A Green Canada Includes The West!

Canada may be out of the Kyoto protocol, but even our own non scientific target of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 won`t be reached at this rate. Due to Harper`s indifference on climate change Canada is falling behind most nations not only when it comes to environmental action, but also maintaining past successes. Harper made Canada the only country not to stay on the UN convention combating droughts.

In Canada emissions are going up. Canada is way above it`s Kyoto agreements. Right now Canada emits 690 Mega tonnes of CO2. Nearly 20 tonnes of CO2 per capita, which makes us one of the biggest polluters  in the developed world. Who is to blame? Alberta. I think it is an over simplification to blame everything on Alberta. And yes while it is true that Alberta over represents itself in CO2 emissions in Canada compared to it's portion of the population. 

Alberta isn't a bad province, because it has oil, and yes oil isn't a bad thing. Oil is a vital resource in today's modern economy. The problem though is that Alberta's Tar Sands are polluting to much, and will hinder Canada ability to reach any target. The Problem is that Alberta is built on this vital resource. Alberta's low unemployment rate and usually* decent public finances are all due to the cash cow that is the OIL!

Quebec and other eastern provinces who don't have as many resources like Alberta, haven't found it too hard to reduce CO2 emissions. Ontario is 6.5% below 1990 levels (That means Ontario reached it's Kyoto target) Quebec is 2% below 1990 levels. Both these provinces have pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by  15% in Ontario and 20% in Quebec from 1990 levels by 2020. For Quebec and Ontario it is much easier to be green and so far these provinces are leading by example. 

The western provinces don't fair so well. BC emission are up 28% above 1990 levels, Manitoba 10%, Alberta 37% and Saskatchewan 69%!!!!!! Harper has taken no action on these frighting numbers. For me even though I live in Quebec I see that Canada can't reach any target no matter how low emissions are in Central Canada.

My Vision for a green Canada include's the west. In order to create a green Canada we need to get the west off fossil fuels, and yes that means getting rid of the old economy and creating a new economy. For this we can't just say to Alberta your on your own. The federal government must help the west invest in green energy to create a new western economy off fossil fuels. A green Canada doesn't mean high unemployment in Alberta. It means new and sustainable employment in the west. 

Pro Same Sex Marriage GOP Candidate.......Maybe?

With Rob Portman, the senator from Ohio along with the many prominent Republicans like Dick Cheney, Meg Whitman and Laura Bush supporting gay marriage is it possible to see a GOP candidate in 2016 run supporting gay marriage.

In 2012 all the GOP candidates where opposed to same sex marriage. Most in fact supported a constitutional amendment prohibiting the marriage of anyone other than a man and a women. Only John Hutsman supported civil unions. And it should be noted that Ron Paul said that the government should get out of marriage and let everyone pretty much define it for themselves.

Currently most of the candidates that may run don't support marriage equality. John Hutsman who now supports marriage equality may be the only candidate in the 2016 republican primary to support same sex marriage. But the question shouldn't be if a pro same sex marriage candidate is possible, but whether the position is winnable.

Currently most republicans 61% according to current polls are against same sex marriage. But this is also generational, among republicans ages 18-44 46% support and oppose same sex marriage. While 45 and up oppose same sex marriage by a margin of 64%-25%. Considering big major donors of the Republican party come from an older generation it is fair to say a pro gay marriage GOP candidate may find it hard to find influential friends in this party.

The Republicans have only started to warm up to this issue and yes in three years more Republicans will probably change their minds. Especially with the supreme court ruling coming in June  but also in the some 8 states that will have a vote on this issue in the next 2 years.

Anyways the 2016 GOP primaries and Caucuses should be interesting. A fight between the younger Republican generation and the older. The tug of war if you will. Santorum will most likely champion the cause for social conservative, but it will be interesting to see which major candidate will take his challenge. If any?

Labrador By-Election!

In the midst of scandal Peter Penashue resigned and is seeking re-election in Labrador. This by-election is perfectly placed to be a present for the next Liberal leader. Another seat for a party that lost so much in the last election would be a great present for the parties future leader.

The prospects look very promising. First the big boost is of course the scandals around Peter Penashue will most defiantly make him lose many votes. And in fact that is really all that is needed to elect a Liberal in the next election. Labrador only elected Peter by 78 votes. This riding has a long Liberal history. Since Newfoundland  became a part of Canada in 1948 this riding has only elected a conservative twice. In 1968 and 2011. Every other election since 1948 this riding has elected a Liberal.

Added on to that, the Conservatives have committed practical political suicide in the east supporting drastic changes to Employment insurance. Even the Conservatives support for the seal hunt won`t do much good as the Liberals are also in favor of keeping the seal hunt going. The NDP will have some issue`s though conveying that message. With the Greens even deciding to step out of this election in favor of some sort of co-operation to unseat Peter Penashue (that the NDP refused to take part in) that frees up some 132 progressive votes from the last election, which most certainly will vote for either the Liberals or NDP.

