Who do you turn to for accurate, objective data on just how relatively effective President Trump’s immigration initiatives have been?
You turn to a source that is both quite credible and, at once, opposes Trump’s immigration policies with all its open-borders, ideological zeal.
That’s not the Left, for its data are seldom credible; it’s the libertarian-left, and in particular, a policy report from the CATO Institute, whose scholars are eagerly awaiting the “Pro-Immigration Agenda [of] the Biden Administration”:
If the libertarian-left condemns Trump’s immigration record—it must have been quite good.
… At no time in American history has immigration been as legally restricted as it is currently. Trump has overseen a reduction in legal immigration greater than the declines during the two world wars, the Great Depression, or even after Congress ended America’s open immigration policy with Europe in the 1920s. President-elect Biden could do more to expand, improve, and deregulate the immigration system than any other president if for no other reason than that the system is largely shut down right now. …
… Before Trump closed the borders, the United States legally accepted more immigrants than any other country in absolute terms, but accounting for its size and economy, it ranked in the bottom third of wealthy countries for both its foreign-born share of the population and its annual per capita growth in the foreign-born population in 2019. Immigrants in Canada are about 21 percent of its population….
Less credible are the polls the CATOites cite to the effect that, “for the first time in [a certain] poll’s 55-year history, more Americans support increasing immigration than decreasing it.”
Really? At a time when Americans can be found congregating by necessity outside food banks, in lines stretching as far as the eye can see? Now, Americans badly want more competition over scarce resources?
Yes, say our CATO “scholars.”