The Bridge
Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to 20th century progressive reform
The content discusses the ideological struggle in U.S. governance, highlighting conservative backlash against progressive reforms like the New Deal and Great Society, culminating in Project 2025’s agenda for Trump’s potential administration.
Colin Gordon, University of Iowa
For much of the 20th century, efforts to remake government were driven by a progressive desire to make the government work for regular Americans, including the New Deal and the Great Society reforms.
But they also met a conservative backlash seeking to rein back government as a source of security for working Americans and realign it with the interests of private business. That backlash is the central thread of the Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025” blueprint for a second Trump Administration.
Alternatively disavowed and embraced by President Donald Trump during his 2024 campaign, Project 2025 is a collection of conservative policy proposals – many written by veterans of his first administration. It echoes similar projects, both liberal and conservative, setting out a bold agenda for a new administration.
But Project 2025 does so with particular detail and urgency, hoping to galvanize dramatic change before the midterm elections in 2026. As its foreword warns: “Conservatives have just two years and one shot to get this right.”
The standard for a transformational “100 days” – a much-used reference point for evaluating an administration – belongs to the first administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Social reforms and FDR
In 1933, in the depths of the Great Depression, Roosevelt faced a nation in which business activity had stalled, nearly a third of the workforce was unemployed, and economic misery and unrest were widespread.
But Roosevelt’s so-called “New Deal” unfolded less as a grand plan to combat the Depression than as a scramble of policy experimentation.
Roosevelt did not campaign on what would become the New Deal’s singular achievements, which included expansive relief programs, subsidies for farmers, financial reforms, the Social Security system, the minimum wage and federal protection of workers’ rights.
Those achievements came haltingly after two years of frustrated or ineffective policymaking. And those achievements rested less on Roosevelt’s political vision than on the political mobilization and demands made by American workers.
A generation later, another wave of social reforms unfolded in similar fashion. This time it was not general economic misery that spurred actions, but the persistence of inequality – especially racial inequality – in an otherwise prosperous time.
LBJ’s Great Society
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society programs declared a war on poverty and, toward that end, introduced a raft of new federal initiatives in urban, education and civil rights.
These included the provision of medical care for the poor and older people via Medicaid and Medicare, a dramatic expansion of federal aid for K-12 education, and landmark voting rights and civil rights legislation.
As with the New Deal, the substance of these policies rested less with national policy designs than with the aspirations and mobilization of the era’s social movements.
Resistance to policy change
Since the 1930s, conservative policy agendas have largely taken the form of reactions to the New Deal and the Great Society.
The central message has routinely been that “big government” has overstepped its bounds and trampled individual rights, and that the architects of those reforms are not just misguided but treasonous. Project 2025, in this respect, promises not just a political right turn but to “defeat the anti-American left.”
After the 1946 midterm elections, congressional Republicans struck back at the New Deal. Drawing on business opposition to the New Deal, popular discontent with postwar inflation, and common cause with Southern Democrats, they stemmed efforts to expand the New Deal, gutting a full employment proposal and defeating national health insurance.
They struck back at organized labor with the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, which undercut federal law by allowing states to pass anti-union “right to work” laws. And they launched an infamous anti-communist purge of the civil service, which forced nearly 15,000 people out of government jobs.
In 1971, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce commissioned Lewis Powell – who would be appointed by Republican President Richard Nixon to the Supreme Court the next year – to assess the political landscape. Powell’s memorandum characterized the political climate at the dawn of the 1970s – including both Great Society programs and the anti-war and Civil Rights movements of the 1960s – as nothing less than an “attack on the free enterprise system.”
In a preview of current U.S. politics, Powell’s memorandum devoted special attention to a disquieting “chorus of criticism” coming from “the perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians.”
Powell characterized the social policies of the New Deal and Great Society as “socialism or some sort of statism” and advocated the elevation of business interests and business priorities to the center of American political life.
