We Are NEXT™: The People’s Voice in Shaping Good Government Policies
Ali Cleveland Rebecca Moryl
By Ali Cleveland, Chief Executive Officer and Rebecca Moryl, Chief Policy Officer
Dear readers,
We Are NEXT (formerly Project 2029) has been in existence for more than a year now, with our nonpartisan, grassroots volunteer force shaping ideas and sustainable policy proposals for a new presidential administration. Through this work we are ultimately striving for a democracy that ensures dignity for all.
We keep you updated on these policies and their reasons for being in a dedicated section of our website, and in our blogs and this newsletter. So far, we’ve compiled work on immigration, housing and homelessness, healthcare funding, electoral college reform, education, classroom censorship, foreign policy, and digital privacy/cybersecurity/artificial intelligence and automation -– and we are still going.
These policies are not red or blue. They are the straightforward needs and wants identified by our citizen-led movement. They come from a practical mindset and reflect original American democratic ideals. In general, they recognize the dignity of each person, are compassionate in intent, and respectful of the rule of law at the same time.
But we know you have some specific questions; we have received some insightful ones over time. Here are some exchanges that stand out.
Question: Some of your policies are described as Day One policies, even for big problems. Why is that when some areas, let’s say healthcare, are so huge? And presidential terms last for 4 years.
Answer: That’s a good place to start. We do want a lasting solution to this dilemma of too many people in our country either paying too much for healthcare they are not satisfied with, or worse yet, trying to get by without sufficient healthcare, or healthcare coverage, because they can’t afford the coverage they need. Realistically, that will take some time and coordination and the passage of new laws, which involves Congress.
What Day One policies do is list the first steps the president (or the executive branch if you prefer that term) can take legally, within the bounds of the U.S. Constitution and produce something substantive. So, not the Congress, not the judiciary, but the executive.
But we don’t need to encourage a new president to issue more executive orders that are actually outside the bounds of what the Constitution permits, as President Trump has been doing. We respect the Constitution and the limits it sets. And we have seen that the judiciary sometimes rightly overturns some of Trump’s executive orders. So we want to use Executive Orders, because they’re efficient, but we want to do it right.
A set of Day One policies can get us off to a quick start. Here’s a small example. The new president can restore America’s membership in the World Health Organization (WHO). That’s the international body connected to the United Nations that sets guidelines for treating diseases and coordinating responses when there is a global outbreak of an illness.
Under President Trump, America has left the WHO and stopped paying dues. Our best policy guidance says it is better for the United States to be a member to help keep our nation and the world safer, partly because we would have access to the best information when illnesses suddenly appear.
There are many possible Day One actions, that could for instance set a new task force in place or announce a specific direction that is important to a new president. That in itself has value because it tells the public, our allies, and even our enemies, what the country’s priorities are.
Some of the work we’d like to see done, like the passage of some new kinds of laws, would have to be done by Congress, so that’s not a Day One executive action we would list.
Still, some of our work has broadened, because we named objectives the new president can meet not on Day One, but within Year One. That’s a recent development.
What actions can be immediate
Q: What’s an example of that?
A: There are several in foreign policy, which is one of our newer areas. Here are a couple: On Day One, the president announces that we are going back to calling the body of water west of Florida and east of Mexico the Gulf of Mexico. We drop the term “Gulf of America.” And we stop naming bases for our military forces after Confederates.
In the longer term, top U.S. officials could meet with European allies because that can help relationships that have been tested. We as a nation could formally recognize the State of Palestine, according to the borders that existed before 1967.
Q: How do you choose the policy areas and the depth and amount of work you’re willing to produce?
A. We’re a volunteer organization, and so we take on the areas where our volunteers can bring expertise to the table. We know we don’t have all the answers.
Q: That still seems like a lot of work — why not just endorse some candidates or parties?
