Close your eyes for a moment and imagine a world in which there was no housing bubble, the global financial crisis barely caused a ripple, the federal deficit was small and shrinking fast, job and wage growth were picking up speed, the trillion-dollar wars of the last decade had never happened, and a massive energy boom was minting millionaires. As it happens, this isn’t an idle fantasy. It is an only slightly embroidered description of Canada, our neighbor to the north. Canada’s robust economy is the big reason the country’s voters gave Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives a bigger-than-expected majority in this week’s parliamentary elections.
Until very recently, the Canadian political scene has been dominated by the Liberal Party, which for decades was the only truly national political party. Now, however, the Liberals have been reduced to a regional rump with a mere 34 seats out of 308 in Canada’s House of Commons. Left- leaning Liberals flocked to the labor- backed New Democratic Party, which won 102 seats, almost all of them in the country’s most economically depressed regions. Canada’s richest regions, from oil-and-gas-rich Alberta to the bustling, immigrant-heavy, high-tech suburbs of Ontario and British Columbia, gave the Conservatives 167 seats.
Often derided by American conservatives as “Socialist Canuckistan,” Canada is on track to have a smaller government than the United States as well as lower public debt levels. We Americans like to think of ourselves as the land of the free. But Canada is giving us a run for our money. As the American right looks to 2012, when Republicans will take on an increasingly popular President Obama, they could learn a thing or two from Harper’s hard-won victory, which was over a decade in the making, and his pragmatic, inclusive style of conservatism.
Harper’s government doesn’t deserve all of the credit for Canada’s success. Much of it is due to the luck of having vast oil and gas deposits in an era of rising energy prices. Canada’s financial system remained sound due to smart regulations that were put in place in the mid-1980s, after a wave of bank failures. And its healthy budget owes a great deal to wise decisions made by Canada’s Liberal government of the mid-1990s, which slashed spending to head off a debt crisis.
Harper has, however, offered a steady hand during a rocky period, when manufacturing employment took a beating and Canada’s largest trading partners saw their economies nosedive. As the head of a minority government for the past five years, dependent on the tacit support of rival parties, Harper has had to compromise his conservative ambitions. He had to win the trust of millions of skeptical moderates who once saw him as a dangerous extremist with wild dreams of breaking Canada apart. To that end, Harper reinvented himself as a tenacious defender of middle class interests. Like their Republican counterparts, Canada’s Conservatives are often accused of only defending the interests of the rich. The Conservative policy agenda has thus made a point of emphasizing the burdens facing cash-strapped families, particularly those with young children.
And Harper recognized early on that a large share of Canada’s aspirational middle class were immigrants. Led by Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, the Conservatives mounted an unprecedented effort to win the votes of Asian voters, many of whom had long been loyal to the Liberals. The gestures ranged from large to small, from reforming Canada’s immigration policies to welcome more high-skilled immigrants to creating official committees celebrating the virtues of traditional Chinese medicine.. The Conservatives realized that the key to winning immigrant voters is to demonstrate that you understand and value their concerns. One result of this outreach effort has been the election of a large number of Asian Canadians as Conservative MPs, a number of whom have made it into Harper’s cabinet. Given that the American electorate is growing steadily less white, it is widely understood that Republicans need to make inroads in large and growing Latino and Asian communities. Harper’s Conservatives offer a road map as to how they might do that.
Perhaps the most central aspect of Harper’s success has been his focus on economic issues over cultural issues. Throughout his campaign, Harper kept referring to his “low-tax plan for jobs and economic growth” and his “low-tax plan for families.” In a typical Harper stump speech, the phrase “low-tax” was used dozens of times, to hilarious effect. Yet there was no mystery as to what Harper intended to deliver: low taxes. The beauty of Harper’s approach, however, is that he has carefully balanced tax cuts with planned spending reductions, to avoid mounting debt levels.
