Skip to content

What Does Project 2025 Say?

Share this page:

On November 5, 2024, the United States Elected Donald J. Trump to a second term. The day after that, his allies gleefully admitted that Project 2025 was their – and his – agenda the entire time.

This is what we’re up against.

“Under President Biden, the mission has shifted to “promoting equity in everything we do” for the sake of “populations sharing a particular characteristic” including race, sexuality, gender identification, ethnicity, and a host of other categories.”
Citation: Project 2025, Section 3.5: Department of Health and Human Services, Roger Severino, page 481, paragraph 1
Context:

In this context, “equity” means ensuring fair access to health care and social services for underserved populations. This was the goal of the Biden Administration’s efforts, which appears to offend Severino. The focus on equity aims to reduce disparities in health outcomes based on factors such as race, gender, income, and geographic location. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the administration emphasized equitable vaccine distribution to communities of color and rural areas that were disproportionately affected.

By “populations sharing a particular characteristic”, he’s talking about the focus on specific populations that have historically faced disparities in health outcomes, including racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and others. The goal is to address these issues by improving access to care, combating discrimination in healthcare settings, and ensuring that public health initiatives are inclusive of all communities. This approach includes efforts to improve maternal health for women of color, address mental health and provide addiction services in underserved areas, and support LGBTQ+ health initiatives.

The phrase “for the sake of” implies that equity efforts are purely political or symbolic, rather than addressing real and documented health disparities. However, there is significant evidence that certain groups – such as racial minorities and LGBTQ+ individuals – face worse health outcomes50 due to factors like discrimination, lower access to healthcare, and higher rates of chronic conditions.

So, we can conclude here that Severino is completely ignoring the facts in favor of an ineffectual “colorblind” strategy that does nothing to reduce bad health outcomes for minorities.

Full contextual analysis of Section 3.5: Department of Health and Human Services here.