmental system was hard won, fought for with blood. We protect it because we as a nation believe government should be "for" the people and protect people rather than for and by corporations. We protect voting rights and democratic processes because we believe that representation should not be corrupted by the powerful and privileged.

Why do we value this? We value it because the bottom line is that when we provide equality under the law and meet human needs, we are treating others as we would want to be treated.

It is inescapable that public policy is a matter of morality. The way we vote is a direct expression of our values.

But now the time of reckoning has come. The chickens have come home to roost, with regard to the morality of our social policy. The moral and practical consequence of how you voted is about to be directly turned back around to you. Congratulations! You won!

Through gerrymandering and voter suppression, Republicans have made it so in some places it takes as many as two Libtards to cancel out the vote of one Deplorable. Since you won in the gerrymandering department, you successfully elected Senators and Congressmen who have no concern for the vulnerable, who have no concern for the marginalized, who don't care about those who go hungry, who don't care about those who will die for lack of access to medical care, who don't care about those who will become homeless if they lose their job. Charity and GoFundMe work just fine for them, thank you. Go beg for some charity somewhere, you lowlife.

Rah rah! Corporations got tax cuts. The social safety net got cut. Obamacare got gutted. Food stamps got cut. The Supreme Court got packed with ideologues. ( I'm not even going to go into the multi-decade consequences of that with regard to many aspects of human rights vs the rights of corporations and monied parties.) Even during this pandemic, the relief package passed by the Republican Senate included $500 billion dollars for corporate bailouts, while providing a one-time payment for ordinary people (who when they lose their jobs are also losing medical insurance) of maybe one month's average rent.

You were happy to cut the social safety net for someone you cast aside disparagingly as a "moocher" -- someone down on their luck who needed medical care, who needed housing, who needed food. You didn't mind for hunger, lack of medical care, or homelessness to happen to someone else! You just never imagined that someone else would be you. Well, guess what. Now it might be you. Or your brother or sister or your parent or your child. Or your economy or your health care system. All of us are going to know someone soon who has no job, no income, no medical insurance, no way to pay for medical treatment, and no adequate response to the pandemic before us.

It has been said that judgment takes many forms. Sometimes judgment comes in the form of consequences for our actions. Reap as you have sown.

--------

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’"

------------

It's quite a paradox that the "least of these" that you were willing to ignore, just may be YOU, yourself, or your brother or your parent or your child, or your best friend. The time of reckoning has arrived.

Nonviolence Does Not Engage in Violence Even in Response

2019-12-18T06:01:00.001-05:00

This is an excerpt from an essay by Chris Hedges:

"If nonviolent protest is met with violence, we must never respond with violence. The use of violence, including property destruction, and taunting the police are gifts to the security and surveillance state. It allows the state to demonize and isolate a mass movement. It drives away the bulk of the population. Violence against the state is used by the authorities to justify greater forms of control and repression. The corporate state understands and welcomes the language of force. This is a game the government will always win and we will always lose. If we are perceived as a flag-burning, rock-throwing, angry mob that embraces violence, we will be easily crushed.

We can succeed only if we win the hearts and minds of the wider public and ultimately many of those within the structures of power, including the police. When violence is used against nonviolent protesters demanding basic forms of justice it exposes the weakness of the state. It delegitimizes those in power. It prompts a passive population to respond with active support for the protesters. It creates internal divisions within the structures of power that, as I witnessed during the revolutions in Eastern Europe, paralyze and defeat those in authority. Martin Luther King Jr. held marches in Birmingham, Ala., rather than Albany, Ga., because he knew Birmingham Public Safety Commissioner “Bull” Connor would overreact and discredit the city’s racist structures."

Chris Hedges

http://m.truthdig.com/report/page2/make_america_ungovernable_20170205

The Prime Gardener

2019-05-17T00:21:00.000-04:00

"Although we have done everything we can to separate ourselves from other people, from creatures large and small, from the land and its waters and from God, God has never left us. God the Gardener comes every day, bucket and hoe in hand, to water and weed the soil of our lives. Through God's care, people, pastures, hills, meadows and valleys can sing together for joy (see Ps 65). God has sought always to feed us and gladden our hearts and to make the created world shine (see Ps 104)."

Quote is from Making Peace with the Land: God's Call to Reconcile with Creation (Resources for Reconciliation)" by Fred Bahnson, Norman Wirzba, Bill McKibben

http://a.co/9oY27r0

Photo is of a gardener at Orchid garden and butterfly museum in Maymyo Botanical Garden

On Being Missional?

2019-05-14T08:23:00.000-04:00

"Strategic planning, never taught as a principle in the Bible, is at the very center of much of the work of today’s churches. Goals, missions, plans, and budgets are set, and all contingencies are avoided. Essentially, there’s nothing wrong with this, but what did we learn from that parable? The Samaritan was not obliged to do good. He permitted himself to be touched by the suffering of a fellow human and responded using what he had at hand. He didn’t ask questions – he loved and acted.
For more from this intriguing article, see:
"The Unplanned Church: How a Brazilian congregation finds renewal by interruption"

link: HERE

Juan de Flandes, Christ and the Caananite Woman, c. 1496

Earthbound

2019-05-10T21:29:00.001-04:00

"To understand Jesus properly, we have to appreciate how his living makes possible the transformation of our own. God became incarnate in Jesus Christ to show us and welcome us into what creaturely life is ultimately about and for. This means that salvation is not about
Read more »

The Good Soil

2019-04-22T07:56:00.000-04:00

Rootbound!

2019-04-20T12:21:00.001-04:00

Gardening gives time for quiet contemplation as one engages with the Earth and God's creation.

The other day, as I was transplanting seedlings from peat pots into the ground, I noticed that even though (in theory) the roots of the seedlings were supposed to be able to push through the peat pots, in most cases they had not. Instead, as the tiny roots reached the wall of the pot, they turned and went a different direction, back inside the pot.

A healthy plant with room to grow will stretch its roots downwards and outwards into the rich soil, supporting the leaves and growth above. When a plant repeatedly encounters the wall of a pot as its roots try to grow, the normal course of growth is interrupted. Its roots turn inward, doubling back upon themselves. When the roots of the plant are tangled and curled back upon themselves inside a pot, eventually there it's not enough soil to nourish the plant. Eventually, the crowded roots become a tangled mass that is so dense it can't even absorb water. Because the plant is limited by the confines of the pot, it will have to be watered constantly. Due to lack of nourishment, the plant will always be stressed, and its growth will be stunted. In short, the plant will never reach its full potential.

When the gardener moves a seedling from a small pot to a bigger one or from a seed tray into the garden, the gardener will gently spread the roots so that the young transplant can grow in a healthy way.

In my own life, I find this to be true, as well. When I've been sitting in a comfortable spot in life, I don't always enjoy being pushed out of my comfortable space. Sometimes, however, being pushed out of my comfortable space is what's needed for growth. Sometimes, it may even be necessary for the gardener in my life to untangle my roots in order to allow them to spread out. I'll try to remember this next time I'm uncomfortable with disruption in my life.

The Hard Work Remains

2019-04-12T20:56:00.001-04:00

Our American Martyr, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote:

“The black revolution

is forcing America to face

all its interrelated flaws –

racism, poverty, militarism, and materialism.

It is exposing evils that

are rooted deeply

in the

whole structure of our society.

It reveals

systemic

rather than superficial

flaws and

suggests

that

radical reconstruction of society itself

is the real issue to be faced. ...

[O]nly by structural change

can current evils be eliminated,

because the roots are in the system

rather than in men

or faulty operations.”

~ Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in a posthumously published essay titled “A Testament of Hope.”

What Is Justice?

2018-01-07T09:45:00.001-05:00

“The clear meaning of “justice” is “what is right” or “what is normal” — the way things are supposed to be. The fairness of laws coupled with fair and equal treatment under the law are common biblical concerns. Throughout scripture, God is the defender and protector of the poor, the alien, the debtor, the widow, and the orphan. Justice can also mean “deliverance,” “victory,” “vindication,” or “prosperity” — but for all, not just a few. Justice is part of God’s purpose in redemption.

One of the clearest and most holistic words for justice is the Hebrew shalom, which means both “justice” and “peace.” Shalom includes “wholeness,” or everything that makes for people’s well being, security, and, in particular, the restoration of relationships that have been broken. Justice, therefore, is about repairing broken relationships both with other people and to structures — of courts and punishments, money and economics, land and resources, and kings and rulers.”

Quote from Wallis, How the Bible Understands Justice ( https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/2014/06/06/how-the-bible-understands-justice/32339 )

Life Doesn't Wait

2017-03-28T13:01:00.000-04:00

Ecclesiastes chapter 3 is the famous Biblical passage which declares, "There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: ... a time to plant, and a time to uproot ...." My garden is a reminder this week that (1) timing is important, and (2) the proper time for planting is not a matter depending on convenience for me. Ecclesiastes is right, after all. There is, indeed, a time to plant. It's spring. For most of us, the time is now.

By June, we can expect some days over 100 degrees F here. I've learned that trick where I live is to get an early start on spring gardening, so that plants have time to produce a crop before the summer heat sets in and they are unable to cope with the heat. (For instance, tomatoes no longer produce flowers or fruit after the temperature reaches 95°.) I had set a goal to have my seedlings in sprouting pots very early, so that they could be set out at the earliest date after there was no danger of frost anymore.

In terms of gardening timing, once again I've been a failure. I didn't make the cut! Even though I started numerous veggie seeds indoors on March 1st, that wasn't soon enough! It is already late, in terms of having nicely filled out seedlings ready to put out into my garden by the time of the last frost. The little plants I put out this week look like tiny sprigs instead of baby bushes!

Broccoli Seedlings 3/28/17

Procrastination is easy. I've been so busy this spring on other things! So many excuses! It's cold outside in the mornings, I'm out of the habit, I'm busy, etc., Yet, excuses have no meaning in terms of real life effects. . It doesn't matter how busy I am. With regard to my garden and the need to work in it, time was still moving forward, no matter what my other plans were.

Photos from last year are indictments of my tardiness! Some things simply are time sensitive. If we miss an opportunity, the opportunity is indeed gone. By this time last year, I had lettuce, spinach, Swiss chard, broccoli, kale, all well underway for spring dining.

Fortunately, the consequences for me are relatively inconsequential since I'm still able to purchase food in the grocery store or produce market. No one will starve on account of my failure.

Failure:

The purpose of this post is not really to talk about the timing of garden plantings, but really to talk more about failure and how I cope with it. We all fall short of our own expectations from time to time.

One of my first inquiries is to ask, "Who did I fail?" If I failed someone else, I may need to do something to undue harm or to prevent harm to them. I may need to apologize. In the garden situation, I'm spared this step because the only person I've failed is myself. My expectation was that I would have been keenly aware of the timing of planting my seedlings to get a great start on my Spring garden. I set a goal to watch my calendar and be very proactive this spring. I failed at that.

I don't like failure. Does anybody? What do we do about it, when we fail at our personal goals? Well, one thing is that in order to learn from any failure, we must first acknowledge that it happened. Another step is to analyze what went wrong and fix things so they don't happen again. A third, obvious but sometimes more difficult step, is to pick ourselves up and move on.

In terms of learning from failure, it is important to understand what went wrong. Keeping a diary of what works and what doesn't work in my garden is a great idea. Based on my records, I know that this time last year I had little lettuces, spinach, chard, broccoli, kale, and Chinese cabbage, all well along toward providing Spring harvest. Setting goals, documenting our progress, and providing ourselves with yardsticks to measure by is a good way to keep track of how we are doing. (Last year, I killed some plants by applying too much fertilizer. Oops, won't do that again!) Whether we fail or succeed, measurements and documentation help us learn from both our successes and our mistakes.

Dates and Labels help with documentation and identification later

Another thing I know is that, while it is helpful to learn from mistakes, beating myself up mentally and dwelling on the past will not help me. The only option real option is to move forward from where I am now. I cannot really make up for lost time, I cannot undo the consequences. All I can do (besides making amends with those whom I've wronged) is to make the best decisions I am able to make from this point forward.

I am pleased at the thought that my gardening this season is (so far at least) not yet a total failure. There is room for redemption! I do have broccoli seedlings and tomato seedlings and artichoke seedlings and pepper seedlings ... They are not as far along as I would like, but it's better than nothing and hopefully not futile to plant them. Here's to moving forward.

Broccoli Seedlings 3/28/17

Eggplant Seedlings 3/28/17

2017 Princeton Kyuper Prize

2017-03-15T09:42:00.002-04:00

There used to be a Virginia Slim TV commercial for cigarettes that had the quote, "you've come a long way, baby." Those words highlighted an extreme contradiction: Yes, women had come a long way; but the very fact that they called woman by the belittling name "baby" showed that women had a long way left to go.

In a current analogy, the fact that Princeton Theological Seminary chose this year to award the 2017 Kuyper prize to Evangelical megachurch pastor Tim Keller, who doesn't believe women should be ordained, is a slap square across the face to women everywhere. Women are grateful to have been ordained and to be accepted in ministry, yet every day they encounter and cope with systemic, widespread discrimination and unthinking acceptance of misogyny.

Would Princeton Seminary have given this award to a man who proclaimed that the Bible supported slavery or (echoing the Jim Crow South) that "all Negroes should work on the farm"? Of course not! It would be outrageous! If there is a lack of similar shock and outrage over the selection of Keller as a role model for future theologians, it is only because so much of our culture is still wearing blinders when it comes to discrimination against women.

Yes, women in ministry have come a long way. Princeton's decision this week reminds us that, indeed, women still have a long way to go.

Tim Keller photo, from Wikipedia

Starting Your Straw Bale Garden

2017-03-11T11:34:00.001-05:00

So much has already been written about using straw bales as a medium for vegetable gardening, that you will have no trouble finding information about how to create a straw bale garden.

The purpose of this blog article is not to teach you how to create a straw bale garden, but to let you know that if you're thinking about it, now is the time to start! It takes at least six weeks to condition bales to get them ready for planting, so you must to start the process six weeks before you hope to put plants into the bale. The time to do that, is now!

The basic idea of straw bale gardening technique is that you set a bale of straw (not hay) upright, with the cut side facing the sky. Ideally, the bales will be braced to keep them from falling over, and they will also be equipped with soaker hoses so that plants grown in the bales are easily watered. Then, nitrogen fertilizer is applied and soaked through the bale. The nitrogen super-stimulates good bacteria that make the interior of the bale decompose and turn into mulch that plants can grow in. Nitrogen is applied just about every other day during a six week process of rapidly composting the internal part of the bale.

The original straw bale gardening book was written by Joel Karsten. If you are interested in straw bale gardening, check out one of the several books he has written about it. Another book I like is called Straw Bales For Dummies.

(This photo from my home garden last spring shows one row of bales that has already been used for one growing season, and a second row of bales that is newly placed and ready for conditioning.)

Straw bale gardening offers significant benefit for the small scale, urban or suburban vegetable gardener. For one, you don't have to prepare soil, hoe, or till. You don't even need dirt! (You can set the bale directly on a patio!) It also offers automatic weed-free space. A third, fine benefit is that it automatically creates a raised gardening space, so that not nearly as much bending is required to cultivate your plants. (The main drawback is probably cost of materials, which you can learn more about in the books above.)

Straw bales do not last forever. They continue to decompose and, over time, become clumps of mulch. Here is a photo taken this week of what is left of the straw bales shown in the illustration above. As you can see, there is nothing left! However, the remains of the bales do contain lots of earthworms and hummus and greatly improved the soil from the pure sand that was there last year.

It is time to be putting seeds into flats for spring planting, and it is time to be getting your bales ready to receive those little baby plants! Here is a photo of some bales currently being conditioned in another part of my garden:

Happy gardening, everyone!

100th Anniversary INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY

2017-03-08T22:38:00.000-05:00

On January 21, 2017, the world saw a taste of the potential power women wield through nonviolent protest, a power that continues to be exerted as women come to realize the extent to which the agenda in Washington, D.C. does not reflect their interest.

This was not the first time women have instigated change through nonviolent revolt. In fact, this year is the 100th anniversary of the demonstration that brought down the Czarist Empire of Russia.

According to Wikipedia, "In 1917 demonstrations marking International Women's Day in Saint Petersburg on the last Thursday in February (which fell on March 8 on the Gregorian calendar) initiated the February Revolution.[2] Women in Saint Petersburg went on strike that day for "Bread and Peace" – demanding the end of World War I, an end to Russian food shortages, and the end of czarism.[4] Leon Trotsky wrote, "23 February (8th March) was International Woman's Day and meetings and actions were foreseen. But we did not imagine that this 'Women's Day' would inaugurate the revolution. Revolutionary actions were foreseen but without date. But in morning, despite the orders to the contrary, textile workers left their work in several factories and sent delegates to ask for support of the strike… which led to mass strike... all went out into the streets."[4]

For all the women who think that there's no longer a need for International Women's Day, I'd like you to consider something: If an average woman and an average man with exactly the same skill started working at exactly the same job on January 1, 2016, the woman still, as of today, would not have been paid as much as the man had been paid as of the last day of December, 2016. Nope. In 2017, equal pay day is April 4, 2017.

Now, consider the photo below: That's what a woman did in her efforts to secure YOUR right to vote.

In my line of work, what we see is that abused women often lose custody of their children. (See https://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/dv.html )

On the positive side, women bring tremendous insight, value, and diverse approaches to governance and management. Countries and businesses that have more women in leadership DO BETTER than those without diversity. (See http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/12/08/companies_with_women_on_their_boards_do_better_and_not_just_because_they.html ).

My question for women and for the men who love them is, what will you do for the women who follow in YOUR footsteps? International Women's Day gives you one day during the year to think just a bit about that.

What to Sow in Plant Zone 8 in March

2017-03-08T08:50:00.001-05:00

For planting zone 8, our last average frost date is March 15th. It's time for spring planting!

Plants that tolerate cool weather can be planted outside now and include:

Asparagus, beets, bok choi, broccoli (and other brassicas such as broccolini and Chinese broccoli), cabbage, carrots, collards, lettuce, mustard greens (and any other type of green, leafy vegetable such as spinach), onions, radish, turnip, Swiss chard, white potatoes.

It's getting a bit late, but English peas could still be planted this week. (ideally, English peas are planted as soon as the soil can be worked in the spring.)

Perennial food plants that can be planted now include artichoke, asparagus, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, raspberries.

Herbs that can be planted now include parsley, thyme, oregano, cilantro.

Seeds that should be started indoors now (under lights or in a sunny window) include tomatoes, peppers, eggplant.

Ash Wednesday Blessing

2017-03-01T23:04:00.001-05:00

A blessing for Ash Wednesday:

Rend Your Heart by Jan Richardson

To receive this blessing,

all you have to do

is let your heart break.

Let it crack open.

Let it fall apart

so that you can see

its secret chambers,

the hidden spaces

where you have hesitated

to go.

Your entire life

is here, inscribed whole

upon your heart’s walls:

every path taken

or left behind,

every face you turned toward

or turned away,

every word spoken in love

or in rage,

every line of your life

you would prefer to leave

in shadow,

every story that shimmers

with treasures known

and those you have yet

to find.

It could take you days

to wander these rooms.

Forty, at least.

And so let this be

a season for wandering

for trusting the breaking

for tracing the tear

that will return you

to the One who waits

who watches

who works within

the rending

to make your heart

whole.

Watch the Sword, Not the Flag!

2016-12-23T10:16:00.001-05:00

People, look at the sword, not the flag!! Trump is a master of deceit, deftly focusing attention away from the real stories. Real stories include rampant conflicts of interest, deliberate manipulation of news in ways that harm political enemies, cabinet appointments of people who plan to dismantle the agencies they're assigned to shepherd, and fishing expeditions for the names of career civil servants who worked on particular projects.

But there's also a dual purpose in the scintillating hint that the nuclear arms race is about to be revived. One of the first steps that every authoritarian / fascist / totalitarian regime takes is to create a perceived threat which is then utilized to justify allocation of resources and erosion of liberty and privacy. Both Putin and Trump need an excuse to rattle their sabers and create crises, in order to justify what comes next.

If you are a Republican and have read this far and think the poor little liberal has lost their mind, be warned. Consolidation of power by the would be despot takes awhile. The first who will be attacked are the old-school Republicans who stand up for principles of fairness and decency, like McCain, Romney, and Lindsey. But after that, anyone who crosses the fascist Right will be targeted. It took Stalin 23 years to fully consolidate his power, but by 1940, Stalin was the only survivor, literally, from among the top political officials at the time of Lenin's death.

You say it can't happen here, but it can. The only gate that prevents this happening in any society is the gate imposed by those who recognize the signs and stand against it.

Why President Elect Trump Does Not Represent Politics As Usual (Part I: COMMONALITIES OF FASCIST REGIMES)

2016-12-09T13:17:00.000-05:00

No one, ever, wakes up and says, "I think I'll become an alcoholic today." Alcoholism comes on slowly, taking us unaware, until we find ourselves unable to resist its inexorable grip. In a similar way, this is how Fascism overtakes societies. No democratic society makes a deliberate decision to give up freedom in favor of Fascism. It comes on slowly. We make compromises in favor of what seems to be the greater good. The compromises then become larger and larger until we find ourselves inextricably tied up in more than we bargained for.

These small, baby steps have been happening in the USA for a long time. I won't go into details to support that statement. Those who choose not to see, would not believe me anyway, no matter what evidence I present. Let me merely say, "He who has eyes, let him see, and he who has ears, let him hear." The USA is well on its way to becoming a Fascist state. This is not a "Democrat" or "Republican" thing, either. In a future blog post, I will show how policies of both major political parties have failed to staunch these tendencies.

Moreover, Trump is not an anomaly. He is a logical result, merely taking a tendency one step further. But he is, indeed, extreme. This is why his election does NOT represent "politics as usual." The water has turned from tepid to hot. It's time to take notice, and stop it, before it's too late.

No one wants to hear that, including me. But, if you are willing to be honest, take a hard look at these characteristics I've compiled below, with characteristics of Fascist regimes. Judge for yourself where the USA falls on this scale. Whether you believe me now, or not, it is important for all of us to know the following signs of the slide into Fascism, and resist wherever we find it:
Read more »

On Being Nice

2016-12-09T00:15:00.001-05:00

Nice people made the best Nazis. They just wanted everybody to get along and get with the program, be unified, get behind economic development and making Germany great again.