Here's the morning rundown of my opinions regarding yesterday's political events:
STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
For the record, I am a moderate who tends to lean Democrat in most elections but did put a split party ticket in the elections I have voted in during my short period of eligibility thus far.
President Trump's speech, when read in transcript form, was clearly written by a group of staffers (as it should be). Normally, this would never be a surprise for most politicians as this is one of the vital functions of a staffer. However, the President has proven he will often speak off the cuff and stray from any pre-written speech.
In this year's State of the Union Address, however, I was pleasantly surprised that he seemed to follow relatively close to what his staff gave him to say. The beginning of the address started out strong with the assertion that a "new tide of optimism" was present and that the actions of his administration have been focused on a stronger, "great" America.
Reflecting on some of the crises that occurred throughout last year across the nation, President Trump made an example of the bravery and strength various citizens showed and created an image of American honor and resilience for the backbone of his speech. Speaking of the Las Vegas strup massacre and of volunteers at natural disaster sites such as that at Hurricane Harvey, Trump really sought to emphasize unity and strength in numbers, and that's personally a pleasant and unexpected turn from his usual discourse.
Following the unity-centric introduction, the President moved into one of his more frequent topics - job growth. Right off the bat, he claimed that 2.4 million jobs have been created since the 2016 election. While this is true, it is important to note the slight political misrepresentation here - much of the 2017 growth follows events from 2016 and the past culminating. Thus, while the 2.4 million jobs (a claim I have yet to look into and verify myself but that seems legitimate) may have been come into existence during this time period, a significant portion of that comes from before Trump assumed the presidency in early 2017. And even then, it is hard to pinpoint any single person as an economic force, but that's another counterpoint for another time.
Trump also went over the general improvements in unemployment rate, wage increases, and manufacturing jobs, all of which were vital talking points in his campaign for President in 2016. While the amount of influence and how much Trump can say he caused in regards to economic gains is up for debate, it is relatively hard to say that the markets haven't benefited from the Trump presidency thus far.
The President then moved into discussing the tax reform bill passed in December. This is where he seemed to stray off his script a bit, with a jab at Obamacare and a lot less formal use of language. Particular focus was put on the recently announced bonuses that corporations have been giving employees due to the bill finally being passed. However, that focus was on the fact that these one time bonuses exist rather than that the bonus could have been given for a long time and that the timing seems to be a bit opportunistic for currying the favor of a corporate-favorable administration. Without going into my personal dissection of the bill and private corporations' responses to it in greater detail, it all looks like an "I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine" situation.
Once he finished discussing the tax bill, President Trump redirected the speech to some of the pillars of his campaign and early administration topics. This is where the speech moved away from typical formality.
A short anecdote about a young child who marked veteran's graves with flags for Veterans Day turned into a brief and subtle political talking point against not standing for the national anthem. He moved onward, sans anecdotes, into conservative judicial appointments, the second amendment, religious liberty, and VA reform (the last of which I strongly support the majority of the decisions made during this administration).
I"m sorry to be so blunt, but this was an informal checklist of campaign talking points. This is further illustrated by a more formal version of "drain the swamp" rhetoric and an end to "the war on American energy" (specifically, coal).
Moving into deregulation across the board under the Trump administration, we see mention of becoming an exporter of energy (which was partially deregulated under the Obama administration and has done well since) and the auto industry moving factories and jobs back into the United States.
Minor mention of the medical industry - the FDA approving a record of new drugs and treatments, and efforts to lower prescription prices were the topics of the day for the President. Not too much to say here.
Kudos on the acknowledgement of the infrastructure issues of our country. Wish there was a little more substance than a simple jab on how long it takes to get a road permit approved, so there's that.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE
Trump calls for Congress to "produce a bill that generates at least $1.5 trillion for the new infrastructure investment that our country so desperately needs" and to streamline the process for permits and overall approval.
After a brief discussion of education policy, we get to the border debate that most of the people watching are here for. Linking open borders to MS-13, which from a political standpoint is a brilliant though morally cloudy idea, seems to be something Trump is sticking with. Nothing particularly new from Trump on this.
The President went into detail on the "four pillars" of his plan for immigration reform.
- Path to Citizenship for DACA immigrants - this is mild progress but definitely a huge compromise to try to get Democratic legislators to hop onto this proposal. The stipulations are "education and work requirements" and "good moral character," along with a 12-year period to become a "full citizen." Obviously there are still details to be had but this seems like an olive branch being extended. I would vouch for a slightly shorter period or at least a way for compliant participants to be safeguarded from unjustified deportation during the process, but I'm sure those issues will be forced when the Democrats look for leverage.
- Fully securing the border - oh boy, here comes ol' Donny's wall! So here, Trump advocates not only for the wall but also for hiring more personnel, which arguably is a more important aspect of enforcement than any physical structure.
- Ending the Visa Lottery - look, I'm not going to sit here and pretend that the visa system is random.
- Ending Chain Migration - another system that recent rhetoric shows a lack of understanding of. You can't sponsor extended family for visas as a non-citizen, the process of which can take years if not decades to complete. And green card holders, as NPR Correspondent Joel Rose notes, can only sponsor immediate family. It's not a broken part of U.S. immigration policy and this is political grandstanding. Come on now.
Trump describes his plan as a down the middle compromise. Look, if I put 3 boxes on one end of a see-saw and 1 box on the other side, the side with 3 is going to be heavier. It's simple math, Mr. President.
After a brief notation on his administration's commitment to dealing with the drug epidemics, Trump starts to wrap up the speech by going into both ISIS and nuclear discussion. He proposes that Guantanamo Bay be used for terrorists and extremists and emphasizes American strength and perseverance.
Finally, Trump goes over international affairs. In order, he mentions the American recognition of Israel as capital of Jerusalem (which as far as I am aware no one else has done), the Iran nuclear deal and its "fundamental flaws," and North Korea's "cruel dictatorship."
In describing the circumstances leading to the death of Otto Warmbier's imprisonment in North Korea along with an anecdote of a defector's journey out of North Korea, Trump pushed for a firm and tough stance on the regime as he always does. It will be interesting to see how North Korea responds, as they are usually swift in response to American rhetoric.
If we are being honest, it was hard to expect much else from this speech. To me, it felt as if this was a slightly tempered down campaign pitch. The Trump 2020 campaign as most of you should know is already pushing full force towards the next presidential race, and it really felt as if Trump was trying to solidify his base and maybe pick up some moderate supporters here and there. Can I blame him? No.
But everyone in politics grandstands or uses events as a political foundation at some point. And whether he wants to admit it or not, Donald Trump is now a politician. Expect more of this to come.
1.31.2018
Well, Trump's CDC director just resigned because it went public that she invested in a tobacco company. Nice.
