FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Mar 26

March For Our Lives Is More Than Just A One Day Demonstration, It’s A Decade Long Campaign!

by bcurry

On March 24, 2018, hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated not only in Washington, D.C., but in hundreds of communities across the U.S., Canada, Europe and elsewhere. They demonstrated against a gun culture that threatens our lives and those of our children everyday.  None of us are immune to the violent use of guns.  In Ottawa where I live, there have already been dozens of shootings so far this year, with several people being injured or killed. As per Canadian authorities, guns are being smuggled into Canada from the U.S. on a regular basis. According to the Canada Border Services Agency, firearm seizures at the border are going up. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) has reported that guns are being sold illegally through the darknet, often to buyers who had no firearms licences.  At the same time, gun sales are occurring through more visible online vendors as well as internet forums.  Almost half the guns used in criminal activities have been stolen from the homes of legitimate gun owners.

Possession of handguns, favoured by most drug gangs and organized criminals, is closely regulated in Canada compared to the U.S.  Nevertheless, as a result of the illegal gun smuggling activities, there has been an increasing use of handguns in major Canadian cities.  From about 1991 on, the prevalence of handguns surpassed long-guns in Canadian homicide statistics. Fortunately, due to tighter gun control laws, there have been few shootings that have involved semi-automatic assault weapons.  The last major mass shooting using an assault rifle was on December 6, 1989, when Marc Lépine shot and tragically killed 14 women at Université de Montréal’s École Polytechnique. One result was the tightening up of long-gun control laws in Canada. However, make no mistake, there is a gun lobby in Canada and they are as active as the National Rifle Association (NRA) in the U.S.

The momentum gathered by anti-gun activists after the mass shooting at Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School — which saw 17 people killed and several injured — is remarkable. However, the future of this latest effort to cure America of its gun obsession will need gobs of money, time, commitment and political skill. Whether the students have the resolve to see it through will determine whether they have any more success than previous anti-gun uprisings.  The lack of that persistence has been the NRA’s greatest friend to date.  Are the Democrats more willing than Republicans to risk their careers by upsetting the NRA and its many apostles?

While the older generations can sit around crippled by pessimism, today’s younger generation has not only the option but a real need to tackle this issue. Real change takes time, resources and commitment.  Do not believe that the NRA and the gun industry will not devote all its political influence and employ nasty tactics to undermine this emerging movement.  Get ready for a long haul fight and numerous setbacks in the months and years ahead.  Nevertheless, we must applaud and support the movement’s efforts.  Please do so by signing on to their petition and/or sending your friends this link: https://marchforourlives.com/sign.

Canada Gun Control Gun Laws US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Mar 23

Why Haven’t All American States Banned Smoking From Public Places?

by bcurry

Like the gun lobby in the U.S., the tobacco industry has been a major lobbyist. In 2011, American tobacco companies were finally forced to concede that they lied to the American public about so-called light cigarettes and the addictiveness of nicotine. In addition, since the 1990s, the health effects of secondhand smoke have come to the forefront.  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported in 2011 that secondhand smoke exposure causes lung cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases in nonsmoking adults and children, resulting in an estimated 46,000 heart disease deaths and 3,400 lung cancer deaths among U.S. nonsmoking adults each year. According to the CDC and the Heart Association, long-term exposure to secondhand smoke can raise heart disease rates in adult nonsmokers by 25 percent to 30 percent.

As a result, the CDC also reported in 2011 that the number of states (including the District of Columbia) with laws prohibiting smoking in indoor areas of worksites, restaurants, and bars had increased from zero in 2000 to 26 in 2010. Today, 32 states ban smoking in public places and workplaces, and many cities and other localities do too. However, regional disparities remain with several southern states not having adopted a smoke-free law that prohibits smoking in all three venues.

Federally in Canada, the Non-smokers’ Health Act came into force way back in 1988, covering all employers and workplaces governed by the federal jurisdiction.  Subsequently, smoking in Canada was banned in public indoor spaces and workplaces (including restaurants, bars and casinos) by all ten provinces and three territories.  Some municipalities in turn passed bylaws restricting smoking further than the applicable national/provincial/territorial legislation.

