Some Americans Contemplate a Move To Canada 

Some Americans Contemplate a Move To Canada 
Posted by CN Staff on July 19, 2003 at 10:27:02 PT
By David Crary, The Associated Press
Source: Associated Press
New York -- For all they share economically and culturally, Canada and the United States are increasingly at odds on basic social policies -- to the point that at least a few discontented Americans are planning to move north and try their neighbors' way of life. A husband and wife in Minnesota, a college student in Georgia, a young executive in New York. Though each has distinct motives for packing up, they agree the United States is growing too conservative and believe Canada offers a more inclusive, less selfish society. 
"For me, it's a no-brainer," said Mollie Ingebrand, a puppeteer from Minneapolis who plans to go to Vancouver with her lawyer husband and 2-year-old son. "It's the most amazing opportunity I can imagine. To live in a society where there are different priorities in caring for your fellow citizens." For decades, even while nurturing close ties with the United States, Canadians have often chosen a different path -- establishing universal health care, maintaining ties with Cuba, imposing tough gun control laws. Two current Canadian initiatives, to decriminalize marijuana and legalize same-sex marriage, have pleased many liberals in the United States and irked conservatives. New York executive Daniel Hanley, 31, was arranging a move for himself and his partner, Tony, long before the Canadian announcement about same-sex marriage. But the timing delights him; he and Tony now hope to marry in front of their families after they emigrate to British Columbia. "Canada has an opportunity to define itself as a leader," Hanley said. "In some ways, it's now closer to American ideals than America is." Though many gay American couples are now marrying in Canada, virtually all return home, hoping court rulings will lead to official recognition of their unions. Hanley's situation is different because Tony -- a Southeast Asian -- is not a U.S. citizen. The men worried that Tony could be forced to leave the United States after his student visa expires in two years: They were elated when Canada's immigration agency said they could move there as partners. Hanley, who works for a Fortune 500 company in Manhattan, doesn't know how the move will affect his career. "It's a challenge, it's scary," he said. "We'll have to drop everything we know here, go up there and figure it out." Thomas Hodges, a computer systems major at Georgia State University, said his dismay with American politics started him thinking last year about going abroad. He recently wrote an article in a campus journal titled, "Why I Am Moving To Canada." "I'm thinking about Toronto, though I hear it's cold up there," Hodges, a lifelong Southerner, said in a telephone interview. Hodges, 21, complained about a "neo-conservative shift" in the United States and praised Canada's approach to health care and education. "The U.S. educational system is unfair -- you have to live in certain areas to go to good schools," he said. Rene Mercier, spokesman for Canada's immigration department, said any upsurge in U.S.-to-Canada immigration based on current political developments won't be detectable for a few years, because of the time required to process residency applications. During the Vietnam War, U.S. emigration to Canada surged as thousands of young men, often accompanied by wives or girlfriends, moved to avoid the draft. But every year since 1977, more Canadians have emigrated to the United States than vice versa -- the 2001 figures were 5,894 Americans moving north, 30,203 Canadians moving south. Mollie Ingebrand, 34, said she has felt an affinity for Canada for many years, fueled partly by respect for its health care system. Her doubts about the United States go back even further, to a childhood spent with liberal parents in a relatively conservative part of Ohio. "In school I was always told this is the best country on earth, and everyone else wants to be American, and that never really rang true to me," she said. "As I got older, it occurred to me there were other choices." Her husband, George, 44, has spent little time in Canada, but said it seems to offer a more relaxed, less competitive way of life. He has no qualms about leaving his law practice and selling the family's upscale home in Minneapolis. "I don't idealize Canada the way my wife does, but I'm ready for an adventure," he said. "I don't know what I'm going to be facing. That's what I'm reveling in." The Ingebrands have completed the first batch of paperwork to apply for Canadian residency, hoping their talents and finances compensate for lack of specific job offers. As Minnesotans, they look forward to Vancouver's wet but mild climate: "Green all year, no mosquitos," Mollie said. At Georgia State, Hodges said some conservative schoolmates have challenged his proposed move to Canada, saying he would be abandoning