An Obama victory will be bad news for Dion

I usually don't get into raw politics much on this blog, but I couldn't help but take exception to a statement made by Lawrence Martin of the Glib and Frail in his column a few days ago regarding an Obama victory ultimately helping the Liberals and Dion in the next general election campaign. Here's what he said:

"The Liberals want to perform reasonably well in the by-elections, then push for a general campaign in the fall. Their ideal scenario is for a vote to come in November on the heels of a rising liberal tide - an Obama victory - in the U.S. presidential election."

Now I can understand every left-of-centre journalists' dream to have the North American power corridor occupied by two very Liberal minded political leaders, however, if you stop for a second and let a few little facts get in the way of clear utopianism, you realize that an Obama victory should be cause for concern for the Dion led Liberals in the next campaign, not cause for optimism. Why?

Well, let's take a look at the political landscape, not to mention, the national poll situation of both the US Democrats and the Canadian Tories for a moment.

First off, much like Democrats, the conservatives under Harper are searching for that last piece of the puzzle that will snap the long hold on power held by their political opponents. In other words, for the Democrats, that would mean regaining the white house; for Harper, that would entail forming a clear majority in the House of Commons.

Unfortunately for Stephane Dion (and Lawrence Martin's scenario above), that's not where the similarities end with Harper and Obama.

What is more important here is that both Obama and Harper have failed to move the polls an inch since gaining the political spotlight. Why is this so significant? Well, the usefulness in national polls is in getting rough ideas of a candidate's popularity, and more importantly as a judge of momentum. It is on this latter score that both Harper and Obama have had some serious concern heading into a general election. In other words, it's cause for concern personally for Obama, as for Harper, it raises doubts on whether or not he can actually sell his party's message to the entire national electorate.

For instance, on June 4th, Rasmussen Reports released its first daily tracking poll of the U.S. general election (3,000 likely voters over three nights, with a margin of error of +/-2%), and it showed Obama 47%, McCain 45%. Fifty-seven days later, the Wednesday, July 30 poll showed Obama at 48% to McCain's 46%-virtually no movement. In the interim, neither candidate has shown movement outside the margin of error.

North of the border, a Nanos tracking poll completed April 9th, 2008 (847 Canadians 18 years of age and older and accurate within 3.4 percentage points) showed the conservatives and Liberals deadlocked at 36 per cent. A scenerio much like Obama's personal numbers, although it's Harper's party numbers, not his personal numbers, that have shown virtually no movement.

So, with that being said, what would a rising Liberal-Democratic tide south of the border and a significant Obama victory mean for Harper and his party? Well, it would indicate two things. First, that voters weren't truly paying close attention, and so minimal movement in the polls was to be expected prior to a race. And secondly, that the strength of a leader during the crucial part of an election campaign means way more to a candidate ultimately forming government, then do a few national polls done months in advance of the real race (or convention in Obama's case).

Furthermore, what the polls say and what the electors do in the next election, I believe, is still up for grabs. So clearly, an Obama landslide victory would defy the current numbers as would a Harper majority. Which is why, in retrospect, the Dion Liberals should be praying for an Obama defeat, not a victory like Mr. Martin has indicated.

As the latter, as I explained above, would not be trending in favour of Mr. Dion.

Oliver Stone's "W" trailer

I came across this leaked version of Oliver Stone's upcoming biopic of President Bush, "W" on Facebook earlier today. The reason I say 'leaked' is because it's not supposed to premier until later tonight. Anyway, there's been a lot of skepticism about this particular film, especially since Oliver Stone hasn't directed a good flick in many years and his previous political films have been far from riveting. Although, I have to admit, upon first glance of the trailer, this looks well put together, and potentially interesting. It's scheduled to debut in theaters just in time for the November election:

Canada: a tax friendly environment?

This has to be encouraging news for the feds. Now, if only Shawn G and co. can do something about the regressive personal income taxes and the Small Business Corporate Income Tax Rate.

Doing the policy dirty work, getting no electoral credit

It's quite ironic that the three Canadian cities that are ranked in the top 10 (for having a competitive tax advantage over their global counterparts) are Vancouver - 4th, Montreal - 6th and Toronto - 7th.