A. Candidates and parties have enough help. They, too, can read our policy ideas and get behind them, for instance.
But we’re here as a civic movement to fill a gap in the country’s political ecosystem — we’re here to speak directly about what the citizens — we, the people — want. That voice hasn’t always been heard. So, it is a lot of work, but it is worthwhile.
And when we explain the outcomes we want to see, we move past some of the old arguments where political parties got themselves into a stalemate of some kind, unproductively. We tell them that’s old and that they should concentrate on what we want to see happen now.
Leaving old sticking points behind
Q: What do you mean?
A: In immigration, for instance, in the past, one side would argue for more visas to allow more people in. But the other side would claim they can’t negotiate on that point simply because the first party just doesn’t accept the concept of borders or the legal reasons for deportations.
In reality, people – and we are the people – accept that there will be deportations. There were more deportations under the Biden administration than there have been under Trump, so far, although under Trump’s second administration this is moving at a quicker pace. (Biden’s administration deported 4 million in his term, while Trump deported 1.9 million, according to a comparison from The New York Times.(1))
Yet, under the Biden administration, no one was shot and killed, and there were no attendant sexual assaults.(2)
So we are not saying there will be no deportations. We’re saying we are going to have them, but with due process. And without the racism and racial profiling(3) demonstrated by ICE officers stopping people who happen to be brown-skinned, or stopping off-duty police officers of color in the Twin Cities, which the upper ranks of local police brought out.(4)
And also without the corruption of the upper-ranks of ICE making excuses for officers shown on video to have shot or harmed people(5), and apparently an unwillingness to investigate officer misconduct(6). And obviously without the violence and the beatings that have been documented(7). Again, none of that means we as a country won’t have deportations — but we expect these federal employees to follow the rules in place and the professional standards in the field, all the time. And we say that clearly so that other people won’t misrepresent our views so they can dismiss us.
Or, in healthcare or housing, we’re saying everybody has a right to healthcare that won’t bankrupt them. Everybody has a right to a home that won’t bankrupt them.
What we’re saying isn’t “woke.” It’s exactly what the people want.
Q: So how do you suggest people make use of these policies you post?
A: First, read them to see what you think. Let us know. If you agree with them, ask the people running for office that you meet if they would support these actions. Encourage other people to read them and respond in some way
Notes
1.Sun, A. (2025, Jan. 22). “Why Deportations Were Higher Under Biden Than in Trump’s First Term.” The New York Times. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/22/us/trump-biden-immigrants-deportations.html
2. Foley, R. J. (2026, Feb. 11). “Several ICE agents were arrested in recent months, showing risk of misconduct.” The Associated Press. Retrieved from: https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2026/several-ice-agents-were-arrested-in-recent-months-showing-risk-of-misconduct/
3. Sanchez, G. R. and Vargas, E. D. (2025, Oct. 16). Research:“Racial profiling by ICE will have a marked impact on Latino communities.” The Brookings Institution. Retrieved from: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/racial-profiling-by-ice-will-have-a-marked-impact-on-latino-communities/
4. KARE 11. (2026, Jan. 20). “Twin Cities police chiefs: officers report being targeted while off duty by ICE agents.” Retrieved from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRURdXNW3A4
5. WABC (2026, Jan. 8). “DHS Secretary Kristi Noem defends ICE shooting during briefing in New York City.” Retrieved from:https://abc7ny.com/post/minneapolis-ice-shooting-dhs-secretary-kristi-noem-addresses-renee-good-killing-during-briefing-nyc/18372951/
6. Bustillo, X. (2026, Feb. 12). “ICE conducted 37 investigations into officer misconduct in last year.” National Public Radio. Retrieved from: https://www.npr.org/2026/02/12/g-s1-109841/immigration-enforcement-investigations-misconduct
7. CBS News 24/7/ (2025, Nov. 11). “Videos show use-of-force violations against protestors, former agent says.” Retrieved from YouTube: https://youtu.be/RPNl7zCShmE