his homeland. Conversely, Mollie Ingebrand says some of her friends -- people who share her left-of-center views -- argue that she should stay at home to battle for changes here. "I've been there and done that," Molly said. "I don't want to stay and fight anymore. I can have that bittersweet love for my country from somewhere else." Complete Title: Dismayed by U.S. Policies, Some Americans Contemplate a Move To Canada Source: Associated PressAuthor: David Crary, The Associated PressPublished: Saturday, July 19, 2003Copyright: 2003 Associated Press Related Articles: Values: U.S. - Canada Contrast! Canada! - Washington Post and Confused - Detroit Metro Times 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #10 posted by kaptinemo on July 21, 2003 at 09:42:29 PT:
Friends, please re-read my missive
I said that the CURRENT situation regarding the matter of those contemplating a move to Canada (as detailled in the article) AFTER the year 2002 was largely based upon the dissatisfaction of those with 'progressive' political viewpoints with the present Busch Regime and it's seeming headlock on the political system.Those who are doing so NOW may have thought of the MMJ aspect of this nascent modern-day Diaspora, but only as a (very) minor element of a much larger group of their considerations.Whereas the actual, 'official' beginning of Americans emigrating to Canada to escape the tender mercies of Ashcroft's and Johnny Pee's efforts to 'help' them vis-a-vis cannabis came almost immediately after the 2000 election. There had a been a bare trickle before then, but more patients followed after it became clear that Herr Busch gave only lip service to 'States Rights' when he sicced Ashcroft on the California dispensaries...and some of the doctors. When Ashcroft went after the doctors, the writing was on the wall, in block letters 20 feet high. I hope that that provides more meat on the bones of my exposition.E_J, believe it or not, I too hold the opinion (stated here many times in the past) that Gore would not have done anything any differently. He *could* have whispered in Mr. Klinton's ear and gotten the Feds to back off, but he kept silent. He was once labeled as a 'parent pleaser', and I have seen nothing of his behavior, then or now, that has dissuaded me. Only one substance in existence is more malleable than Al Gore without turning to liquid, and that's Silly Putty. Gore is infinitely 'flexible' (as in "Bend over, Albert!") and owes his political connections to people like the arch-traitor Armand Hammer, who was a Sov spy nearly all his life. Trust such a person, whose political debts were to those whose loyalties were so obviously suspect? Never.Gore is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Which makes him a Rockefeller toady, no different than Dumbya, except Gore has more mental wattage for his bulb. That's damning enough in any patriot's book. A Gore presidency, in my estimation, would have led to the same economic and political woes that we have experienced of late, because the conditions which created them were years in the making..and more years in the effects being acknowledged as such. According to some researchers, when Gore learned of the then-coming economic meltdown - that we have since experienced - because of the Korporate Krooks like Enron's 'Kenny Boy' Lay cooking the books, he is reputed to have turned down the Presidency, saying, "Let Bush be Hoovered." The reference to the Republican President Hoover and his unfortunate handling of the Great Depression is obvious.It's been my personal experience, having been a civil servant, that things that need changing positively only get changed when someone high up the food chain is either inconvenienced or killed. So, yes, having the escaped simian disguised as George Busch in the White House has incovenienced a hell of a lot of people higher up the food chain. His loose cannon ways have finally endangered their profits, and this is why he is presently being subjected to increasing pressures. He's served his usefulness and will soon be discarded by the very people he presently serves. The very same people Al Gore served as VPOTUS. Functionally, there really never was any difference between the two; one is just more glib, the other more dour, but they're both tools. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by b4daylight on July 20, 2003 at 20:23:59 PT
We went up to Canada it was my B-day. We met some ex americans and we continued to bar hop. At the end of the night I was offered a joint of chronic. We went around the block to this alley smoked up. This was my only experince with Canada. To say the least I found them very nice. Just stay away from Monteral I hear. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by goneposthole on July 20, 2003 at 06:11:35 PT
a way to end all this
move the Canadian borderline to Mexico and let Canada govern the erstwhile United States. Canadian governance looks preferable to what the US has to offer. stupid dolts, those neocons
