Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:07:13.344Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of the United States Congress on Canadian-American Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Peter C. Dobell
Peter C. Dobell
Affiliation:
Director of the Parliamentary Centre for Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade in Ottawa.
Get access

Extract

Traditionally relations between nations, including Canada and the United States, have been analyzed in terms of the interaction between the executive branches of the two governments. This approach used to reflect relatively accurately the actual state of affairs. It is still broadly consistent with the constitutional allocation of powers, particularly in Canada. While the president of the United States must seek congressional action in order to declare war and Senate action to ratify treaties and to confirm ambassadorial appointments, these powers in Canada fall within the prerogatives of the crown, and constitutionally no parliamentary approval for decisions by the executive branch in any of these areas is required.

Type
Part IV. Integration, Institutions, and Bargaining
Information
International Organization , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , Autumn 1974 , pp. 903 - 929
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 10 April 1957, pp. 3357–58.

2 “Hands Off Canadians Diefenbaker Tells US as Vote Drive Opened,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), 8 April 1957.

3 US Congress, Senate, 89th Cong., 1st sess., 22 September 1965, Congressional Record, vol. 111, part 18, p. 24758.

4 The story does not need to be recounted in detail because it has been fully described in an excellent monograph by Wagner, J. Richard, Canada's Impact on United States Legislative Processes: The Chicago Diversion Bills, Research Series #14 (Tucson: University of Arizona, 1973).Google Scholar

5 Heeney, Arnold, The Things That Are Caesar's, Memoirs of a Canadian Public Servant (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), p. 127.Google Scholar

6 Mr. Wagner's monograph omits the critical role in providing behind-the-scenes support played by Congressman Thomas O'Brien of Chicago, a friend of Speaker Rayburn and Senator Dirksen and one to whom several southern congressmen were indebted.

7 Heeney, p. 127.

8 US Congress, Ports and Waterways Safety Act, PL 92–340, Title II, sec. 201 (1972).

9 Globe and Mail (Toronto), 16 November 1973, p. 2.

10 See Ted Greenwood's article in this volume for a discussion of the energy question in a wider perspective.

11 These events are outlined in my book, Canada's Search for New Roles, Foreign Policy in the Trudeau Era (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), pp. 69–70.

12 The Aleyska Pipeline Service Company, which is to build the pipeline.

13 The United States Tariff Commission decided in 1973 that US producers were likely to be injured by Canadian imports sold at less than the domestic sales price and the Treasury Department has ordered dumping duties imposed.

14 See Roger Swanson's article on defense and Kal J. Holsti and Thomas Allen Levy's article on bilateral institutions and transgovernmental relations in this volume.

15 US Congress, House, Bill HR 5751 to Amend Section 202 of the Interstate Commerce Act, introduced 15 March 1973, p. 2.

16 For further details of this group, see Abrams, Matthew J., The Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group (Ottawa/Toronto: Parliamentary Centre for Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade/Canadian Institute of International Affairs, 1973).Google Scholar

17 For an example, see US Congress, Senate, 85th Cong., 2d sess., 18 March 1958, Congressional Record, vol. 104, part 4, p. 4649.