Which of Project 2025's plans come to fruition?
Mini
14
1.1k
2026
48%
Gutting the US Department of Justice (DOJ)
25%
Gutting the Environmental Protection Agency
10%
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will require that "every state report how many abortions take place, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother's state of residence, and by what method".
8%
Eliminating the Department of Commerce
8%
Eliminating the Department of Education
7%
abolishing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
5%
Removing all climate change regulations from 2000 onwards
5%
Implement a Scripture-based system of government whereby "Christ-ordained civil magistrates" exercise authority over the American public
5%
Dismantling the FBI
3%
Dismantling the Department of Homeland Security
Resolved
N/A
Reducing by more than half the US Department of Justice (DOJ) funding
Resolved
N/A
Allow criminal prosecutions for the senders and receivers of abortion pills

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

Project 2025 (officially the Presidential Transition Project) is a collection of policy proposals to reshape the executive branch of the U.S. federal government at an unprecedented scale in the event of a Republican victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

[...]

The plan proposes slashing U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) funding, dismantling the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, gutting environmental and climate change regulations to favor fossil fuel production, and eliminating the cabinet Departments of Education and Commerce.

If an option gets achieved before that by a Republican government in 2025, it resolves YES.

Otherwise, resolves NO at the end of 2025.

"Gutting" is operationalized as reducing 30%+ of the budget OR staff count.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

Does “allow criminal prosecutions […] abortion pills” mean at the federal level, or do state laws count?

Their agenda / manifesto seemed general about it, so I think they intend it to be federal? If so, it’s meant to be federal. I’ll close the question to allow for a bit of discussion about it if anyone disagrees that that’s their intent

but in general, the intent of the market is to see which of their plans succeeds, so the resolution criteria seek to be roughly in line with what their plans actually are

N/A or No in the case of a Dem win?

@spider wording implies NO

@spider pyrylium is right, that’s a NO. I was considering a conditional market with N/A but went with this to quantify ‘whats the risk these things actually happen’