The Ad-Lib Heard Around the World



Usually few people can recall specific policy proposals made during a State of the Union and fewer can remember a specific line. But that may not be the case with President Trump’s address to Congress last night which included a huge ad lib that left many scratching their heads.

Having just launched into his comments on immigration, President Trump offered praise for legal immigrants who “enrich our nation and strengthen our society in countless ways.”

If you were reading along with the prepared remarks, the president should have then said, “I want people to come into our country, but they have to come in legally.”

But the president did not. Instead, he went off the cuff saying he wants “people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come in legally.”

The reactions from both sides shared a similar stunned disbelief.

“I want people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever” — like I’ve always said, the guy is not a restrictionist,” tweeted Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

NumbersUSA, which like CIS supports limiting legal immigration, reacted with guarded hope, asking, “Did he misspeak? Let’s hope so,”

Jonathan Swan, a reporter for Axios, heard it differently arguing that the ad lib “means nothing” since Trump “just likes the sound of hyperbole.”

CNN’s political analyst Jon Avlon ran through a list of actions the administration has taken to curb legal immigration before advising viewers: “don’t believe the hype.”

Alex Nowrastah, a senior immigration analyst with the libertarian Cato Institute, also took the president’s statement with a grain of salt suggesting that if he truly means it then “repudiate the RAISE Act and his campaign promise to cut legal immigration.” 

Even ABC News’ fact check rated the statement “False” based on Trump lowering the cap on refugee admissions to historic lows and other executive actions.

So, is it much ado about an ad lib?

Reihan Salam, who contributes to The Atlantic and the National Review, acknowledged it might be hyperbole, but wrote that it also could be “a sign of things to come.”

He theorized that Trump may be trying change the direction and tone of the immigration conversation by muting his approach to legal immigration, while trying to hold onto his base with a firm stand on border security issues and the wall.

Less than 24 hours later, when asked directly about the ad lib, Trump confidently confirmed to reporters that the ad lib was mistake but an actual change in policy.

“Yes,” he said, “because we need people in our country because our unemployment numbers are so low, and we have massive numbers of companies coming back into our country.”

The abandonment of his campaign pledge and commitment to protect American workers is more disturbing considering other signs of a weakening on other issues, particularly concerning guest workers.

The administration also has, at least rhetorically, opened the door to expansions of the guest worker programs in certain industries.

Last April, President Trump promised farmworkers in Michigan that he favored letting guest workers in “because we need them.” He doubled down on that pledge in a speech to the American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual convention last month.

If Trump remains committed to pursuing bad public policy, he will be reversing past positions taken and promises made, both as a candidate and as president. Coming to the United States legally matters, but so does the number of people coming to the United States. Mass immigration, legal or illegal, undermines the jobs and livelihoods of many Americans, overburdens vital social institutions and the social safety net.

In advocating for allowing “people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever,” the president seems to be ignoring the impact of mass immigration on American society and that those considerations are precisely the reasons why immigration laws exist and limits are set

 

About Author

avatar

Jennifer joined FAIR as Web Content Writer in 2017 and brings to the role extensive communications and media background. She began her career as a policy research analyst on multiple national and state political campaigns before entering journalism. In addition to spending over a decade writing for several broadcast and print news outlets, Jennifer directed communications strategy for a member of Congress and a military nonprofit.

4 Comments

  1. avatar

    I Don’t Know What Trump Meant?

    Word Parsing is very inaccurate without statistical number planning data [in writing]…Trump does misunderstand the “Urban Legend” that high tech needs H-1B because of a STEM [engineering] shortage…we most all were brainwashed over that issue for a decade…IMO, Trump will figure it out and train/hire our “unemployed” American citizen high school kids for S/W development in the IT field instead.

    • avatar
      Geoge Tyrebyter on

      What gives you that idea? You are totally naive. Trump is turning out, in this area like all others, to be a big talker but that’s it. He’s not done a single fucking thing about work visas that he promised. We still have those fucking H-4s. OPT is not cut back. It’s really terrible, and then people write idiotic crap like you did.

      • avatar

        Perhaps Stop Using the F-Bomb Blogging

        It makes you look like a phony/staged Trump hater from the Open Border Party. The OBP is mean too. Perhaps that demonstrator at the Trump rally was a phony/staged Trump supporter too? Attacking the BBC cameraman last night?

  2. avatar

    The unvarnished truth is that business is NEVER going to say they have an adequate number of workers. They want a never ending supply of low-wage no-benefits workers. The fact is that the labor market HAS tightened a bit, but that’s to the good of the average worker. Wages are rising slightly but that is after a 3 decade decline, which went hand in hand with the mass immigration, legal and illegal, that accompanied that decline. The undeniable fact is that the period when the average worker did best, when union membership was at an all time high, was the period from the late 40s through the 70s, which was not by coincidence a low immigration period of about 1/4 of now. The difference between the pay of executives and the lower paid workers has skyrocketed to the benefit of those at the top.

    Legal immigrants are not supposed to be getting any welfare but they do, at rates that are much higher than native born Americans. The taxpayer is subsidizing the large families of the workers that business wants to import. At one time labor unions were the ones that favored mass immigration be shut down. In the 1920s Samuel Gompers, founder of the American Federation of Labor, pointed out that it was factory owners who wanted a perpetual supply of workers to keep wages low. Calvin Coolidge, a conservative Republican president, signed the bill that drastically reduced the high levels of immigration of that time, although nothing compared to the levels of now.

    Hasn’t GM announced over the last couple months that they will layoff 15,000 white collar and line workers and will close several factories? What about them? What are their chances against a flood of new workers. Or workers at retail giants like Sears and JC Penney who will be lucky if they have jobs. Every week another retailer is going of business. Not that the jobs are great, retail and fast food jobs have replaced a lot of better paying jobs, but they are at least a job. Add to that the fact that the “shortage of high tech workers” is a lie. Many companies have laid off American workers and forced them to train their foreign replacements, including Disney and Southern California Edison. The pro-amnesty mass-immigration business-owned candidates in 2016 like Graham, Rubio and Jeb went nowhere. Trump needs to keep his promises. That’s why people voted for him.

Leave A Reply