With the votes set for the “Super Tuesday 2” primaries, we are closer than ever than narrowing which candidates is going to be competing in November to make life worse for Canadians. Because, regardless of who is ultimately elected, the current trend within the U.S. is perfect for a much different coalition of interests in both parties – each one of these threatening to make our lives here less comfortable compared to past.
Post-election, expect the U.S. to be more protectionist, inward looking and disquieted by global developments. Both parties now have a big part in their respective primaries supporting politicians who argue towards “wall building” – trade barriers and border security. Even though the U.S. economy is healing, with a rebound in manufacturing, American politicians play to lingering memories of job losses and stagnant middle-class incomes.
On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders is dead set from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, arguing the deal is really a Wall Street plot to consider advantage of low wages in countries like Vietnam, where labourers earn the absolute minimum US$0.56 an hour. Throughout the Michigan primary, he argued that Detroit’s death has been due to disastrous trade policies (translation: NAFTA).
Hillary Clinton has pirouetted from a pro-TPP position to now being against “ObamaTrade,” like a Donald Trump adviser has slyly dubbed it. Now, Clinton made clear that she wants the “rules of origin” terms of the TPP made stricter because American autoworker jobs are unprotected by rules that eliminate tariffs on cars created using just 45 per cent of their value from a member country (meaning the remainder could be produced in China). This sticking point could effectively kill the agreement.
Consider the (TPP) deal just like dead within the U.S.
Neither are the two leading Republican candidates strong supporters of free trade. Arguing the American worker has been crushed, Mr . trump makes it clear he wants no part of the TPP. He’s also lamented job losses to Mexico under NAFTA and criticizes China’s most-favoured nation status, and demands a renegotiation of both. Although Ted Cruz says he generally supports free trade, he wrote an article for that conservative Breitbart magazine, opposing the TPP as a backroom deal by politicians that should be stopped.
Related
- Joe Oliver: While Canada's PM posed for selfies, John Kerry slapped us within the faceOdds favour another Democrat win in U.S. election, meaning Canada continues to feel the love
-
-
-
So, with majorities in both the Democrat and Republican primaries opposed to the TPP, think about the deal as good as dead in the U.S. And when Americans now see trade with the dim lens of lost jobs, instead of income gains minimizing consumer prices, imagine how they will appear at other trade issues later on such as forex devaluations, anti-dumping actions and U.S. non-tariff barriers erected in the name of “fair trade.”
Other protectionist policies are within the making. During the Florida debate, Donald Trump was asked why he proposed building a wall along Mexico but not Canada. As they granted that security difficulties with Canada are not a “big problem” (for now), his bigger point could be that the northern border’s too large, not too it was unwise in principle. At least that’s progress within the position of Wisconsin governor Scott Walker who, before dropping his bid for that Republican candidacy, supported creating a Canadian wall because 16 years ago, an Algerian from Montreal tried driving to the U.S. to blow up the Los Angeles airport.
So don’t think that Canada is home-free in reassuring Americans about maintaining a skinny border. Both parties’ leading candidates argue towards tougher border security (mostly the Mexican, but not exclusively) including Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, despite their support for helping illegal immigrants gain American citizenship.
After Sept. 11, 2001, Canada made some progress on NAFTA-related issues like a quid pro quo for stronger North American border-security arrangements. Since President Obama’s election in 2008, Canada’s been distracted by various border-wall policies: The “Buy American” procurement plan, country-of-origin meat labelling, foot-dragging on a new WindsorCDetroit Bridge, and the prohibition of Keystone XL, which now apparently pertains to all future Canadian pipelines, judging by comments from John Kerry a week ago.
The now deepened inward-looking nature of American exceptionalism doesn’t spell good news for Canada. When the top minister opined recently he wanted the U.S. to know Canada more, he may forget there are advantages to staying individually distinct. From mind, we have not become a target, like Mexico and China are.
If Americans did understand us more, may possibly not help our case. Canada has plenty of its own “wall-building” policies that any populist U.S. politician could easily indicate as proof of our trade hypocrisy. For example, once we head into renegotiating the softwood lumber agreement, Americans might notice our very own trade restrictions on log exports to the U.S. that, by forcing down prices here, effectively subsidize Canadian producers of lumber, pulp and paper. Our marketing boards in dairy, poultry and eggs, not only put a virtual excise tax on Canadian consumers but also restrict U.S. exports to Canada. We restrict foreign purchase of banking and telecommunications. Our provinces strictly control beer and wine imports. The list goes on.
The prime minister’s trip to Washington a week ago surely helped bring about a better relationship with the outgoing administration. But as far as putting us on course to tear down walls forwards and backwards countries, little was accomplished. Because of the currently jaded view among American voters of the world outside their borders, there is little change reason to expect things will get any better for all of us with a brand new president and Congress.
Jack M. Mintz may be the President’s Fellow in the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy and scholar-in-residence at Columbia Law School.