Put all these together and it seems that the Conservatives will be even lucky to place second let alone first. The first place winner looking at the evidence will most likely be Yvonne Jones the Liberal candidate. If the Liberals win this by-election it will grow the Liberal caucus to 36, which is 2 more than the 2011 election results. We are the only major party which has grown in size since 2011. The Conservatives are down 2 so far at 164 and the NDP are 3 down now at 100.

Same Sex Marriage..... About Time!

This week the U.S supreme court has been hearing oral arguments for and against same sex marriage as well as the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA). The answers to these cases will come in at the end of June. Quite frankly I am hopeful, but know that the supreme court will probably not make a national consensus on this issue.

The Supreme court of the U.S unlike our own is very politically motivated. It is relatively safe to assume that their our 4 justices on both sides of bench for and against same sex marriage and Anthony Kennedy in the middle is left to decide. What I suspect will probably occur is that the Supreme court will strike down Prop 8 claiming it is unconstitutional. Therefore re-legalizing same sex marriage in the California, and California only. This unfortunately I don`t believe will be a Rov Vs Wade decision, where the entire country is effected by the ruling.

California if the supreme court strikes Prop 8 down will be the 10th state to legalize same sex marriage. Currently there is a push to legalize same sex marriage in Illinois, Hawaii, Ohio, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Delaware. As new polls show that a clear majority of Americans believe that we should let all people marry. Then Marriage equality will only be a matter of time. The supreme court could settle this problem once and for all, or continue this inevitable fight for marriage equality. If DOMA is repealed it will give the thousands of Gay and Lesbians couples already married in 9 states and DC all the rights of marriage.

In the meantime France, New Zealand and the U.K are putting this issue to bed. It`s only a matter of time... it`s only a matter of time.

America Moves a Few Inches to the Left

For the most part the U.S political climate has remained the same. The White House resident is still a democrat, the senate is still controlled by democrats and the House is controlled by Republicans. But I think in all it is a win for left wing of the country, and shows to some extent the fact that America has at least in my mind moved little bit more towards the left of the political spectrum.

In the Presidential election Obama didn't win popular vote wise as much as he did in 2008. This of course doesn't prove that America has moved to the right, because we have to look at previous elections and look for a trend. The trend I see is that many former swing states  have started to lean towards the democrats, and many former Republican states have started to become the new swing states.

Michigan and Pennsylvania have been called swing states for quite some time, but they haven't voted for a republican since 1988! The state of New Mexico was also called a swing state and even voted for Bush in 2004, but the Hispanic vote which is growing in New Mexico, and is increasingly voted Democrat ensured Obama would win New Mexico by a 10% margin (which rivals other more staunchly democratic states like Washington). The state of Virginia which before 2008 has voted Republican since 1964 has became increasingly a democratic state. The state of North Carolina before 2008 has voted Republican since 1976. In 2004 Bush won the state by more than 12%, and now Romney only wins by a mere 3%.

As it can be seen a Democrat candidate has an easier way to 270 electoral votes versus any generic Republican candidate, because many states have become increasingly democratic due the increasing minority demographics in the U.S which currently vote staunchly democrat and the Youth vote increasing involvement.

For example in the year 2000 Only 15% of voters were of the age 18-29 and by a margin of 13% they voted for Gore. In 2008 18% of voters were 18-29 and Obama carried it by more then 34%. In 2012 the portion increased again and is now 19% and they still vote by an overwhelming margin of 23% for the democrats.

As for minorities in 2000 80% of voters were white, in 2008 only 74% were white and in 2012 only 72% are white. The Republican party is only winning this demographic, and have improved there numbers among whites since 2000. Bush in 2000 got 54% of the white vote Romney got 59%. The Reason this landslide majority among white's doesn't easily propel someone to the presidency is because of the minority vote, which feel they are being pushed away by the Republicans.

Among African Americans the percentage has remained relatively constant with around 90% something of all African Americans voting Democratic, but the reason this is dangerous is because the African American voting population is increasing. From 9%-13% (between 2000 and 2012)

Among Hispanics there is a different story. They have also increased there share of the voting population from 7% -10% (between 200 and 2012), but they have also increasingly started to move towards the blue candidate. In 2004 44% of Hispanics voted for Bush, In 2008 only 32% and in 2012 27%. The same is true for the Asian population as well.

It can be seen that demographics of America's voting population has made dramatic changes to some states voting habits as the Republican party is increasingly becoming a party made up of primarily white people and seems to be pushing away the other minorities. If any Republican wishes to get elected president continually pushing away minorities and not reaching out will cause the demise of the Republican party.