At least she spelled it right. A member of the US House of Representatives has introduced the CANADA Act. She is upset that sales of American alcohol have plummeted in Canada. She wants US federal government action.

The Combating Attacks on our National Alcoholic Drinks by Allies Act calls for Canada to be punished because in most Canadian jurisdictions the provincial government, which controls alcohol sales, has removed American products from store shelves. It is part of an ongoing trade dispute.

I find the legislation amusing. There is no attack on American alcoholic drinks, just a decision not to sell them in government stores. Which provinces have the right to do, no matter what Representative Claudia Tenney thinks.

According to her official release, “Canadian provinces cannot be allowed to hold American wineries, breweries, and distilleries hostage and attempt to ransom them. American wineries, breweries, distilleries, and other beverage producers deserve fair access to Canadian markets, not discriminatory treatment from one of our closest trading partners. Nearly all of Canada’s provincial liquor boards have unfairly targeted U.S. producers and harmed hardworking American businesses due to unrelated policy issues.”

That’s a lot to unpack. But let’s take it a piece at a time. First, nobody is holding any American drink producer hostage. There has been no ransom demand, just a request for fair trading.

Secondly, no business has a right to a market, unless that is set out in a trade deal. If she feels there is an issue, she can use the dispute resolution process in CUSMA – the Canada-US-Mexico trade agreement that Donald Trump hailed as the best deal ever when he signed it. Yes, the same deal he now repudiates. But there apparently is no CUSMA fair access case to be made here.

Thirdly, whether Canada’s provincial liquor boards have unfairly targeted American producers is a matter of opinion. In a trade war some business are going to suffer economically. That is why countries try to avoid them.

Fourthly, how can a decision not to stock a particular product during a trade dispute be considered a an “unrelated policy issue?” there are thousands of products, Canadian and American, subject to various tariffs in the current dispute. One side doesn’t get to choose how the other reacts. THE USA can’t dictate to Canada, nor can Canada dictate to the USA.

So let Representative Tenney have her fun and get her publicity. You probably had never heard of her before. Someone though should give her a lesson in American history.

In 1919 Congress passed the Volstead Act, which prohibited alcohol sales in…..the USA. For 14 years you could legally buy alcohol in the United States.

Arguably the businesses hardest hit were Canadian producers of beer, wine and spirits. Their southern market dried up. For more than a decade. Representative Tenney will discover if she looks that the Government of Canada did not respond with legislation to punish the US for banning Canadian alcohol.

You could argue that the US punished itself with Prohibition. The market for booze was still there, and if Americans couldn’t buy it legally, then there were illegal options. Al Capone is the best known of the bootleggers of the period that saw a rise in organized crime that still plagues the USA today.

As a Congressperson, Representative Tenney has a platform to allow her to have a real impact on improving trade relations between Canada and the United States. The CANADA Act won’t help.