Economic Justice

Can You Believe They Put This in Writing? The Wildest Quotes From Heritage’s ‘Project 2026’

PUBLISHED 7/8/2026 by , , , and

The Heritage Foundation has once again taken it upon itself to craft a plan for how to supposedly save America. The report—”Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years”—focuses on marriage, family and the American Dream, and has become widely known as “Project 2026,” a follow-up to Heritage’s infamous Project 2025 blueprint.

Project 2025 clocked in at 900 pages; the sequel is around 150. We read the whole thing and pulled out the passages that gave us chills, made us laugh out loud, compelled us to suddenly need to take a long walk and hug our dogs, or inspired another donation to our local abortion fund.

This isn’t intended to be a fact-check or a line-by-line rebuttal. It’s intended to show you how some of the country’s most influential conservative thinkers are talking about feminism, contraception, abortion, LGBTQ+ people, higher education, marriage, motherhood and the role government should play in all of it—because you’re probably too busy to read hundreds of pages of anti-feminist slop.

And because, as former Vice President Kamala Harris famously said about Project 2025: “Can you believe they put that thing in writing?” They did—twice now!

This is the roadmap they’re offering. These documents tell us how their authors understand the country, the family and women’s place in both. We should know what it says.

Revisiting the Speech That Made America See Farmworkers: Dolores Huerta and the Power of Saying, ‘We Exist’

PUBLISHED 7/2/2026 by

In 1965, the National Farm Workers Association announced their decision to join the striking Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee on Sept. 16—Mexican Independence Day. The choice of date reflected the hybrid identity of Chicanos: straddling Mexican and American cultures, Spanish and English, rooted in the old country but with branches fully extended into the new one.

This was the identity Huerta embodied.

Huerta maintained a heavy bilingual speaking schedule to keep up mo­rale. In addition to the typical challenges of organizing, the farmworkers were standing up against bigotry and asserting their American identity—attaching their cause to the Civil Rights Movement.

“Abajo con racism! Down with rac­ism!” Huerta sometimes ended her speeches. “Viva la union! Viva la causa!”

The people in power, the ones who owned the companies that sold the food or wrote laws in the statehouse, had been able to ignore people like the farmworkers—the people who toiled out of sight to keep the system going.

Now, a crowd of people had walked across the state to watch Huerta declare: “We are here and we embody our needs for you.”

(Excerpted from the book ALL WE SAY: The Battle for American Identity: A History in 15 Speeches by Ben Rhodes.)

America’s Roman Holiday: Prime Day and the Price of Convenience

PUBLISHED 6/26/2026 by

Amazon Prime Day has become one of the biggest shopping events in the country, but its success tells a story far bigger than discounts.

In an economy where families are struggling with the cost of groceries, rent, healthcare and childcare, the appeal of lower prices is understandable. Yet the massive scale of Prime Day also raises a harder question: What does it mean when one of America’s defining consumer rituals depends on a labor system that workers, regulators and advocates have repeatedly described as dangerous, underpaid and deeply unequal?

Amazon’s influence extends far beyond its own warehouses. By normalizing ever-faster delivery, constant surveillance and relentless productivity, the company has helped reshape expectations across the retail economy.

As billionaire wealth continues to soar and labor protections face renewed political pressure, Prime Day reveals the growing divide between those who profit from convenience and those whose labor makes it possible.

The World Cup Is Here—But Who Is It For?

PUBLISHED 6/23/2026 by

Soccer is one of the most beloved sports in the world, and the 2026 FIFA World Cup—the largest in the tournament’s history—has drawn millions of fans across the globe. This year, for the first time, the event is being jointly hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico, with matches and related events taking place across North America.

FIFA stands to earn billions of dollars from the tournament.

But as the organization reaps record revenues, many host communities are bearing significant costs. Soaring ticket prices, displacement, labor concerns and aggressive immigration enforcement have raised questions about who truly benefits from the World Cup. For many working-class residents—and even lifelong soccer fans—the tournament is out of reach.

To better understand those impacts, I spoke with Jennifer Li, co-director of the Center for Community Health Innovation at the O’Neill Institute and director of Dignity 2026, a coalition of labor and human rights organizations working to protect communities most at risk during the World Cup.

Soccer “is very much an immigrant sport, let’s face it,” said Li, “and by extension, a sport for people of color, diverse communities. It is a sport that’s not expensive to play, but very expensive to watch, apparently. So, the question then becomes: Who is this for?”

Making a Killing: Who Profits From Trump’s Foreign Policy? Trump and His Inner Circle.

PUBLISHED 6/16/2026 by and

As we wait for the details of the Trump administration’s proposed deal with Iran, one thing is already clear: The people benefiting most from U.S. foreign policy are often the people making it.

From Jared Kushner’s role in Middle East negotiations, to the Trump family’s rapidly expanding business empire, this administration has blurred the line between public service and private profit in ways that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.

U.S. foreign policy has never been free of criticism or influence from wealthy interests, but Trump has taken those dynamics to new extremes. While Americans face rising costs at home and vulnerable communities around the world suffer the consequences of conflict, the president’s family and closest allies appear positioned to reap financial rewards. The result is a foreign policy that prioritizes enrichment over accountability, and power over the public good.

We need a different vision—one rooted in transparency, peace and shared prosperity rather than personal gain. Foreign policy should serve people, not billionaires. It should reduce conflict, uphold human rights and improve lives, not create new opportunities for those already at the top to grow even wealthier.

