The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute is facing a turbulent reception, with both criticism and commendation, for its assertion that a Canadian government advertisement broadcast in U.S. Markets distorted the 40th president's statements to condemn President Donald Trump's tariff strategies.
TL;DR
- The Reagan Foundation criticized a Canadian ad using Reagan's words against Trump's tariffs.
- Economists and former officials accused the Reagan Foundation of hypocrisy and disloyalty to Reagan's legacy.
- President Trump used the foundation's statement to defend his tariff strategies against Canada.
- The foundation's involvement is unusual, potentially violating its nonpartisan, tax-exempt status.
The California-based Reagan Foundation's involvement in the dispute over the ad, remains unclear. Ontario Premier Doug Ford had acquired the item and incorporated parts of a 1987 Reagan speech on trade, where the former president expressed doubts about employing tariffs as an economic strategy. However, soon after the foundation stated on social media that the advertisement misrepresented “selective audio” of the former president, Trump referenced the foundation. In his own social media commentary, Trump warned of halting all trade with Canada and criticized the ad for improperly meddling in U.S. Politics.
The foundation's statement appeared to link Reagan, a proponent of free trade, with Trump, a protectionist who has disregarded years of U.S. Policy by imposing substantial border tariffs, notably on products from key U.S. Trading allies. The organization, which aids the Reagan Presidential Library & Museum, also indicated a potential for legal recourse against the provincial government of Ontario, the sponsor of the advertisement.
The Presidential Record Act, enacted in 1981 by President Jimmy Carter, governs millions of administration records, including Reagan's speech. This legislation designates presidential remarks as public domain, eliminating the need to obtain authorization from presidential foundations or libraries for their redistribution.
Ford stated Friday that the ad would be phased out allowing U.S. And Canadian administrations to restart trade discussions. He indicated the advertisement had met its objective but would persist in broadcasting during the initial two World Series contests.
‘Easily intimidated by a call from the White House’
The backlash on social media was explosive, immediate and far from unanimous.
“Incredible cynicism and betrayal of Reagan by his own foundation,” Paul Novosad, a Dartmouth College economist, wrote on X. Novosad said anyone who followed the foundation’s advice to listen to Reagan’s full remarks “would see he says exactly what the Ontario ad claims.”
Jason Kenney, who previously served as a Canadian cabinet minister in a Conservative administration, voiced doubts regarding the Reagan Foundation's leadership on the platform X. He stated that the organization had been “easily intimidated by a call from the White House, yet another sign of the hugely corrosive influence of Trump on the American conservative movement.”
Trump supporters countered on social media with echoes of the president’s assertions and accusations that Canada was meddling in U.S. Politics.
The foundation's personnel offered no comment to Associated Press inquiries regarding their handling of the situation. However, a board member stated in a short conversation that he was unaware of the declaration and hadn't been consulted on any discussions prior to its issuance.
“There may have been discussions about it, but I wasn’t a part of any of them,” Bradford Freeman, a private equity executive, told the AP.
Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, also provided no immediate response via email when questioned if the White House or any representative of the president had requested the Reagan Foundation's intervention.
Several other board members also did not reply to AP inquiries.
An atypical role for a presidential foundation
The developments, at minimum, signify a notably strained execution of the foundation's standard objective, which aims to reinforce Reagan’s historical impact. This scenario also underscores the foundation's emergence as the most recent American institutional entity to become entangled in the disputes arising from Trump's assertive second term in office.
Previously, Trump has prompted policy concessions from multiple U.S. Universities, encompassing prestigious public and private educational institutions, by either withholding or threatening to withhold federal financial support. The presidents of Columbia University and the University of Virginia stepped down as the Trump administration exerted pressure on their respective organizations.
Several American companies have chosen to contribute voluntarily rolled back diversity initiatives. In more recent times, prominent businesses such as Amazon, Apple, Coinbase, Comcast, Google, Lockheed Martin, and Meta Platforms have committed to funding the ballroom Trump intends for The White House, following his directive to demolish the building's East Wing. A significant number of those firms are currently engaged in regulatory matters with Trump's administration.
On Truth Social, Trump called the Canadian ad “fake,” despite the TV spot featuring clear audio excerpts from Reagan’s April 25, 1987, radio address.
“CANADA CHEATED AND GOT CAUGHT!!! They fraudulently took a big buy ad saying that Ronald Reagan did not like Tariffs, when actually he LOVED TARIFFS FOR OUR COUNTRY, AND ITS NATIONAL SECURITY,” he posted Friday.
President Reagan utilized his radio address to clarify his decision to implement specific tariffs on certain Japanese goods, aiming to exert pressure in the ongoing trade disagreement between the two nations concerning computer chips.
This situation provides Trump and his supporters with a basis to contend that Reagan might not object to certain actions taken by the current president regarding trade. However, Trump has implemented tariffs, frequently at exceptionally high levels, across a much wider spectrum than Reagan or other recent U.S. Administrations. Furthermore, even when discussing his approach to Japan, Reagan dedicated a significant portion of his 1987 address – which lasted under ten minutes – to stressing his continued opposition to tariffs, a stance that the advertisement from Ontario seemed to reflect truthfully.
Reagan’s speech affirmed his broad tariff opposition
“Throughout the world there’s a growing realization that the way to prosperity for all nations is rejecting protectionist legislation and promoting fair and free competition,” Reagan said.
He expounded:
Initially, when the idea of imposing tariffs on foreign goods is proposed, it appears to be a patriotic move aimed at safeguarding American products and employment. While this strategy might yield temporary positive results, its effectiveness is short-lived.
What ultimately happens is this: Initially, domestic businesses begin to depend on government safeguards like substantial import duties. This causes them to cease competing and halt the necessary advancements in management and technology required for global success. Concurrently, an even more detrimental situation develops. Elevated tariffs invariably provoke retaliatory measures from other nations, igniting intense trade disputes. Consequently, tariffs escalate, trade obstacles grow, and competition diminishes progressively.
“So, soon, because of the prices made artificially high by tariffs that subsidize inefficiency and poor management, people stop buying. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.”
The Reagan foundation operates as a tax-exempt nonprofit, providing financial support for his library, which falls under the purview of the National Archives and Records Administration. Due to its tax-exempt standing, the foundation is restricted from endorsing political candidates and is generally required to maintain a nonpartisan approach in its operations.
——
Barrow reported from Atlanta and Beaty from New York.