As of 2015, health authorities reported that about 13% of Canadians smoke. According to the CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health, the U.S. smoking rate has dropped every year since 1998 to about 20 percent. With fewer and fewer Americans and Canadians smoking tobacco, there is no good reason for governments at all levels not to ban smoking from public places and workplaces.  We know what the dangers of secondhand smoke are. We need to protect workers, the public and especially children from exposure to this danger.  It’s time that 100 percent of Americans and Canadians are protected from this danger to their health, especially when congregating in indoor public spaces and workplaces.

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Mar 17

Yes, Donald Trump Is “Vindictive”. His Recent Actions Prove It.

by bcurry

The Oxford Dictionary defines “vindictive” as “having or showing a strong or unreasoning desire for revenge”. When I read that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had fired former FBI deputy director Andrew Mc­Cabe — a little more than 24 hours before Mr. McCabe was set to retire — the first word that came to mind was “vindictive”.  Mr. McCabe had spent more than 20 years at the FBI and was well respected by his colleagues and previous administrations. This firing comes days just after the President suddenly fired his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, using of all things a tweet to inform everyone.  Although not totally unexpected, Mr. Tillerson proved not to be the “yes man” desired by this President.  Again, the manner and speed in which his dismissal was carried out could be described as being “vindictive”.  After all, this was the same person that was rumored to have referred in private to Trump as being a “moron”, which I’m sure was never forgotten.

One again, following the earlier firing of former FBI Director James B. Comey, Mr. McCabe’s firing appears to be one more vindictive attack on the FBI. Remember that Trump’s administration has carried out an ongoing war with the FBI due to the agency’s work for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia. The FBI has also been alleged by the administration of improprieties in the handling of the Clinton email case, despite a lack of evidence supporting the allegations.  Mr. Mc­Cabe’s attorney noted that the intervention by the White House in the Justice Department’s disciplinary process is unprecedented, deeply unfair, and even dangerous.  Moreover, Mr. McCabe was a frequent target of criticism from Trump.  In addition, it was asserted by his lawyer that Mr. McCabe had not been given an adequate chance to respond to the Justice Department’s allegations.  It definitely appears that this may be a good case for a “wrongful dismissal” suit, and if won will no doubt tarnish the President’s and Attorney General’s reputations.

What’s even more troubling in recent weeks is the ongoing loss of Whitehouse staff who have either resigned or been dismissed. As one Political Scientist noted, to date there has never been so much staff turnover and turmoil occurring so early in a first Presidential term.  Way back in February 2016 I published a blog about “Donald Trump and Extreme Narcissism”  (https://froliticks.wordpress.com/2016/02/29/donald-trump-and-extreme-narcissism/).  In it, I noted about extreme narcissists that: “If challenged, they often will bully and disparage those who would dare criticize them.” For the sake of all Americans, I sincerely wish that I had been wrong in my earlier prognosis!

Donald Trump Federal Government Political Scandals US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Mar 13

Where Is Trump Going With His Foreign Policy — Especially When It Comes To North Korea?

by bcurry

Just learned from a release by the Associated Press that President Trump has dumped Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. Wow!  It’s getting hard to know who is in his Cabinet without a numbered sweater.  What’s even more interesting is that Tillerson’s dismissal comes following Trump’s announcement that he plans to meet with the “little rocket man” — Kim Jong Un, North Korea’s Dictator. Just by sitting down with the President, Kim Jong Un will get what he craves the most: legitimacy.  Of course, this sudden move on the part of Trump most likely caught the former Secretary of State off guard.  Indeed, the entire State Department and foreign service were probably excluded from the decision-making process.  Instead, it appears that the South Korean administration is driving the agenda.  That leaves the Trump administration with few people with experience in dealing with North Korea, while those in the North Korean Foreign Ministry have been working on little else.

