05 December 2006

"Brief remorse over move to Canada"

Brief remorse over move to Canada
One can head north as a political protest, but political climates can change.
David Drucker

My wife and I awoke, as usual, to NPR. Before political correspondent Mara Liasson got to the end of her first sentence, I knew the news was disastrous. George W. Bush had been reelected.

"Honey," I said, "remember when we talked about moving to Canada?"

I'm sure a lot of other dyed-in-the-organic-wool liberals muttered something similar that dark morning in 2004, but unlike most of them, we meant it. Plan A: John Kerry wins, we build that dream ski house in Vermont. Plan B: Move to Vancouver.

So, Plan B it was. We'd had enough of Bush, the direction the United States was going, and this was the last straw. Never mind that we lived in Cambridge, Mass., arguably the most liberal city in the bluest of the blue states. We were packing our bulk granola into our diesel Beetle and heading out.

Eight months later, we were settling into a new home and jobs in British Columbia when Canada had its own election. For those unfamiliar with the Canadian system of government, the prime minister is elected by parliament -- not every four years but after losing a no-confidence vote. After a few of those, there was a parliamentary election in January, which led to the election of a new prime minister, Stephen Harper, of Canada's Conservative Party.

Harper ran on cutting taxes and turning a federal child-care program into a monthly payment per child. The opposition's negative campaign ads sounded eerily familiar: He supported Bush's war in Iraq, was against signing the Kyoto environmental accord and wanted to "reexamine" gay marriage (which is legal in Canada). A shiver rippled down from our berets to our Birkenstocks.

Then, a few weeks ago, we awoke, as usual, to the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. Before CBC morning-show host Tom Allen got to the end of his first sentence, I knew: Back in the United States, the Democratic Party had won control of the House and the Senate.

"Honey, did we make a big mistake?"

By "big mistake" I mean not the kind in which you switch lines at Whole Foods and the line you'd been in suddenly starts to move. We're talking big mistake like selling all of your stock in Ben & Jerry's the day before Unilever buys the company.

But it turns out that Canadian conservatism can look awfully liberal. So far, Harper -- derided as "Bush lite" -- has, for instance, introduced a partial tax credit for monthly transit passes. The Conservatives have proposed a Clean Air Act for Canada, and although it's not ideal, it's still something. Harper said that these new laws would "institute a holistic approach that doesn't treat the related issues of pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions in isolation." When was the last time you heard any U.S. politician utter the word "holistic"?

Did I mention universal health care? Even Harper seems committed to keeping that.

We've come to the conclusion that the United States has drifted so far to the right that any self-respecting Canadian Conservative would be considered a raving liberal in Washington. Stephen Harper is no George W. Bush. We may not agree with him, but we don't feel ashamed every time he opens his mouth. We might yawn, though.

So we're staying in Canada. But good luck with that new Congress, eh?

David Drucker is an information architect in Vancouver, British Columbia. He wrote this article for the Los Angeles Times.

Star Tribune

9 comments:

laura k said...

Loud Murmurs, David Drucker's blog.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for that. I'd not come across him before the piece in today's paper.

West End Bob said...

Thanks for sharing that piece, mseh.

And thank you, l-girl for supplying the link - Looks like a great blog.

Daniel wbc said...

Is it me or do the headline and sub-headline of the article (what's that called?) not match the content. I started reading with dread and was surprised at his conclusion. Was the beginning just to draw the reader in and then the writer (Drucker) pulled a fast one?

I was getting ready for rant mode and then he wrote what I would have said. Whew ...

But some people only skim the headlines and don't read much further.

Anonymous said...

I took it to mean that, after seeing the election results, there may have been a moment of remorse. But, given the bigger picture it was only a moment. But, yes, prior to reading, I thought there would be "more" to the "remorse" than that.

Tom said...

Thanks Melissa, this article couldn't have come at a better time for me.

laura k said...

You're most welcome. David Drucker found my blog pretty recently, and we added each other to our links. There are so many of us out there! It's so good to know.

I do think it's meant to be humorous, by the way.

Anonymous said...

L-girl: Absolutely!

David said...

Hi folks!

Yes Daniel, I think the headline was misleading, and I've seen others out there that are even more mismatched - like 'The Great Canadian Flip Flop'.

I should be clear, we have _no_ intention of going back to the US. We like it way too much here. The whole 'did we make a mistake' angle was the idea of the LA Times when they approached a friend of mine here in Vancouver, to see if he knew any Americans who had fled the US either partly or completely because of Bush's reelection (if you count 2000 as real election). For us it was indeed pretty much the last straw, so that part was true. The rest, as they say, is humour by way of exaggeration!

Nice to know there are some others out there who are sympathetic and share our love of our new home.