Building a conservative infrastructure
Powell captured the conservative zeitgeist at the onset of what would become a long and decisive right turn in American politics. More importantly, it helped galvanize the creation of a conservative infrastructure – in the courts, in the policy world, in universities and in the media – to push back against that “chorus of criticism.”
This political shift would yield an array of organizations and initiatives, including the political mobilization of business, best represented by the emergence of the Koch brothers and the powerful libertarian conservative political advocacy group they founded, known as Americans for Prosperity. It also yielded a new wave of conservative voices on radio and television and a raft of right-wing policy shops and think tanks – including the Heritage Foundation, creator of Project 2025.
In national politics, the conservative resurgence achieved full expression in President Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign. The “Reagan Revolution” united economic and social conservatives around the central goal of dismantling what was left of the New Deal and Great Society.
Powell’s triumph was evident across the policy landscape. Reagan gutted social programs, declared war on organized labor, pared back economic and social regulations – or declined to enforce them – and slashed taxes on business and the wealthy.
Publicly, the Reagan administration argued that tax cuts would pay for themselves, with the lower rates offset by economic growth. Privately, it didn’t matter: Either growth would sustain revenues, or the resulting budgetary hole could be used to “starve the beast” and justify further program cuts.
Reagan’s vision, and its shaky fiscal logic, were reasserted in the “Contract with America” proposed by congressional Republicans after their gains in the 1994 midterm elections.
This declaration of principles proposed deep cuts to social programs alongside tax breaks for business. It was perhaps most notable for encouraging the Clinton administration to pass the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, “ending welfare as we know it,” as Clinton promised.
Aiming at the ‘deep state’
Project 2025, the latest in this series of blueprints for dramatic change, draws most deeply on two of those plans.
As in the congressional purges of 1940s, it takes aim not just at policy but at the civil servants – Trump’s “deep state” – who administer it.
In the wake of World War II, the charge was that feckless bureaucrats served Soviet masters. Today, Project 2025 aims to “bring the Administrative State to heel, and in the process defang and defund the woke culture warriors who have infiltrated every last institution in America.”
As in the 1971 Powell memorandum, Project 2025 promises to mobilize business power; to “champion the dynamic genius of free enterprise against the grim miseries of elite-directed socialism.”
Whatever their source – party platforms, congressional bomb-throwers, think tanks, private interests – the success or failure of these blueprints rested not on their vision or popular appeal but on the political power that accompanied them. The New Deal and Great Society gained momentum and meaning from the social movements that shaped their agendas and held them to account.
The lineage of conservative responses has been largely an assertion of business power. Whatever populist trappings the second Trump administration may possess, the bottom line of the conservative cultural and political agenda in 2025 is to dismantle what is left of the New Deal or the Great Society, and to defend unfettered “free enterprise” against critics and alternatives.
Colin Gordon, Professor of History, University of Iowa
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Space and Tech
Astronaut Victor Glover is the latest in a long line of Black American explorers − including York, the enslaved man who played a key role in the Lewis and Clark expedition
Craig Fehrman, Indiana University
Astronaut Victor Glover
In April 2026, four astronauts are scheduled to fly around the Moon. As part of NASA’s Artemis II mission, they will become the first humans to do so in half a century. One crew member, pilot Victor Glover, will become the first Black astronaut to ever orbit the Moon.
Glover’s achievement is worth celebrating. But it’s also worth remembering that he belongs to a long and underappreciated history. America’s first Black explorer didn’t fly an Apollo rocket or sail with the U.S. Exploring Expedition. He traveled with Lewis and Clark, and he was known by a single name: York.
I’m a historian who spent five years writing a book about Lewis and Clark, and I found new documents that show York was one of the most important people on their expedition. Even in a party that could number as many as 45 men, York stood out – for his courage, his skill and his sacrifices that helped the famous captains reach the Pacific Ocean.
York’s life as a slave
York was born in Virginia around 1770. Growing up, he was a creative and sociable child, unusually tall with dark hair and a dark complexion – “black as a bear,” a contemporary noted.
