Trade and tourism between the U.S. and Canada fell sharply last month. Michigan Radio's Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry argues misguided security measures are doing our economy in.
As you may know, the national recession is worse in Michigan than anywhere else. And now for the bad news. Washington is hurting our economy further by choking off trade with Canada.
And frankly, our politicians in this state haven't been doing much to help matters. If you weren't aware of this, I wouldn't be too hard on yourself. For years, this has been one of the most important and yet most neglected stories in this part of the world.
Ironically, it also represents possibly one of the most lasting victories the September 11 terrorists managed to achieve. Here's the background. Canada is the United States' biggest trading partner, by far. More of this trade goes through Michigan and Ontario than anywhere else. Things used to work superbly well along what we used to call "the world's largest unguarded border."
Then came 9-11. Suddenly, the world seemed to change overnight. We turned into a frightened people who were utterly paranoid about the threat of terrorists in our midst. Days after the disaster, a story in the Boston Globe indicated that many of the hijackers had come into the United States from Canada.
That was quickly shown to be totally false. None of the terrorists entered through Canada. Yet the damage was done.
Soon, tourists and truckers faced long lines at the border. Both governments struggled to find ways to speed trade and improve security, with mainly not-very-good results. At one point, the lines of trucks waiting to get on the Ambassador Bridge were so long that the government of Windsor started putting portable toilets on homeowners' lawns. You can guess how popular that was.
Now things are even worse. Thanks to something called the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, or WHTI for short, since June 1, all U.S. citizens have needed a passport to visit Canada.
Well, actually, you can get into Canada without one -- you just can't get back. This has been a blow to the economies of Windsor and Detroit and other border cities, by effectively eliminating spontaneous travel, as in, let's go over for a nice Italian dinner.
Traffic through the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel was down 22.5 percent last month, according to today's Windsor Star. The Shaw Festival and Stratford are suffering. But the big concern is trade.
Yesterday, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Chamber released a report called "Finding the Balance: Shared Border of the Future," calling on both governments to fix the logjam at the border before it ruins both nations. When times are good, about $1.6 billion in trade crosses the border each day.
Thanks both to the recession and new restrictions, that figure was down 31 percent in January. More of this trade passes through Detroit than anywhere else, but the new rules threaten to choke that off. From the standpoint of customs regulations, it is now easier to import a shipment of cars from Korea than Canada.
This needs to be fixed and fixed now, before the economy starts to revive. What I don't know is why our governor and our congressional delegation isn't making this a huge priority.
Losing more trade is the last thing our economy needs.
What? Can it be true? Is Jack Lessenberry suggesting that less regulation (less security regulation in this instance) might be good for the economy? Praise the Lord, and pass the tax cuts, brother. Hallelujah! Jack Lessenberry has seen the light!
Now, mindful of the fact that we really did foil one terrorist at the Canadian border (see, e.g., Millennium Bomb plot, LAX airport), I'm kind of sympathetic to the bipartisan approach taken in strengthening border security. Jack Lessenberry, of course, cannot resist taking a shot at anything that references 9/11 or the Bush era. But at least "border security" offers us something in return for the degree to which it might cramp the style of truckers carrying auto parts across the river. And that would be, uh, "security." If anybody suggests that there are better ways to increase border security, I'm all ears. I don't think that's what Jack Lessenberry is suggesting, however. Jack isn't suggesting better security. He's suggesting scorn for the Bush era.
As to other large regulatory schemes affecting our region, when was the last time you heard Jack Lessenberry complain about something like CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards, which are far more impactful on domestic auto-making, and which offer us all nothing in return. (Unlike "secuirty.") Thanks to CAFE, we don't get less gasoline consumption, or less carbon emission -- the kinds of things that Barack H. Obama and the Congressional Democrats are always yapping about in any CAFE discussion. How do we know? Years and years of experience with CAFE tells us that. You increase fuel economy; people tend to drive more, or drive bigger cars. You increase the price of gasoline (Democrats don't have the courage of their convictions to do that) and people use less of it. It's that simple. What CAFE does give us is a less competitive domestic auto production environment. With no "green" benefits.
But back to border security: here's to the celebration of The New Jack Lessenberry - Deregulation Crusader! Yay!
Posted by: Anonymous | July 22, 2009 at 12:28 PM
I love Canada but it is a doormat for America and a haven for drugs, terrorists etc.
Of course the Bush era was a cluster fuck and discussions about CAFE standards is a waste of time since the Big 3 could not give away cars even with robust rebates in this economy.CAFE regulations did not destroy the domestic auto industry backward thinking auto CEO's and inflated ego's of those in the domestic auto industry were more lethal.
Our homeland security & law enforcement folks as usual are worthless of course have profiled Mexico while giving Canada a free pass on racial profiling ( really makes no sense most domestic terrorists in our nation have been white males i.e think Tim McVeigh and others).
Regulation is the evil force which is causing the meltdown in America of course weak minded thinkers always like to to float simple excuses..
Posted by: Thrasher | July 23, 2009 at 09:58 AM
Jack's best point is that the Sept. 11 hijackers did succeed in frightening us into restricting our own way of life, and damaging our own economy and growth.
How does restricting bridge/tunnel travel stop the committed terrorist? (Ever hear of a row-boat?) How does it stop the next Timothy McVeigh?
Guess I won't be getting up to the Stratford Shakespeare Festival with my wife this year -- unless we fork out and wait for our newly required passports. Sad.
Much sadder when you expand that to the huge numbers of people who will be similarly impeded, let alone the losses with commercial traffic.
Posted by: Jon | July 23, 2009 at 12:08 PM