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by FoM on July 19, 2003 at 22:15:50 PT
News Article -- Associated Press
Cellucci Gains Recognition Associated Press Sunday, July 20, 2003QUINCY -- U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci, no stranger to taking unpopular stands on behalf of the Bush administration in Canada, is not backing away from criticism of Prime Minister Jean Chretien's efforts to decrimiminalize marijuana possession in Canada.In an interview with the Patriot Ledger of Quincy for weekend editions, Cellucci said such a move would make crossing the 5,500-mile border between the U.S. and Canada more difficult, and hurt the countries' trade relationship, worth $1.4 billion per day."If the perception is that it's easier to get marijuana in Canada, then that's going to raise the antennae of U.S. customs and immigration officers, who are law enforcement agencies," Cellucci said in an interview at the U.S. embassy in Ottawa. "They are going to be looking for people trying to bring marijuana into the United States. So what that does is put pressure on the border at a time when we're trying to take pressure off the border."But Cellucci downplays the disagreements between the United States and Canada, saying the two countries are "best friends" with much in common."The United States in general is more conservative, and Canada is more liberal," said Cellucci, who stepped down as governor in 2001 when Bush tapped him for the ambassador post. "I don't think there's any question that if they got to vote in the last election, they would have voted for Gore over Bush. That doesn't mean we don't share values. It doesn't mean that we're not good friends and allies, because we are."Cellucci, 55, has come a long way from his days selling Oldsmobiles at his family's dealership in Hudson. He's now recognized as the most outspoken U.S. ambassador to Canada in recent memory. And his boss, President Bush, was identified in a recent poll as the least-liked U.S. president among Canadians in modern times.A year ago, when Ottawa River tour boat guide Loreen Gibson asked passengers if they knew who the U.S. ambassador is, she drew blank stares. But since March, when Cellucci told Canadians they had abandoned their American allies by refusing to back the war in Iraq, Gibson's passengers have known the answer."I know some people don't appreciate what he said about not wanting to go to war," said Gibson, an Ottawa native. "Some people don't like what he has to say, but he was chosen to be here, so we have to respect that."Zoe Carriere, 22, a waitress who once waited on Cellucci, described the former governor as a "smooth talker" who is good at what he does. But she doesn't see why the United States singled out Iraq, and said the United States has no business telling Canada whether it should decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana."Almost everyone I talk to is kind of anti-U.S.," she said. "They are global bullies, they interfere."Mike Landry, owner of an art gallery near the embassy, said he believes a U.S. ban on Canadian beef -- based on the discovery of a single cow carcass with symptoms of mad cow disease -- is a "tit for tat" response to Canada's refusal to back the war with Iraq.But Capt. Rick Slinn, who also operates a tour boat on the Ottawa River, credits Cellucci with speaking his mind without alienating Canadians."There are points to be made, but he doesn't point fingers when he does it," Slinn said. "That's what it's supposed to be like."Cellucci sees his style as part of a changing face of diplomacy, which involves the United States taking its case directly to the people."The old-style diplomacy is that you do all of your work behind closed doors," he said. "Since World War II, we've been getting into much more public diplomacy. And that means speaking directly to the people of the country you're in so that you can explain why the United States government is taking certain actions and build support for those actions."His willingness to travel -- he has visited each of Canada's 10 provinces and three territories -- comes in part from a meeting he had with retired Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith, a native of Ontario who was President Kennedy's ambassador to India from 1961 to 1963."He only had one bit of advice," Cellucci said. "He said when you're the U.S. ambassador in a country, you have to travel the country. You can't just stay in the capital. You have to make sure you get everywhere with the message of what the United States is doing and what the relationship is. I've taken that advice."Copyright: 2003 Associated Press
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by floyd on July 19, 2003 at 14:47:56 PT
long day
Oye, sorry for all the typo's in that last post guys....time for some coffee =)
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by floyd on July 19, 2003 at 14:46:43 PT
It pretty much all started because of cannabis?