He was also enslaved by the Clarks. William Clark, who was around the same age, was also unusually tall, though his hair was a rusty red, and sometimes the boys played together. But the playing stopped once York turned 9 or 10. That’s when he joined the adult slaves in working full time. That’s also when he began to note the differences between his life and William’s – differences that became only clearer once William started ordering him around.
In the 1780s, the Clark household headed to Kentucky. York met a Black woman there and married her. He also became William’s “body servant.”
A body servant was a slave who stayed close to his owner and prioritized his comfort, laying out his clothes and serving his meals. When Meriwether Lewis asked Clark to join his expedition, in 1803, Clark ordered York to accompany him.
Perhaps York was excited for this adventure. Perhaps he was not – it would be punishing, and he would be separated from his wife.
Either way, York didn’t have a choice.
The Corps of Discovery
York proved his worth from the start. Once they reached St. Louis, the soldiers, later known as the Corps of Discovery, rushed to raise winter quarters. Working in hail and snow, York and the others built log huts. They needed rough planks for their tables and bunks, but the carpenters had only a single whipsaw to make them. They chose two men to operate this crucial tool. One of them was York.
On May 14, 1804, the corps began ascending the Missouri River. York helped row and tow the party’s barge, which was the size of a semi-truck trailer. He carried a rifle and hunted – according to the expedition’s journals, he was only the fifth named member to bring down a buffalo. York cooked for the captains. He collected scientific specimens. He nursed the sick, including several soldiers and, later on, Sacagawea, a Shoshone woman who would also prove essential to the expedition’s success.
The soldiers were not always kind in return. During this period, officers rarely brought along enslaved body servants. York’s race probably made some of the men angry or uncomfortable. One day, someone threw so much sand in his face that it nearly blinded him. Clark claimed it was “in fun,” but he also wrote that York was “very near losing his eyes,” and no one else got cruelly sprayed with sand.
That fall, during councils with Native leaders, York played a surprising and vital role. The Arikara, Mandan and Hidatsa all crowded in to see him and to touch his skin. They had never met a Black person before, and York showed off his strength and played with the Native children. Later, the Arikara said York was “the most marvelous” thing about the corps.
The next year, the expedition crossed the Rockies and the Continental Divide. York’s most important – and most overlooked – contributions came soon after. On the Columbia River and its tributaries, the party had to dig out five new canoes and then paddle them through treacherous rapids.
Lewis and Clark allowed only their best rivermen on these foaming, rock-riven waters. One of them was almost certainly York. During my research, I found an unpublished letter in which Clark praised York’s ability to “manage the boats.”
Just as important, York was a strong swimmer, a rare thing in an era when many people never learned to swim.
York’s life as an explorer
On the Columbia River, the corps survived a series of terrifying choke points – soggy hazards they referred to as the “Long Narrows” and the “Great Chute.” After that came the ocean. They had traveled together for more than 4,000 miles (6,400 kilometers), and when the captains asked the men to vote on where to put their final winter quarters, they made sure to ask York, too.
It was the latest sign that his role had changed during this epic journey. But those changes began with York. In the West, he found ways to make choices and assert himself. He sent a buffalo robe to his wife in Kentucky. When Clark told him to scale back his performances for Native people, York ignored him – because he wanted to, and because he could.
York’s vote was also evidence that, like Victor Glover today, he was an official American explorer, a key member of a sprawling, federally funded mission. From 1804 to 1806, the government devoted a larger percentage of its budget to the corps than it devotes to NASA today.
Part of that money was earmarked for York. The Army gave officers who brought along their slaves a monthly ration or its cash equivalent. When the corps made it home, the government paid US$274.57 for York’s labor, a sum similar to what the privates received. But that money didn’t go to York. It went to Clark.
