Now That Obama Is In, Should Canada + USA Become 1 Country?

[kEiThZ]

I wouldn't underestimate Obama's abilities or the American desire for change. So far, the comments suggest nothing will happen. But what if it does? And what if one morning you wake up and the USA resembles Canada, more than anyone could ever have imagined?

Dude,

Everyone on here will truly be amazed if Obama meets all his campaign promises and if the US truly ends up like Canada in 8 years we'll be in awe. You should note that even Obama's platform does not include basic Canadian things like universal health care. He has some form of health care but it ain't universal. And Clinton burned a hell of a lot of political capital trying to get improved health care through. That's partly what cost the Democrats the house in the Clinton era. There really is no real support for universal health care in the US. And that's health care, the Americans are just as bad at public education, subsidized daycare, government mortgage insurance (Fannie Mae is no CMHC), banking and finance sector regulation, public access to abortions, gun control, etc. And Obama has made no promises to address any of those challenges.

It'll be interesting to see how much Canadians like Obama when he comes calling to ask us to contribute more in Afghanistan. And he will. Or what happens, when Harper signs a North American climate change pact that commits the US to just meeting 1990 levels of emissions and Canada to a 2-3% cut below 1990 levels by 2020....that's basically the end of Kyoto.

You might be enthralled by the smooth talker that Obama is but I doubt most Canadians (particularly our Francophone variety - their cultural/language protection laws would be illegal in the US) would want to live in a country that is constantly embroiled in conflict somewhere, exists as a decentralized federation where individuals states fall to the whim of elected theocrats, where democracy is a two-party system, where the individual is prized more than the collective, and one where they are worse on virtually every socio-economic indicator (save GDP per capita). I hardly think that's a society we would want to emulate much less live in.

Just keep in mind, that for every Obama there's a George W. Bush lurking somewhere. Do you really think Obama would have gotten elected if W hadn't messed up this bad? What if W had just stuck to Afghanistan and had not doled out reckless tax cuts? Keep in mind that after all that Bush screwed up Obama still got only 53% of the vote with essentially one opponent (Nader got 1%). And don't forget this is a country that re-elected George Bush AFTER HE INVADED IRAQ AND FOUND NO WMD.

If you want to live under Uncle Sam's rule just remember Obama's term will end some day, and you never know who'll rise to power next. If you want to live under Obama, you have to be just as willing to live under Bush II. Just remember that.

 

[Brian69]

I wouldn't underestimate Obama's abilities or the American desire for change. So far, the comments suggest nothing will happen. But what if it does? And what if one morning you wake up and the USA resembles Canada, more than anyone could ever have imagined?

I can think of at least 57,000,000 reasons why that won't be happening.

Obama won the electoral college handily but America is still very split in terms of ideology, with lots of conservatives (ones who make Harper look like an NDPer) still out there. Even if he wanted to make sweeping changes it's much more likely he'll be taking baby steps. He has a shaky economy to deal with and if he wants a second term (along with a chance at lasting greatness) he's going to have to work with Republicans and their more outspoken supporters.

The USA and Canada might join up at some future date but I don't see it happening in terms of a happy melding of similar liberal ideologies. I have a bad feeling it might be more out of mutual economic desperation or else an outright grab at our water and other natural resources.

 

[kEiThZ]

The young generation of American's voted across the board for Obama. They will inherit the country. And they're pretty much on the same page as Canada. So why wait? There's no reason to have to two countries when you could have one.

Actually a recent study done on a state-by-state basis show younger voter's didn't really help Obama. It was minorities. And the turn out for young voters was not drastically higher than past elections:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27582147/

Turns out, American youth are not significantly better than our own....

 

[afransen]

Wave the magic wand, then. America's problems are too big for one man, and too big to change overnight.

Beyond that, Canada and the US are fundamentally different. And even if they shared more things in common, how does that justify merging with the US and by necessity destroying all of Canada's national institutions?

 

[Whoaccio]

I voted "maybe". I should clarify that that is a very tenuous maybe, I can think of about 2501 reasons why Canada and the US shouldn't merge and probably never will. But, there is always the so called "deep integration" talked about by Cellucci. I think John Ibbitson ran a piece in the Globe a while back musing at the possibility of a comprehensive N. American economic, environmental and security pact. I see no reason why, with some concessions, Canada the USA and Mexico can't enter into something approaching the Eurozone. Maybe the Amero would be a bit much at the moment, but free movement of labor, capital, goods and services should be achievable. That isn't "joining the US", but in practice there wouldn't be much of a difference.

 

[Whoaccio]

Something like this could work...

This could be Stephen Harper's Big Thing.

Canada's Prime Minister approaches his second government with a record of competent administration - and let's not undersell the value of that, given the events of the past eight years in Washington - but with no great achievement for which he will be remembered. But such an achievement is available to him.

Mr. Harper could, and should, propose a revolutionary new agreement that would transform both Canada and the U.S., truly launching the continent into the 21st century.

