The United States and Canada have the largest trade relationship in the world.[1] In 2006, total merchandise trade between the two countries consisted of $303.4 billion in imports and $230.3 billion in exports. The trade relationship between the two countries crosses all industries and is vital to both nations’ success. Each country is the largest trade partner of the other. The trade across Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, Michigan alone is equal to all the trade between the United States and Japan.[2][3]
Contents |
Since 1866, free trade has been debated topic by Canadian politicians. Free trade was generally supported by the Liberal Party of Canada, and was a main topic in the 1911 Canadian Federal Election. After the Liberals lost that election, the topic was a non-issue for many years. Although there were many bilateral agreements reducing tariffs, a free trade agreement was not reached until the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement in 1987. The agreement intended to promote a free market between the two nations, and encourage investments within that market.[4]
The Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement laid the groundwork for a multilateral agreement between, the United States, Mexico, and Canada, called the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA has helped fuel the relations between the three nations. Although there are some discrepancies between the countries’ especially in the area of automobiles and agriculture, the trends are negligible as the agreement has arguably been a boon for all nations involved.[3]
There are several disputes arising from the bilateral trade between the two nations. The United States has placed Canada on its Special 301 watch list over intellectual property rights enforcement (although under the mildest category of "rebuke"). Other products from Canada under dispute include softwood lumber, beef, tomatoes, and other agricultural products.[3]
The heightened border security as a result of the 2001 terrorist attacks has been an issue of concern for businesses in both countries. The Issue has become less of a concern as technology, registration, training, and fewer rules. However a midpoint estimate of US $10.5 billion cost to businesses in delays and uncertain travel time.[1]
One ongoing and complex trade issue involves the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada to the United States. Due to the Canadian government's price controls as part of their state-run medical system, prices for prescription drugs can be a fraction of the price paid by consumers in the unregulated U.S. market. While laws in the United States have been passed at the national level against such sales, specific state and local governments have passed their own legislation to allow the trade to continue. American drug companies—often supporters of political campaigns—have obviously come out against the practice.
According to a 2007 study commissioned by the Canadian Embassy in the United States, Canada–U.S. trade supported 7.1 million U.S. jobs.
| U.S. State | U.S. Jobs Supported[5] | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 105,000 | 22 |
| Alaska | 3,100 | 50 |
| Arizona | 128,750 | 20 |
| Arkansas | 63,250 | 32 |
| California | 832,250 | 1 |
| Colorado | 123,750 | 21 |
| Connecticut | 90,250 | 27 |
| Delaware | 21,250 | 46 |
| District of Columbia | 29,000 | 38 |
| Florida | 404,750 | 4 |
| Georgia | 211,750 | 9 |
| Hawaii | 37,000 | 38 |
| Idaho | 33,500 | 40 |
| Illinois | 304,500 | 5 |
| Indiana | 147,750 | 15 |
| Iowa | 78,000 | 30 |
| Kansas | 72,750 | 31 |
| Kentucky | 96,000 | 25 |
| Louisiana | 102,000 | 24 |
| Maine | 32,250 | 42 |
| Maryland | 140,250 | 23 |
| Massachusetts | 172,250 | 13 |
| Michigan | 221,500 | 8 |
| Minnesota | 141,250 | 19 |
| Mississippi | 61,750 | 33 |
| Missouri | 144,750 | 17 |
| Montana | 24,250 | 44 |
| Nebraska | 49,750 | 36 |
| Nevada | 61,250 | 34 |
| New Hampshire | 32,750 | 41 |
| New Jersey | 206,750 | 11 |
| New Mexico | 44,500 | 37 |
| New York | 468,750 | 3 |
| North Carolina | 208,500 | 10 |
| North Dakota | 18,750 | 47 |
| Ohio | 267,500 | 7 |
| Oklahoma | 82,250 | 29 |
| Oregon | 88,750 | 28 |
| Pennsylvania | 295,250 | 6 |
| Rhode Island | 26,000 | 43 |
| South Carolina | 95,250 | 26 |
| South Dakota | 21,500 | 45 |
| Tennessee | 146,000 | 16 |
| Texas | 521,750 | 2 |
| Utah | 61,250 | 35 |
| Vermont | 17,500 | 48 |
| Virginia | 197,000 | 12 |
| Washington | 153,000 | 14 |
| West Virginia | 37,000 | 39 |
| Wisconsin | 141,500 | 18 |
| Wyoming | 14,000 | 49 |
| Total | 7,079,350 |
Since the September 11th attacks, there has been debate on whether there should be further North American integration. Some have proposed the adoption of the Amero under the North American Currency Union as the official currency of North America. While these discussions are more prevalent in Canada, studies have shown that United States citizens would not object to economic integration. According to Former U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci however, “Security trumps trade” in the United States, and so as long as Canada is considered a possible point of entry for terrorists, such integration seems unfeasible.[6]
Because English is the majority language in both countries, and accents and dialects on both sides of the border are (relatively) similar (as compared to the British or Australian English), both high culture and mass media are easily traded between the two countries. Both countries have minority-language media, of course: Canada has a large francophone population and the United States a large hispanophone population, and both countries have other immigrant and indigenous language populations; however, cultural trade is mostly through the English-language media. The major difference is that America's English-language media market is more fifteen times as large, meaning that American producers of books, newspapers, magazines, radio programs, songs, films, and websites have an in-built advantage over their Canadian competitors. This has been the case since the nineteenth century when Canada was flooded with American books. It was also the case in the 1920s when Canada's radio market was dominated by American broadcasts, leading cultural nationalists to form the Canadian Radio League, a pressure group demanded that the Canadian government create a publicly-funded broadcaster to compete with the American stations. This was the beginning of a pattern Canadian cultural protectionism, which has caused frequent trade disputes between the two nations. During the 1950s, the pattern was repeated in television, with Canadian stations airing US programming and US stations broadcasting into Canada, leading to the creation of CBC Television in response. Since the 1970s, Canadian radio and television stations have been required to air a minimum percentage of Canadian Content. One source of tension is a difference in philosophy: the Canadian position is that Canada's culture must be protected to preserve Canada's nationhood and should therefore be excluded from free trade agreements, whereas Americans negotiators have claimed that media is a commodity like any other. This difference came light during the dispute over "split-run" magazine during the 1990s. Split-runs are American or other foreign magazines which produce a slightly-modified Canadian edition and which re-sell much of the advertising space in the magazine to Canadian advertisers. Publishers of Canadian magazines argued that the Americans were poaching all their advertising revenue without producing substantial Canadian content. The American publishers and the US government claimed that banning "split-runs" was illegal under international trade law. There have also been disputes over the generous tax credits that the Canadian federal and provincial governments give to television and film productions. This, combined with a weaker Canadian dollar caused American filmmakers to complain during the 1990s that "runaway productions" were hurting American employment in the film industry, especially in California.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||