The hidden history of Black explorers
There have been many Black explorers in American history. Thomas Jefferson launched other expeditions besides Lewis and Clark’s, and those expeditions also included enslaved people, though their names have not survived. Isaiah Brown served on the Wheeler Survey, which mapped the West in greater detail after the Civil War. Matthew Henson accompanied Robert Peary on his Arctic expeditions, which received some federal support. More recently, NASA has depended on Black astronauts such as Guy Bluford, Mae Jemison and Jeanette Epps, among others.
York and Victor Glover are, for now, the first and most recent examples of this inspiring tradition. But their contributions go beyond that. When the captains asked York to vote on the winter quarters, they were acknowledging in some small way that he’d proven he was more than a body servant.
Of course, York had always been more than that. It just took 4,000 miles for Lewis and Clark to see it.
Craig Fehrman, Adjunct instructor at the Media School, Indiana University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
🧠 Forgotten Genius Fridays
A Short-Form Series from The Knowledge by STM Daily News
Every Friday, STM Daily News shines a light on brilliant minds history overlooked.
Forgotten Genius Fridays is a weekly collection of short videos and articles dedicated to inventors, innovators, scientists, and creators whose impact changed the world—but whose names were often left out of the textbooks.
From life-saving inventions and cultural breakthroughs to game-changing ideas buried by bias, our series digs up the truth behind the minds that mattered.
Each episode of The Knowledge runs 30–90 seconds, designed for curious minds on the go—perfect for YouTube Shorts, TikTok, Reels, and quick reads.
Because remembering these stories isn’t just about the past—it’s about restoring credit where it’s long overdue.
🔔 New episodes every Friday
📺 Watch now at: stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge
🧠 Now you know.
As the United States moves toward the 250th anniversary of its independence, a new public storytelling project is asking Americans to answer a big question: what does the American Dream mean today?
McCourt Entertainment has launched America-Dreams.com at SXSW as a digital platform designed to collect video submissions from people across the country. The goal is ambitious: gather one million voices reflecting on hope, opportunity, and what Americans want the future of the country to look like.
The initiative is tied to AMERIGO, an upcoming documentary presented by South Florida PBS and distributed by American Public Television. The film, which will be available to PBS stations nationwide beginning in June as part of 2026 programming tied to the nation’s 250th anniversary, explores the past, present, and future of the American Dream through conversations with people across the United States.
According to the project team, selected user-submitted videos may become part of the broader AMERIGOstorytelling effort, turning the campaign into more than a promotional rollout. Instead, it is being framed as a living archive of public voices gathered during a milestone moment in American history.
South Florida PBS President and CEO Dolores Fernandez Alonso said the goal is to make the anniversary feel inclusive and participatory.
“To celebrate the 250th anniversary of America’s independence, we wanted to do something truly remarkable and invite all Americans to share their hope for the American Dream at America-Dreams.com,” Alonso said. “We are extremely proud of the cross-section of voices from across our nation and we want to capture these stories, experiences and perspectives so that people feel included in this historic national conversation.”
Emmy Award-winning producer David McCourt said the project builds on the documentary team’s nationwide reporting.
“As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, this project asks a simple but powerful question: ‘What is your hope for the American Dream?’” McCourt said. “We want to hear directly from people across the country.”
The campaign arrives at a moment when interactive documentary projects and audience participation are becoming a larger part of public media storytelling. With AMERIGO, the combination of a PBS documentary and a nationwide video submission initiative gives the project a broader cultural footprint than a traditional film release.
Submissions are now open at America-Dreams.com. A trailer for AMERIGO is also available on Vimeo.
For entertainment audiences, the project stands out less as a conventional documentary launch and more as a large-scale invitation to participate in a national media moment ahead of America’s semiquincentennial.
Catch the latest in movies, TV, music, pop culture, and live events in STM Daily News’ Entertainment section.
Related Links
Source Link
Authors
Last Updated on April 4, 2026 by Daily News Staff
Few transportation systems in the world are as instantly recognizable as the cable cars of San Francisco. Climbing steep hills with a steady hum and a nostalgic charm, these moving landmarks are more than just a tourist attraction—they’re a triumph of innovation born out of necessity.