No one really knows Kim Jong Un all that while. He certainly has studied Donald Trump.  In the short-run, sanctions relief is definitely one of his goals.  In addition, there is little doubt that the planned May meeting is a ploy on the part of North Korea. Any unlikely peace treaty would require addressing issues regarding the U.S. military’s presence in South Korea and its transfer of wartime operational control to South Korea and United Nations forces in South Korea.

Trump is employing a very high-risk strategy which could backfire spectacularly. Kim Jong Un will never agree to so-called “denuclearization” without major unacceptable concessions by the U.S.  Any concessions will certainly strengthen his regime’s safety externally while ensuring his continuing internal control over the North Korean people.  As one expert on North Korea noted: “Kim wants to portray himself as the bold leader of a normal, peace-loving nuclear power who can meet an American president as equals.” For Kim, the associated propaganda will greatly benefit him on the home front where the current sanctions have had a detrimental impact on the day-to-day lives of North Koreans.  Expect more displays of affection for the regime.

The real danger here is that Trump may be all too willing to concede on a number of important policy matters in order to claim some sort of diplomatic triumph. Donald Trump may perceive himself as a “great negotiator”, but he is no match for the North Koreans.  I suspect that Rex Tillerson recognized this, warned Trump, and subsequently left following his voiced objections.  This is an all too familiar occurrence within Trump’s administration, and can only lead to greater White House problems and internal dissension.

Donald Trump Foreign Policy US

Leave a comment »
Mar 5

Does Trump Not Understand Fundamental Principles Behind Multi-lateral Trade?

by bcurry

This past week, President Trump announced (tweet, tweet) that he plans to impose tariffs of 25 percent on imported steel and 10 percent on aluminum. Besides affecting trade with Europe and China, the proposed tariffs would particularly affect Canada and Mexico. Canada is the biggest supplier of steel and aluminum to the U.S., and Mexico is the fourth largest source of steel. Both countries have asked to be excluded, and both indicated that they would strike back if Trump includes them in the stiff duties.  Trump’s basis for imposing such tariffs is on the grounds of national security, arguing that the U.S. cannot rely on foreign imports for steel and aluminum. This rationale in and of itself is totally baseless given existing security arrangements among the three countries and the nature of their integrated economies.

Not only this, Trump’s announcement has thrown a wrench into current negotiations among the three countries respecting the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Canadian and Mexican teams are absolutely furious, and rightly so.  The steel and aluminum tariff announcement may have just killed off any hopes of advancing on major sticking points at the NAFTA talks, including setting new rules for auto content in the region.  On top of which, Trump has implied that the two countries would not be excluded from the imposition of tariffs unless a new NAFTA deal is made which would benefit the U.S.  Some negotiating tactic!

The problem for the U.S. is that the Americans export as much steel and aluminum to Canada as they import from Canadian manufacturers. The North American market has nicely evolved over decades to allow both countries to develop more specialized sources of steel manufacturing, benefiting both countries.  This is why U.S. businesses and labour unions (e.g. United Steelworkers or USW) are arguing for an exemption from the planned tariffs. The USW, representing steel workers on both sides of the border, even went on record with the following:

“Canada is not the problem. The United States and Canada have integrated manufacturing markets and our union represents trade-impacted workers in both nations. In addition, the defense and intelligence relationship between the countries is unique and integral to our security. Any solution must exempt Canadian production. At the same time, Canada must commit to robust enforcement and enhance its cooperation to address global overcapacity in steel and aluminum. …”

Once again, the Trump administration has demonstrated its complete lack of good economic policy, all in the name of political opportunism. We now have an integrated North American market, exemplified by the fact that Canada is the biggest trade partner with the U.S.  The major problem is that there appears to be a complete lack of understanding as to how multi-lateral trade arrangements work in today’s global markets.  Unfortunately, if Trump’s approach continues, then the NAFTA talks will falter much to the detriment of all three countries and to their respective economies.  Consumers will suffer as will workers.  Hopefully, growing American domestic opposition to Trump’s protectionist trade policies will prevail.  One can only hope!

Canada Donald Trump NAFTA Protectionism Protectionist Trade Policies US

Leave a comment »
Blog at WordPress.com.