Be reasonable kaptinemo, I agree cannabis has been a catalyst for what has happened in VERY recent history, but Canada representing American ideals before America does as far back as us ending slavery before the Americans and providing sanctuary for black people (underground railway, anyone?). While I do agree to an extent with what you are saying I cant agree with a straight face that the MJ issue is was made Canada more compassionate.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by charmed quark on July 19, 2003 at 14:06:03 PT
Just got back from BC
I just got back from British Columbia. Vancouver and Vancouver Island are wonderful. Great climate, gorgeous vistas, friendly and polite people, eh? Just a great place. So tempting to move there. And I wouldn't have to worry about getting my medicine if Dr. Mikuriya gets shut down. The whole pot issue is very low key there. The medical marijuana distribuion story was making headlines in all the papers, but most people thought the Minster of Health was just being odd.The newspaper coverage is totally different from what I've been reading in the US. Really slamming Bush on Iraq. But the big story was the death of a Canadian woman jounalist at the hands of the Iranian police, something I haven't seen any coverage on back here in the states.The only negative I ran into was that dealing with the medical clinics, the airlines, etc., was very bureaucratic and inefficient. Long lines, take a number, long waits, that sort of thing. But always polite and sincerely nice.Gas was high, about $2.30 a gallon if I converted from Canadian cents per liter ( 79.9) to US dollars per gallon correctly. But I don't drive much due to my condition.Anyway, I really liked both the politics and the people. I think it is great place to live.-Pete
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by E_Johnson on July 19, 2003 at 12:19:11 PT
kaptinemo I still insist
I voted against Gore for a reason. I would do it again if given a chance. I am happy that he lost because he was a bad man. Gore was not a good person. Good people do not look at the Institute of Medicine report and then go out and claim that there is "absolutely no evidence" for medical marijuana.Gore represented the portion of the Democratic party willing to stand up in public and claim they believe in a Drug Free America. Drug Free America is an irrational belief system at best and the growth bud of an actual fascist movement at worst.I don't consdier the 2000 election stolen. I think it was good that Bush ended up in the White House because he's forever changed the game in the War on Drugs.We're not going to have any more Democrats stand up on the convention stage and claim that they believe in a Drug Free America.Imagine what could have happened if Gore got into power and the Democrats out of loyalty to him retained their loyalty to the War on Drugs.Thanks to Bush, Democrats are taking our side now. We have a chance of winning only BECAUSE Gore lost.That is how I see it. I'm sorry if that makes anyone mad but sometimes you have to lose a few battles to win a war.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on July 19, 2003 at 11:51:52 PT:
And it pretty much all started because of cannabis
Don't think so? Who were the first to move? The MMJ patients who saw the writing on the wall when George the Dim stole the 2000 election and then sicced his DEA goons on the California clinics. They were the first recipients of Georgie's own twisted version of 'conservative compassion' being implemented. Those who could, left. The remainder of those considering emigration began to do so after the 2002 elections, and only then.I've said it before, and will say it again: if America doesn't watch out, it's 'best and brightest' will find more friendlier climes than the autocratic, plastic Jesus cum Corporate State Utopia the Reich Wing wants to make America into. Chase away your 'cultural creatives', and you're left with nothing but masters and drones. The masters are too busy lording it over the drones to fix anything, and the drones are not allowed much creativity, lest they get any ideas. Societies so culturally stagnant don't last long against ones that encourage innovation and diversity. Nazi Germany found that out real quick when it chased out those nuclear scientists in the mid 1930's who then came to America and used their talents to create the first fission bomb to be used expressly - on Nazi Germany.But ruling elites have never been terribly mindful of that fact...until they see the hangman coming...for them.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by firedog on July 19, 2003 at 10:55:38 PT
Canada...'s the new America
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment