Democrats take page from conservative playbook with new Project 2029
A group of leading Democratic Party thinkers is beginning to collaborate on a policy agenda for their eventual presidential nominee in the 2028 election cycle.
And, as first reported by the New York Times, they're calling it Project 2029. It's an obvious play on the notorious Project 2025, the more than 900-page policy blueprint assembled by the conservative powerhouse Heritage Foundation think tank for the Republican Party's 2024 presidential nominee.
Democrats repeatedly attacked Project 2025 during the previous White House race as a far-right threat to the nation. Then-GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump and his campaign distanced themselves from the document, even as many Trump allies helped draft it.
But Trump, during the opening months of his second tour of duty in the White House, executed much of what was proposed in Project 2025. And Russell T. Vought, who was a key member of the team that produced the document, now leads the Office of Management and Budget.
The Democrats behind Project 2029 hope to rally White House hopefuls behind their policy framework as the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination race heats up following the 2026 midterm elections.
The project is being spearheaded by Andrei Cherny, a onetime Democratic speechwriter and state party leader.
"Avengers… Assemble!" he wrote in a social media post, as he spotlighted the New York Times story on Project 2029.
Democrats are aiming to escape the political wilderness following 2024 election setbacks, when the party lost control of the White House and the Senate, and failed to win back the House majority. And 2025 polls have indicated the Democratic Party brand sinking to new lows.
"After several Democratic presidential runs that featured the old guard, there is a hunger for the next generation of candidates and ideas," Jim Kessler, executive vice president for policy at the center-left Third Way, told Fox News.
Kessler, who's involved with the project, added that the effort "is a chance for those candidates to see and test out new policy ideas. The advisory group runs the gamut of the Democratic ideological perspective, so these new ideas may not bring a consensus, but it can act as a showroom for presidential candidates to test drive."
Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville, asked about Project 2029, welcomed more ideas to the party's conversation.
But Carville told Fox News Digital that "the person Democrats need to look to, whose ideas will count, is the next presidential nominee. People can throw ideas out and the different candidates can respond in one way or another, but the idea that a political party can develop a message outside of having some power – it's been done before, but it's quite difficult."
Word of Project 2029 comes amid continued divisions in the Democratic Party between its establishment and progressive wins.
And it comes as the stunning victory in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary by outsider and 33-year-old democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani over former three-term Gov. Andrew Cuomo has reignited the party's argument over whether the Democrats' problem is their policy or their messaging.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
9 minutes ago
- Fox News
Justice Alito's warning about nationwide injunction 'loophole' looms over Trump cases
Justice Samuel Alito raised concerns about a "potentially significant loophole" in the Supreme Court's decision to curb universal injunctions, and now his warning is hanging over lawsuits involving President Donald Trump. Alito said in his concurring opinion in Trump v. CASA that class action lawsuits and lawsuits brought by states leave room for judges to hand down injunctions that, in practice, would function the same way a universal injunction does. "Federal courts should thus be vigilant against such potential abuses of these tools," Alito said. Alito's warning comes as judges continue to hand down sweeping rulings and as plaintiffs begin filing lawsuits tailored to avoid running into the new roadblock established by the high court. In one major ruling, Judge Randolph Moss, an Obama appointee based in Washington, D.C., found this week that Trump's proclamation declaring an "invasion" at the border was unlawful. Trump's proclamation restricted migrants from claiming asylum when crossing into the United States, a practice the Trump administration says has been abused by border crossers. Moss "set aside" that policy under the Administrative Procedure Act, which had an effect similar to that of a nationwide injunction. More than a dozen potential asylees brought the lawsuit, and Moss also agreed to certify the case as a class action lawsuit that applied to all potential asylees in the country. The Trump administration immediately appealed the ruling. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement that Moss was a "rogue district court judge" who was "already trying to circumvent the Supreme Court's recent ruling against nationwide injunctions." In his concurring opinion, Alito warned against class action lawsuits that do not strictly abide by Rule 23, which lays out the criteria for certifying a class. He said the Supreme Court's decision on universal injunctions will have "very little value" if district courts do not adhere to the rule. "District courts should not view today's decision as an invitation to certify nationwide classes without scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23," Alito wrote. "Otherwise, the universal injunction will return from the grave under the guise of 'nationwide class relief,' and today's decision will be of little more than minor academic interest." Alito also noted that another area for exploitation could be states that seek statewide relief from a court. For instance, Democrat-led states have filed several lawsuits challenging Trump's policies. A judge could grant those states statewide injunctions, meaning everyone living in the state would be exempt from the policies. Alito warned that giving third parties widespread standing in cases in that manner required careful scrutiny. If judges are lax about these statewide lawsuits, states will have "every incentive to bring third-party suits on behalf of their residents to obtain a broader scope of equitable relief than any individual resident could procure in his own suit," Alito wrote. "Left unchecked, the practice of reflexive state third-party standing will undermine today's decision as a practical matter."
CNBC
9 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump megabill gives the oil industry everything it wants and ends key support for solar and wind
President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act ends long-standing federal support for solar and wind power, while creating a friendly environment for oil, gas and coal production. The House of Representatives passed Trump's megabill Friday ahead of a White House-imposed deadline, after the Senate narrowly approved the controversial legislation Tuesday. Trump has made his priorities on energy production clear. The U.S. will rely on oil, gas, coal and nuclear to meet its growing energy needs, the president said last weekend, bashing wind and solar power. "I don't want windmills destroying our place," Trump told Fox News in an interview that aired June 29. "I don't want these solar things where they go for miles and they cover up a half a mountain that are ugly as hell." The president's embrace of fossil fuels and hostility to renewable energy is reflected in his signature domestic policy law. It delivers most of the oil and gas sector's top priorities, according to the industry's lobby group, while ending tax credits that have played a crucial role in the growth of solar and wind power. The law opens up federal lands and waters to oil and gas drilling after the Biden administration enacted curbs, mandating 30 lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico over 15 years, more than 30 every year on lands across nine states and giving the industry access to Alaska. The law also slashes the royalties that producers pay the government for pumping oil and gas on federal lands, encouraging higher output. "This bill will be the most transformational legislation that we've seen in decades in terms of access to both federal lands and federal waters," Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, n industry lobbying group, told CNBC. "It includes almost all of our priorities." The law also spurs oil companies to use a carbon capture tax credit to produce more crude. The tax credit was designed to support nascent technology that captures carbon emissions and stores them underground. Under Trump's bill, producers would receive an increased tax benefit for injecting those emissions into wells to produce more oil. The law ends the hydrogen tax credit in 2028, later than previous versions of the bill. Chevron, Exxon and others are investing in projects to produce hydrogen fuel. "I have a number of members who plan on investing significantly in hydrogen and so the extension to the end of 2028 was a welcome priority that was fulfilled," Sommers said. The coal industry is also a big winner from the law, which mandates at least 4 million additional acres of federal land be made available for mining. The law also cuts the royalties that coal companies pay the government for mining on federal land, and allows the use of an advanced manufacturing tax credit for mining metallurgical coal used to make steel. The law phases out clean electricity investment and production tax credits for wind and solar that have played a crucial role in the growth of the renewable energy industry. The investment credit has been in place since 2005 and the production credit since 1992. The Inflation Reduction Act extended the life of both until at least 2032. Solar and wind farms that enter service after 2027 would no longer be eligible for the credits. There is an exception, however, for projects that start construction within 12 months of the bill becoming law. The phaseout is more gradual than previous versions of the legislation, which had a hard deadline of December 31, 2027. That gave all solar and wind projects just 2.5 years to come online in order to take advantage of the credits. "Despite limited improvements, this legislation undermines the very foundation of America's manufacturing comeback and global energy leadership," Abigail Ross Hopper, CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said in a statement. A related tax credit for using U.S.-made components in solar and wind farms ends for projects that enter service after 2027. A carveout allows projects that start construction within one year of the law's enactment to claim the credit. The credit was designed to spur demand at U.S. factories in order to break the nation's dependence on equipment from China. "If nothing changes, factories start to close," Michael Carr, executive director of the Solar Energy Manufacturers Association, told CNBC. "Factories that are on the drawing board that probably penciled [favorably] two weeks ago, maybe don't pencil now. We'll see investment slow down in the sector going forward."
CNN
9 minutes ago
- CNN
Supreme Court agrees to review bans on transgender athletes joining teams that align with their gender identity
Source: CNN The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to decide whether states may ban transgender students from playing on sports teams that align with their gender identity, revisiting the issue of LGBTQ rights in a blockbuster case just days after upholding a ban on some health care for trans youth. The decision puts the issue of transgender rights on the Supreme Court's docket for the second year in a row and is by far the most significant matter the justices have agreed to hear in the term that will begin in October. The cases, one from West Virginia and the other from Idaho, involve transgender athletes who at least initially competed in track and field and cross country. The West Virginia case was filed by a then-middle school student who told the Supreme Court she was 'devastated at the prospect' of not being able to compete after the state passed a law banning trans women athletes' participation in public school sports. The court's decision landed as transgender advocates are still reeling from the 6-3 ruling in US v. Skrmetti, which upheld Tennessee's ban on trans youth from accessing puberty blockers and hormone therapy. Though the state law also bars surgeries, they were not at issue in the high court's case. But that decision was limited to questions of whether the state had the power to regulate medical treatments for minors, leaving unresolved challenges to other anti-trans laws. The justices agreed to review two cases challenging sports bans in Idaho and West Virginia. The court didn't act on a third appeal over a similar ban in Arizona and will likely hold that case until it decides the other two, probably by early next summer. The American Civil Liberties Union, which is part of the legal team representing the athletes in the cases, said school athletic programs should be accessible to everyone regardless of a student's sex or transgender status. 'Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth,' said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project. 'We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.' West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey, a Republican, said that the state is 'confident the Supreme Court will uphold the Save Women's Sports Act because it complies with the US Constitution and complies with Title IX.' The Supreme Court will review the case at a time when Republican-led states and President Donald Trump have pushed for policies to curtail transgender rights. Trump ran for reelection in part on a campaign to push 'transgender insanity' out of public schools, mocking Democratic candidate Kamala Harris in advertising for supporting 'they/them,' the pronouns used by some transgender and nonbinary people. But even before that, states had passed laws banning transgender girls from playing on girls' sports teams. Roughly half of US states have enacted such laws. The Trump administration has actively supported policies that bar transgender athletes from competing on teams that match their gender identity. On Wednesday, the federal government released $175 million in previously frozen federal funding to the University of Pennsylvania after the school agreed to block transgender athletes from female sports teams and erase the records set by swimmer Lia Thomas. In West Virginia, former Gov. Jim Justice, a Republican, signed the 'Save Women's Sports Act' in 2021, banning transgender women and girls from participating on public school sports teams consistent with their gender identity. Becky Pepper-Jackson, a rising sixth grader at the time, who was 'looking forward to trying out for the girls' cross-country team,' filed a lawsuit alleging that the ban violated federal law and the Constitution. The Richmond-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that West Virginia's ban violated Pepper-Jackson's rights under Title IX, a federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex at schools that receive federal aid. The court also revived her constitutional challenge of the law. 'Her family, teachers, and classmates have all known B.P.J. as a girl for several years, and – beginning in elementary school – she has participated only on girls athletic teams,' US Circuit Judge Toby Heytens, who was nominated to the bench by President Joe Biden, wrote for the court. 'Given these facts, offering B.P.J. a 'choice' between not participating in sports and participating only on boys teams is no real choice at all.' Most of the appeals on the issue of transgender athletes question whether such bans are permitted under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The West Virginia case was different in that it also raised the question of whether such bans violated Title IX. The Supreme Court often prefers to settle a dispute under a law, rather than the Constitution, if it has the option because such a ruling technically allows Congress to change the law in response to the decision. West Virginia appealed to the Supreme Court last year, arguing that the appeal court decision 'renders sex-separated sports an illusion.' 'Schools will need to separate sports teams based on self-identification and personal choices that have nothing to do with athletic performance,' the state said. West Virginia initially brought the case to the Supreme Court last year on an emergency basis, seeking to enforce the law against Pepper-Jackson while the underlying legal challenge played out. In an unsigned order, the court declined that request. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said they would have granted it. In Idaho, Republican Gov. Brad Little signed the state's sports ban in 2020, the first of its kind in the nation. Lindsay Hecox, then a freshman at Boise State University, sued days later, saying that she intended to try out for the women's track and cross-country teams and alleging that the law violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. A federal district court blocked the law's enforcement against Hecox months later and the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision last year. Idaho appealed to the Supreme Court in July. 'Idaho's women and girls deserve an equal playing field,' said Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, a Republican. 'For too long, activists have worked to sideline women and girls in their own sports.' But Sasha Buchert, senior attorney and director of the Non-Binary and Transgender Rights Project at Lambda Legal, stressed the importance of team sports for all students. Lambda Legal is part of the team representing Pepper-Jackson in the West Virginia case. 'Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,' said Buchert said. 'Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.' This story has been updated with additional information. See Full Web Article
