Read theMandate

Project 2025 › Chapter 3 › Proposal

Reconsider whether public-sector unions should exist

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, chapter 3, p. 82. Written by Donald Devine, Dennis Dean Kirk, Paul Dans.

Reconsider whether public-sector unions should exist

The document says “should consider”Who acts: CongressHow: legislationp. 82 in the PDF
What the document says

“Congress should also consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate in the first place.”

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, p. 82

Framed as a question for Congress to consider rather than a specific proposal: the chapter says a bipartisan consensus until the middle of the 20th century held that public-sector unions were incompatible with constitutional government, and that after half a century it is hard to avoid the same conclusion.

What the document actually says

“Congress should also consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate in the first place.”

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, p. 82
That sentence, in plain words

Congress should also ask a bigger question. Should workers in the government have unions at all?

What this is about

The book asks Congress a much bigger question. It asks whether federal workers should have unions at all. It does not lay out a plan for this. It says leaders long ago thought unions were a bad fit for government.

What has happened
Contested reading

Exclusions From Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs

2025-03-27 · 90 FR 14553

Whether this order answers the chapter's question is a reading, not a fact. The chapter put the question to Congress and proposed no executive action on it; this is executive action, and it removes coverage from named agencies rather than deciding the general question. Recorded here because readers reasonably connect the two, and left unresolved.

In plain English

The chapter asked Congress to weigh whether these unions should exist. It asked for no act by the President. This order is such an act. It covers only named agencies. Whether it answers the chapter's question is a reading, left open here.

What cites those orders

2 agency rules

Each of these names the order above in its own summary, preamble or filing. That is a fact about the document, not a finding that it carries out this proposal: it is one step further away than the order is, and what it does about the proposal is a reading nobody has made here.

Share this page
How to cite this
  1. The document itself

    Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, edited by Paul Dans and Steven Groves (The Heritage Foundation, 2023), p. 82.
    https://static.heritage.org/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

  2. This page

    “Reconsider whether public-sector unions should exist,” Project 2025, chapter 3, p. 82. Read the Mandate, https://readthemandate.org/project-2025/proposal/ch03-question-public-sector-unions/ (retrieved October 7, 2026).

Cite the document when the claim is about what the document says. Cite this page when the indexing, the wording or the record of what has happened is what is being relied on.

How to Read This Page

The quotation is the document's own words, exactly as printed, checked against the page number against the book itself before publishing. The paragraph underneath is our summary, not the document's words. So is the plain English version, which is why it sits beside the quotation rather than replacing it.

All proposals in this chapter →