All cities that the federal Tories have helped along with their excellent tax policies, but can't seem to breakthrough in --- electorally.

Let me tell you, if I were Harper's communications director, I'd start letting local candidates better sell the positive aspects of their economic policies (as a primary message) to their local constituencies instead of controlling the message too much insofar as to avoid bad press. Come on, lower taxes (both personal and corporate) is an easy sell, especially when your opponent is selling higher ones sprinkled with side deals that benefit his party in favorable jurisdictions.

I mean, it's better then the perceived current alternative which hasn't budged the polls in your favour one bit for months, right? Anyway, I guess only time will tell if the tories' new math and strategic sell job will "truly" include all areas of the 905, 416, 514, 604 and 778.

It has to, if they want to increase their odds at forming a majority.

Born free. Taxed to death

Speaking of high taxes, bloated gas prices and outrageous text messaging fees, it would seem that a majority of Canadians have a common pent-up anger about them, which btw, supposedly unites us.

Ontario's outrageous federal dependency

Still whining, even after billions and billions has been earmarked (via corporate welfare) for the auto industry over the past two decades;

The lead editorial in Today's Halifax Chronicle Herald provides fodder for the argument that the Ontario Premier really is the small man of confederation that he has been accused of.

McGuinty is whining that Ottawa should give Ontario more cash. Of course, he does this the same day the the Toronto Star runs a front page story about how the feds are committing $7.8 billion for Ontario infrastructure. So much for his timing.

Ontario is flirting with a recession and Mr. McGuinty has spent the provincial cupboards bare, so there is no cash for him to provide the tax relief necessary to help fix things. Why is that? Because he has spent like a drunken sailor - more than twice the combined rate of inflation and population growth for five straight years. He has created almost as many government jobs as private sectors jobs. In fact, more government jobs than Mike Harris, Ernie Eves and Bob Rae combined!

If the feds want to help out Ontario they could scrap equalization altogether and reduce taxes by the same amount. It is better that Ontario taxpayers and businesses get the cash without the Premier getting his mitts on it because he has proven already that he can't be trusted to manage it responsibly.

Any more whining for federal handouts (not to mention excessive spending) and McGuinty's province may very well become the "new" New Brunswick. Although I'm sure the press will pick up on it there.

To fly banana or not to fly banana? That is the $55,000 question

People who read this blog know I'm a huge critic of wasteful subsidies earmarked for ridiculous pet projects. However, this one most definitely takes the cake for the most outrageous proposed project funded by taxpayers ("proposed" because it didn't get off the ground...no pun intended). Anyway, if you don't believe me, take a look for yourself. I have to tell ya, that's a lot of banana cream pie.

That'll explain it

It's good to know there is a reason why my prayers haven't been met for a more free economic society in New Brunswick. LOL!

New technology, same old concept

I see Bombardier has launched a "new family of fuel-efficient, single-aisle commercial airliners" called the CSeries (known as the Green planes program to enviro nuts). To tell you the truth, it's not a bad initiative since these planes will release up to 20 per cent less CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. Plus, when complete, they will fly four times quieter and deliver huge energy savings .

Unfortunately, that's where the compliments end for Bombardier (and this deal) as this announcement was seriously muddied by the fact that Canadian taxpayers will once again be on the hook for these new planes, to the tune of $350 million (funding which was originally approved by the Martin Libs back in '05).

Quite disappointing since this not only proves that the federal tories are the same as the Liberals when it comes to corporate welfare, it also demonstrates that Maxime Bernier, though a shacky Foreign Affairs Minister, wasn't that bad an Industry Minister, at least not as bad as statist Jim Prentice.

Update: Quebec Libertarian Pierre Lemieux has an excellent article on the subject of subsidies and bombardier over at Liberty in Canada. It's definitely worth the read. Great job, Pierre!

Related: Bombardier shares get a lift from C-Series Taxpayers, Coyne Chides aerospace subsidy, On the Dole (pg.18), I think he will get an argument from Tasha on his stance in the last three paragraphs, Taxpayers to risk more then $100,000 per job, CSeries video.