America’s Medical Research System Has Been Failing Women for Generations

PUBLISHED 6/11/2026 by and

For decades, women have been systematically excluded, overlooked and underfunded by America’s scientific and medical institutions—and the consequences are measurable. Women were not required to be included in federally funded clinical research until 1993, and even today, no more than 8.8 percent of NIH grant spending goes toward women’s health research. The result is a dangerous knowledge gap that affects everything from cardiovascular disease and autoimmune disorders to drug safety, maternal health and reproductive care.

The problem transcends partisan politics. While the Trump administration’s cuts to women’s health research have intensified concerns, Democratic and Republican administrations alike have failed to prioritize women’s health.

Private philanthropy and venture capital have also fallen short, with women’s health receiving just a fraction of available funding.

As women face rising healthcare deserts, worsening maternal mortality rates and persistent gaps in diagnosis and treatment, meaningful progress will require action on every front—from federal investment and philanthropy to innovative new funding models focused specifically on women’s health research.

Trump’s White House UFC Fight Was a Master Class in Fake Populism

PUBLISHED 6/9/2026 by | UPDATED 6/15/2026 at 10:45 A.M. PT

The White House UFC spectacle has come and gone—but the questions it raised about masculinity, power and political culture remain.

In a post-event column for The Guardian, writer Moira Donegan argued that the event reflected a governing style rooted in spectacle and domination, writing that Trump’s embrace of public displays of violence evokes “the dysfunctional Roman emperor” more than a democratic leader. Arts & Entertainment
National
Politics
Sports
Trump’s White House UFC Fight Was a Master Class in Fake Populism
PUBLISHED 6/9/2026 by Jackson Katz | UPDATED 6/15/2026 at 9:22 A.M. PT
Updated June 15 at 8:40 a.m. PT: The White House UFC spectacle has come and gone—but the questions it raised about masculinity, power and political culture remain.

In a post-event column for The Guardian, writer Moira Donegan argued that the event reflected a governing style rooted in spectacle and domination, writing that Trump’s embrace of public displays of violence evokes “the dysfunctional Roman emperor” more than a democratic leader.

Josh Hokit speaks with President Trump following his win in a fight during the UFC Freedom 250 event on the South Lawn at the White House on June 14, 2026, in Washington, D.C. (Chris Unger / Zuffa LLC)
The concern, she suggested, is not simply the fight itself but what it symbolizes: a vision of power that treats aggression, conflict and public humiliation as signs of strength.

The spectacle arrives amid continuing attacks on reproductive rights, gender equality initiatives and social programs that disproportionately affect women and families. In that context, the celebration of cage fighting on the grounds of the White House feels less like a harmless entertainment event than a cultural statement about whose values matter and which forms of power deserve public admiration.

The UFC event was never just about athletics—it was political symbolism. And for many observers, the image of fighters trading blows outside the executive mansion served as a stark reminder that authoritarian politics often rely on spectacles of strength, especially at moments when leaders have less to offer on the material concerns facing ordinary people.

How One Haitian Mother Rebuilt Her Life After Gang Violence—with Courage, Determination, Enterprise and a Small Loan

PUBLISHED 6/2/2026 by

Over the past 25 years, I have had the privilege of working alongside communities in Haiti, traveling there 35 times through my work with the Raising Haiti Foundation. I have met many people like Mirlanda Sully—women and men whose resilience, dignity and determination challenge the way we understand hardship. Her story is extraordinary, but it is not unique.

After armed gangs overtook her hometown, Sully fled with her husband and young son, leaving behind their home, business and possessions.

Arriving in a remote mountain community with nothing, she rebuilt her life through a women-focused microcredit program that provided small loans, business training and a network of support.

Today, she runs a thriving market business, mentors other women and helps ensure her neighbors can access essential goods closer to home.

Again and again, I have seen that lasting change does not come from outside solutions. It comes from investing in the strength, ingenuity and leadership that already exist within communities.

Sully’s story is a powerful reminder that transformation often begins with something small—a loan, an opportunity, a belief in what women can accomplish when given the tools to succeed.

Black Women Political Candidates Are Expected to Be ‘Likable,’ Qualified and Tireless. Men Aren’t.

PUBLISHED 5/28/2026 by

What I experienced during my 2014 run for office wasn’t entirely unfamiliar to me.

The year before, I had run for president of the Young Democrats of America (YDA), a national political party office role, against a popular opponent. The opponent was a Black man, so race wasn’t a factor in the election; however, gender was.

Before my campaign, I was vice president of YDA and had heard only good things about my service: my fundraising efforts, the partnerships I had engineered with progressive organizations, and programming coordination for the membership. However, when I decided to run for president, I instantly became ‘difficult to work with’ and ‘mean.’

Research on women candidates confirms that voters are less likely to vote for a woman if they don’t like her; by comparison, voters don’t need to like men to elect them. But when I was running as the Black woman candidate in a seven-candidate primary for public office, with two other women in the race, I noticed almost nothing about my being ‘difficult’ and more about my ability and work ethic.

My experience running for public office reflected the systemic bias and double standards not just for women candidates, but Black women candidates who dare to aspire to any sort of political leadership—and that needed to change.

We need more progressive Black women in public office for a myriad reasons, but we also specifically need the younger generation of Instigators in office, candidates who understand the times in which we live currently.

Electing more Black women will take real investment in changing the biases and attitudes (conscious and unconscious) of mostly white donors, media, campaign staff, consultants and institutional leaders to help shift the culture and systems. But this support needs to be substantively increased so that we can rebuild an inclusive, multiracial democracy with the leaders we want and need.

(Excerpted from The Instigators: How Black Women Have Been Essential to American Democracy by Atima Omara.)