Radical Incrementalism and the Heritage Foundation

Radical incrementalism is what Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, recommends as a working philosophy for conservatives. It's stacking one partial win on another and then another.

"Radical incrementalism" was a term used by Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, in a 2023 speech. He had used it several times before. What that phrase means is that if a hypothetical Donald Trump.administration puts any appreciable amount of the Project into play, that's a win for the Heritage Foundation. Since Project 2025 overlaps Trump's own Agenda 47, some of the recommendations would surely be followed. Historically, all Republican presidents have followed a good percentage of their recommendations, beginning with Ronald Reagan.

The Heritage Foundation has always been incremental to some degree or other. In the Reagan presidency they got 60 percent of what they wanted. They followed up with Bush 41 and got more of their agenda emplaced. They even got a smidgen of their suggestions out of the Clinton administration. His welfare reform included some Heritage suggestions, and the Clinton administration gave up a few budgetary concessions, partially due to a Republican majority in the 104th Congress.

Allow me to repeat that. Since its founding in 1973 by Paul Weyrich, Ed Feulner and Joseph Coors, Christian conservatives all, the Heritage Foundation has been an organization that has settled for a percentage of the marbles in the game at any given time. They have a long term agenda. They have been patient, but they have always kept their eyes on the goal posts. In the 1980s and 1990s the goal didn't seem to include an obvious push for the theocracy of Christian Nationalism. The seeds were there, as evidenced by Weyrich being a co-founder of the Moral Majority. However, the drastic push to place Christian Nationalism in control of the government is a recent occurrence. Again, that potential was always there, depending on the political climate and the people in leadership roles at the Heritage Foundation.

They have traditionally favored business interests, pushing tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, and deregulation. Up until the Trump administration, Republican presidents usually followed their fiscally conservative advice on budgets.

Their reach extends to more than just presidential influence. In 1988 Heritage published their first edition of "The Candidate's Briefing Book," promoting their policies. Here's a quote from their timeline: "Heritage releases the first edition of Issues: The Candidate's Briefing Book. This comprehensive guide to domestic, foreign, and defense policy issues helps conservative candidates frame the debate. In 2000, House Majority Leader Dick Armey said, 'If candidates read nothing else, they should read Issues.... No candidate should run without it.'"

Doing a Google search reveals a few copies floating around. Look for “The Candidate’s Briefing Book.

In 1995 they held their first orientation for freshmen congressmen. This is another excerpt from their timeline: "Conference to educate the freshman class. Fifty-six Members of Congress attend while Harvard University's competing conference is canceled due to lack of interest. On the first day of the new session, the House reforms 15 rules: 13 of these rule reforms had been recommended by Heritage. Over the 100 days of the new Congress, Heritage analysts testify over 100 times."

From their November 20, 2020 Heritage Impact article:

"This year, more than half of the newly elected members of Congress attended Heritage's orientation program on Nov. 10.

"The program is designed for the freshman representatives to engage with conservative movement leaders and Heritage policy experts prior to taking their official oath. Heritage's program, which happens before the official congressional orientation hosted by the U.S. House of Representatives, provides an early access point for the soon-to-be lawmakers."

This is the organization that authored Project 2025. They are almost irrevocably intertwined with the Republican party. Officially they can't be partisan because of their tax exempt status, but Republican elected officials are the ones following their lead.

Like The Purloined Letter, the Heritage Foundation has been hiding in plain sight since 1973. Their "radical incrementalism" means they don't need a Republican president, a Donald Trump, to totally follow their lead. Every time they achieve a partial win, it accrues to their pile of wins. After every marble game, there are fewer marbles in the circle.

The Democratic party doesn't currently have a good counterweight to the Heritage Foundation. The closest contender would be the Center for American Progress, which was founded in 2003, giving Heritage a thirty year head start.

This is not a totally hopeless picture. The Federalist Society, the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute and others favor big corporations as opposed to working folks. These organizations are the heavy hitters influencing Republican elected officials. We have our grass roots bootstaps with which to counter them. It can be enough if we keep sharing information with our friends and neighbors, and if we work hard and put in a lot of effort. Project 2025 is a good example. A few weeks ago, Joyce Vance said that only thirty percent or so of the voting populace had heard of it. That number recently passed fifty percent.

We can do this.