NBT: Put it all down on your debt Nova Scotia

Only days after agreeing to an $870 million Crown share settlement, I see the MacDonald government is sending out mixed signals on how it will be invested. Some for the 100-series highway project? Some for education? Some for this? Some for that? When does it end?

Remember, former Premier John Hamm put $830 million on the debt from the Atlantic accord in 2005. Let's hope the current government does the same and puts 100 per cent of the offshore windfalls towards the deficit. Anything less would be fiscally irresponsible.

Related: Why we deserve our billion bucks, Crown-share revenues should go on debt, Offshore Energy Payment Issue Almost Resolved,Crown share deal sets the table, Large day for offshore, Ottawa, N.S. Reach Deal On Payments, Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia Resolve Crown Share, N.S. lands $867M windfall.

"Green Shift" quickly shifting from shift to shaft

As kit pointed out over at Spink About It, last week Ontario Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff was on record wherein he admitted that Dion's carbon tax, or as his boss calls it 'Green Shift', was anything but an environmental policy, but rather "the most aggressive anti-poverty program in 40 years," which would ultimately "transfer wealth from the oil patch to the rest of the country."

And as National Post columnists Lorne Gunter demonstrates, Boshcoff sure wasn't kidding when he said "transfer wealth from the oil patch":

Two weeks ago, Mr. Dion intimated that while Alberta and Saskatchewan have just 13% of the national population between them, their economies could -- should -- pay up to 40% of the cost of his carbon tax because they produce 40% of Canada's carbon emissions.

At about $16-billion a year in new carbon levies, the Green Shift would cost each Canadian about $500 a year -- just under $2,000 for a family of four. Mr. Dion has promised to return that amount in the form of income tax cuts and subsidies. His proposal would "shift" part of Canadians' tax burden from income to energy consumption.

But if won't shift it evenly across the country. By aiming his taxes at producers, rather than consumers, Mr. Dion clearly means to extract more of his new revenues from some provinces than others -- not coincidentally the provinces that seldom elect Liberal MPs.

The share of the green taxes he wishes to impose on Alberta and Saskatchewan would work out to nearly $1,500 per capita, or $6,000 per family. In the rest of the country, the load would be just $325 per person or $1,300 a family.

And it's not as though Albertans, in particular, aren't making a disproportionate contribution to federal finances already.

In addition to fuelling the federal budget surplus, Albertans contribute about $4,000 more per person to federal finances than they receive back in federal program spending. By comparison, the fiscal deficit Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty frequently speaks of for his province is just over $1,500 per person per year, and Green Shift wouldn't raise that to $2,000.

Add together what Albertans are already contributing to Confederation with the green surcharge Mr. Dion is proposing, and Alberta families would be kicking in more than $20,000 extra per family if the Liberals are ever returned to power.

No wonder it's being deemed the Green Shaft. Because it really is! And trust me, it really must be bad if Harper's cowboy outfit got runner up in the news [today] because of it. Though I have to admit, this outfit sure beats the 2005 version he wore during the barbecue circuit.

Update: Phil (aka Voice of the Association) has an excellent post on how Dion's 'Green tax' is not an environmental plan, but an economic plan that redistributes wealth to areas that are generally more vote-rich for Liberals. Give it a read.

Related: Harper ridicules Dion proposal as 'green shaft', Green shift gives life to Dion, Will Canadians support a hard-nosed approach to climate change?, Hot and bothered over climate.

Industry Canada's $4 Billion Dollar Boondoggle

Terence Corcoran of the Financial Post makes a case against the Government of Canada's [specifically Industry Canada's] wireless spectrum auction; or as he sees it for cell users, a Wireless Tax.

Yes Mable, Carbon Taxes Really Do Suck

In other tax related news, two out of every three Canadians have tuned out Dion's regressive national carbon tax policy. Another note of interest was the fact that only Albertans hate the policy worse then Atlantic Canadians (as 79 per cent thinks it's "a bad idea").