🐎 A Problem on the Hills
In the mid-1800s, San Francisco was growing rapidly, but its geography posed a serious challenge. The city’s steep inclines made travel difficult, especially for horse-drawn streetcars, which were the primary form of public transportation at the time.
Horses often struggled to pull heavy loads uphill, and accidents were common. In some cases, animals collapsed under the strain. This dangerous and inefficient system needed a solution.
💡 The Vision of Andrew Hallidie
That solution came from Andrew Smith Hallidie, an engineer and entrepreneur who envisioned a safer, more reliable way to move people through the city.
Hallidie developed a system in which streetcars would be pulled by a continuously moving cable running beneath the street—eliminating the need for horses altogether.
⚙️ The First Cable Car Line
On August 2, 1873, Hallidie launched the world’s first cable car system: the Clay Street Hill Railroad.
This groundbreaking line proved that cable-powered transit could successfully navigate San Francisco’s steep terrain. Instead of relying on animal power, cars used a mechanical grip to latch onto a moving cable underground, allowing them to glide smoothly up and down hills.
The innovation quickly captured public attention—and demand.
🚀 A City Transformed
Following the success of the Clay Street line, cable car systems spread rapidly across San Francisco.
By the late 19th century:
- Dozens of routes crisscrossed the city
- Cable cars became the backbone of urban transportation
- The system helped shape the city’s growth and accessibility
For a time, San Francisco operated the largest and most advanced cable car network in the world.
⚡ The Rise of Electric Streetcars
Despite their success, cable cars faced competition from emerging electric streetcar systems in the early 20th century. Electric trolleys were cheaper to build and operate, and they didn’t require the complex underground cable infrastructure.
The turning point came after the devastating 1906 San Francisco earthquake, which destroyed much of the city—including large portions of the cable car network.
When rebuilding began, many lines were converted to electric systems instead of restoring the older cable technology.
San Francisco’s cable car system, first launched in 1873, remains the last manually operated system of its kind. According to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) , the system was designed to safely navigate the city’s steep terrain.
The cable cars are now designated as a National Historic Landmark, recognized for their cultural and engineering significance by the National Park Service .
Visitors can explore the history and mechanics of the system at the San Francisco Cable Car Museum , which preserves original equipment and archives.
🛑 Saving a Symbol
By the 1940s, cable cars were on the brink of extinction.
That’s when Friedel Klussmann stepped in. A passionate preservationist, Klussmann led a public campaign to protect the remaining lines from being dismantled.
Her efforts culminated in a successful 1947 voter referendum that ensured the survival of San Francisco’s cable cars—transforming them from everyday transit into a preserved cultural landmark.
🌉 Cable Cars Today
Today, San Francisco’s cable cars are:
- The last manually operated cable car system in the world
- A National Historic Landmark
- One of the most visited attractions in California
Three lines remain in operation:
- Powell–Hyde Line
- Powell–Mason Line
- California Street Line
While they still function as public transit, they now serve as a moving museum—connecting modern riders with the city’s past.
🎯 Why It Matters
San Francisco’s cable cars represent more than a mode of transportation. They tell a story of innovation, resilience, and community action.
From solving a practical problem to becoming a global icon, the cable car system reflects how cities adapt—and how people fight to preserve what makes them unique.
📌 “Now You Know”
San Francisco’s cable cars weren’t built for tourism—they were invented to solve a life-and-death problem on steep city streets. Today, they remain the last system of their kind anywhere in the world.
🔗 External Sources & Related Links
- SFMTA – Cable Cars Overview
- San Francisco Cable Car Museum
- National Park Service – Historic Landmark Info
- Britannica – Cable Car History
- History.com – Invention of Cable Cars
Explore the latest in innovation, AI, gadgets, startups, and digital trends in STM Daily News’ Techsection.