The current Canada-U.S. relationship could be described as quietly troubled. There are no crises facing the two countries - no softwood or Iraq - but the 49th parallel steadily thickens, thanks to passport requirements, fluctuating dollars, and suspicion within Homeland Security that Canada lets in too many people without knowing exactly who they are.

Barring an electoral or actual cataclysm, Barack Obama will be the next president. This gives Mr. Harper a unique opportunity.

Most Canadians are Democrats, except for a few in Alberta, and Mr. Obama is wildly popular north of the border. He's the multicultural Canadian prime minister Canada never had.

Mr. Obama, worryingly, has vowed to renegotiate or scrap the North American free-trade agreement, a deal that's hugely benefited our two countries. Optimists are confident Mr. Obama is really thinking about Mexico. Pessimists fear that, once NAFTA is reopened, anything could happen.

From the St. Lawrence Seaway to the auto pact to free trade, Canada has led in proposing major changes to the border. We are about to achieve a rare confluence in which the U.S. has a new president and Canada's prime minister has a fresh mandate. This is the perfect time to do something big. This is the time for a North American environmental, security and economic accord.

While no one was watching, many U.S. states and Canadian provinces signed cap-and-trade deals to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. In a few years, every state and province outside the coal-producing Ohio Valley and oil-producing Alberta and Saskatchewan will be part of a continental carbon market. Canada should propose a harmonized, universal, continental market, coupled with massive joint investment aimed at reducing the environmental impact of the oil sands, in exchange for guarantees that the U.S. gets all the oil.

Let's not stop there. Let's propose a joint security agreement to prescreen goods and people coming into the continent. Let's set a joint tariff. Let's remove national protections on cultural and financial services. (No, the sectors won't get swallowed up. There are more TD Bank-owned branches in the U.S. than there are in Canada.)

And let's cap it off with a comprehensive agreement that eliminates any barrier to the free flow of goods, services and citizens between the two countries, while guaranteeing the right of each country to maintain its own immigration and refugee policies.

The nationalist rabble on both sides will howl. But sensible Canadians and Americans will understand that only such an agreement can protect the continent's environment, economy and safety.

As others have observed, Mr. Harper would have a hard time selling such a deal to Canadians if John McCain won the election, because even sensible Canadians become unreasonably suspicious when Conservatives talk to Republicans. But Mr. Obama's popularity would help improve its reception.

At the same time, such a proposal would offer Mr. Obama just the kind of rethink on NAFTA that he's been asking for. In such difficult economic times, these are exactly the sort of initiatives that could help restore economic confidence in both countries.

Mexico, unfortunately, should not be part of this conversation - it's not far enough along. But just as the European Union assists eastern European countries until they are ready for admission, Canada and the U.S. could work with Mexico until it's ready to join.

Some will say: This is too much, too soon. Mr. Harper might think that himself. If so, he should ask himself: What is the most I could propose, short of this Big Bang? And he should go with that.

He should go with something. We are in new times, with new dangers and new opportunities. Canada and the U.S. need each other, now more than ever. Isn't it worth the gamble, Mr. Harper? You could transform the continent. You could make history.

 

[afransen]

Trade CTV for FOX Canada? No thanks.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

i can just picture palin driving up the 400 with her shotgun shooting each bridge that has one of those coat of arms with the moose & the media talking about how she could field dress an overpass.

 

[AKS]

I wouldn't underestimate Obama's abilities or the American desire for change. So far, the comments suggest nothing will happen. But what if it does? And what if one morning you wake up and the USA resembles Canada, more than anyone could ever have imagined?

Like you said...what IF. We'll decide then once it does change and America is in a better position. Even if Obama is god, he won't be able to change America in a day. He'll be lucky to fix 1/10 of America's problems in his 4 year term.

 

[k.w.l.]

I wouldn't underestimate Obama's abilities or the American desire for change. So far, the comments suggest nothing will happen. But what if it does? And what if one morning you wake up and the USA resembles Canada, more than anyone could ever have imagined?

Give your head a shake. Obama was certainly the right choice for America, but his policies would make him a right wing wacko here. For example,

-He doesn't support universal health care
-He wants to escalate Afghanistan
-He's against gay marriage
-He's pro-capital punishment

 

[JasonParis]

Portugal and Spain have much in common as do Ireland and the United Kingdom and New Zealand and Australia. Are you suggesting they all merge too?

 

[adma]

Does the European Union count as a "merger"?

 

[AKS]

Does the European Union count as a "merger"?

I don't think that counts as a merger. They only share the same currency.

 

[Whoaccio]

I don't think that counts as a merger. They only share the same currency.

They share a lot more than that. In more than a few ways, the EU is more integrated than the Canadian provinces are.

 

[afransen]

A EU-style union for Canada and the US would never work. It would be like Canada consisting of only Ontario and Manitoba. In no way would Manitoba tolerate a 90% Ontario majority, and in no way would Ontario tolerate equal say in matters. Canada works because, like the EU, no one entity can dominate the federation. A Canada/US agglomeration would necessarily be tantamount to Canada being dictated to by Washington. Why anyone would want this (aside from maybe free dominion types) is beyond me.