Not a surprising reaction after what you see happening in British Columbia as "taxpayers are paying more for gasoline and most other energy sources as a result of Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell’s introduction of a carbon tax. The levy went into effect on July 1 and gasoline taxes increased by 2.34 cents a litre (the additional tax paid by consumers is actually 2.46 cents/L when the GST tax-on-tax is factored in). Vancouver, which today has the highest taxes on gasoline, saw pump prices jump to over $1.50. The province’s carbon tax will also hit natural gas, propane, diesel and jet fuel. It will rise again on Canada Day over the next four years unless high energy prices and voter furry prompts Mr. Campbell to rethink his policy."

I see truckers in New Brunswick seem to agree it's bad policy.

Related: Environmental consulting firm suing Liberal Party, Dion's Green Shift isn't as painless as it sounds, Carbon tax confusion everywhere, More holes in Dion carbon tax, Most oppose carbon tax.

Ontario picking winners and New Brunswick losers

Just remember, the following statement below came from a New Brunswick cabinet minister whose statist Liberal government (and province) has never EVER embraced the private sector, whether it be the IT sector, energy, forestry, consulting, agriculture or the fishery. But alas, as Keir says, the private sector -- within a free market -- will miraculously be the champion in New Brunswick when it comes to nuclear (article here):

"Let's say Ontario doesn't (choose the ACR-100), they pick Areva. The private sector here is going to say 'hold on, we'd better slow down here, because I don't want an orphan technology', but it's the private sector that's going to make that decision, not NB Power, not Francis McGuire, not Jack Keir, not our government" he said, "It's the private sector that's paying the money, it's the private sector that will pick the technology. I can clearly tell you that every indication I've been given from the private sector investors that I've talked to is that AECL is their (preferred) technology."

Not that I want to delve into their politics, but it would seem that once again the NB government has ended up with the short end of the stick because of the manner in which they played their cards (policy-wise). Although, when you lose, it's nice to blame it on something you can't control, or never believed in, like the private sector. Don't worry Jack, most of us know the real reason why.

Ipsos Reid poll out of touch with Atlantic Canadians

Blogger Right from Alberta makes some great points regarding the latest Dominion Institute and Ipsos Reid poll, specifically part 1, called "THE PEOPLE, PLACES, EVENTS, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND SYMBOLS THAT DEFINE CANADA." I found his Harper comments interesting:

While I am disappointed that P.E.T. comes in at #1 nationally I am impressed that our current Prime Minister, after 2.5 years in a minority government, comes in at #8, sandwiched between Tommy Douglas and Lester Pearson (some might say that's pretty good company). Former PMs Martin, Chretien, and Mulroney (I intentionally excluded Campbell and Clark since they reallly didn't serve long enough to have any legacy what-so-ever) don't rank in the top 10.

The only region in Canada where Harper doesn't rank in the top 10 is in BC. And, this is where the Conservatives should pay close attention, in Quebec Harper ranks as #3 (just behind PET). Heck, Harper only comes in at #7 in Alberta.

Let's just say I [too] felt disappointed with regards to P.E.T's #1 ranking, but I won't get into that right now as I found a few other things interesting about the overall rankings, specifically the Atlantic Canada rankings. First of all, how on earth did Celine Dion finish sixth amongst Atlantic Canadians? I can see the argument behind her finishing first in La Belle Province (which she did), but one would think that same regional mentality would have propelled Anne Murray past Dion in Atlantic Canada, no? I guess the only explanation I can figure is that Ipsos must have called all fifty maritimers that like Celine. Other then that, I really don't think she is deserved of a top 20 ranking in our neck of the woods, let alone a top ten ranking.

Furthermore, though I was quite impressed with Harper's #7 ranking, I found it a bit curious since I suspect there are many that still haven't forgiven him for his 2002 comments. In other words, he still has a lot to prove to Atlantic Canadians in the next few years before he merits that kind of ranking. That being said, I was very pleased to see Terry Fox, Wayne Gretzky, Sir John A. and Anne Murray on the list as they are all iconic Canadian figures (even with Atl. Canadians). Too bad the "Canadian Soldier" didn't make the cut as they sacrifice so much.