At last night’s Republican presidential debate, the candidates spent a great deal of time lambasting President Obama and demonstrating their conservative bona fides. They spent very little time explaining how they would defend the interest of the middle class, or how they intended to make inroads with the Latino and Asian voters who are so crucial to victory in 2012 and beyond. They need to give Stephen Harper a call.
Until very recently, the Canadian political scene has been dominated by the Liberal Party, which for decades was the only truly national political party. Now, however, the Liberals have been reduced to a regional rump with a mere 34 seats out of 308 in Canada’s House of Commons. Left- leaning Liberals flocked to the labor- backed New Democratic Party, which won 102 seats, almost all of them in the country’s most economically depressed regions. Canada’s richest regions, from oil-and-gas-rich Alberta to the bustling, immigrant-heavy, high-tech suburbs of Ontario and British Columbia, gave the Conservatives 167 seats.
Often derided by American conservatives as “Socialist Canuckistan,” Canada is on track to have a smaller government than the United States as well as lower public debt levels. We Americans like to think of ourselves as the land of the free. But Canada is giving us a run for our money. As the American right looks to 2012, when Republicans will take on an increasingly popular President Obama, they could learn a thing or two from Harper’s hard-won victory, which was over a decade in the making, and his pragmatic, inclusive style of conservatism.
Harper’s government doesn’t deserve all of the credit for Canada’s success. Much of it is due to the luck of having vast oil and gas deposits in an era of rising energy prices. Canada’s financial system remained sound due to smart regulations that were put in place in the mid-1980s, after a wave of bank failures. And its healthy budget owes a great deal to wise decisions made by Canada’s Liberal government of the mid-1990s, which slashed spending to head off a debt crisis.
Harper has, however, offered a steady hand during a rocky period, when manufacturing employment took a beating and Canada’s largest trading partners saw their economies nosedive. As the head of a minority government for the past five years, dependent on the tacit support of rival parties, Harper has had to compromise his conservative ambitions. He had to win the trust of millions of skeptical moderates who once saw him as a dangerous extremist with wild dreams of breaking Canada apart. To that end, Harper reinvented himself as a tenacious defender of middle class interests. Like their Republican counterparts, Canada’s Conservatives are often accused of only defending the interests of the rich. The Conservative policy agenda has thus made a point of emphasizing the burdens facing cash-strapped families, particularly those with young children.
And Harper recognized early on that a large share of Canada’s aspirational middle class were immigrants. Led by Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, the Conservatives mounted an unprecedented effort to win the votes of Asian voters, many of whom had long been loyal to the Liberals. The gestures ranged from large to small, from reforming Canada’s immigration policies to welcome more high-skilled immigrants to creating official committees celebrating the virtues of traditional Chinese medicine.. The Conservatives realized that the key to winning immigrant voters is to demonstrate that you understand and value their concerns. One result of this outreach effort has been the election of a large number of Asian Canadians as Conservative MPs, a number of whom have made it into Harper’s cabinet. Given that the American electorate is growing steadily less white, it is widely understood that Republicans need to make inroads in large and growing Latino and Asian communities. Harper’s Conservatives offer a road map as to how they might do that.
Perhaps the most central aspect of Harper’s success has been his focus on economic issues over cultural issues. Throughout his campaign, Harper kept referring to his “low-tax plan for jobs and economic growth” and his “low-tax plan for families.” In a typical Harper stump speech, the phrase “low-tax” was used dozens of times, to hilarious effect. Yet there was no mystery as to what Harper intended to deliver: low taxes. The beauty of Harper’s approach, however, is that he has carefully balanced tax cuts with planned spending reductions, to avoid mounting debt levels.
At last night’s Republican presidential debate, the candidates spent a great deal of time lambasting President Obama and demonstrating their conservative bona fides. They spent very little time explaining how they would defend the interest of the middle class, or how they intended to make inroads with the Latino and Asian voters who are so crucial to victory in 2012 and beyond. They need to give Stephen Harper a call.