Tuesday 29 July 2014

Beware of the Security Industrial Complex....

In January 1961, President Eisenhower went on national television to give his last public address from the Oval Office. The best known element of that speech was the President's admonition that America be weary of the growth of the "military-industrial complex." What Eisenhower meant by this has been the subject of much debate (and the source of many conspiracy theories), but he was openly worrying about the peacetime growth of the American military and the troubling intersection of Pentagon bureaucracy, private sector military contractors, and their political paymasters in Congress; a classic "iron triangle."

I have been giving some thought to whether a similar kind of complex has perhaps descended on post-9/11 North America; the Security Industrial Complex?

Thursday 10 July 2014

New West Partnership and Neoclassical Integration

Many Canadian newspapers ran a story this morning wherein the premiers of British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan called for an overhaul of the 1995 Agreement on Internal Trade. For many people, the AIT is likely to illicit snoring, but it is actually part of a fascinating case study in the neoclassical stages of integration.

Most Canadians have probably never heard of the AIT, but was essentially an effort to eliminate inter-provincial barriers to trade within Canada; a NAFTA for Canada's provinces. The analogy between the two agreements is not far fetched. Indeed, a quick comparison of the texts of the two agreements reveals similarities many would find shocking, complete with institutional architecture like dispute settlement (see for yourself AIT vs. NAFTA).

When we think about trade liberalization, we more commonly think about the elimination of barriers to trade between countries and protracted, high-level, and controversial negotiations to bring all of it about. The World Trade Organization's various "Rounds" of negotiations, the infamous NAFTA negotiations from the early 1990s, or the ongoing Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations often come to mind.

Wednesday 9 July 2014

Leading from behind.....

President Obama has been mocked for his assertion that America has been "leading from behind."

Back in early June, President Obama did a bit of plain old leading by proposing new rules on carbon emissions from power plants (link). The new rules are the first significant exercise of authority exercised by the EPA under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. In earlier posts to this blog, I detailed how this interpretation of the Clean Air Act came about (link to February 2 Post) as well as my belief that President Obama would indeed invoke "executive authority" to tackle climate change during his remaining two years in office (link to April 23 Post).

Reaction to the proposed rule was generally positive, particularly among those who have been pushing for decisive U.S. action on climate change. It was an important step forward, but also one that will not dramatically alter America's contribution to global emissions. In fact, if fully implemented, the rules' main impact may be to force the closure of some of America's oldest, dirtiest, and least efficient coal-fired power plants (see link).

Here's where it gets rich.... The day after Obama's announcement, Alberta's Minister of Environment, Robin Campbell, suggested that Canada and the United States work together on climate change initiatives; something I have argued would grease the political skids for Obama to approve the Keystone XL pipeline (link). Campbell seemed to be arguing that Alberta was doing some leading. Hmmm....

Redefining the Floor....Down

I was scrolling through some YouTube clips the other day and came across the great Seinfeld episode in which Frank Costanza invites Seinfeld...