51st State?

Although Trump consistently refers to Canadian annexation in terms of making the whole country a "51st state", it seems to me that there are obstacles nobody has mentioned in swallowing Canada whole. There are major differences in national policies on hot-button issues like gun control, universal medical care, and medically assisted suicide, as well as questions over the status of the French language -- if annexing Canada would create special circumstances for French in the US, wouldn't fairness demand the same treatment for Spanish?

As a practical matter, the US would also have to offer Canadians some major enticement that would overcome the reluctance or distaste of many individual Canadians to vote for annexation. One such would be to offer some form of dollar equity, equivalent to what the German Federal Republic offered the German Democratic Republic at the time of reunification:

The Deutsche Mark played an important role in the reunification of Germany. It was introduced as the official currency of East Germany in July 1990, replacing the East German mark (Mark der DDR), in preparation for unification on 3 October 1990. East German marks were exchanged for Deutsche Marks at a rate of 1:1 for the first M 4,000 and 2:1 for larger amounts.

Lately, one Canadian dollar has been worth about US$0.70. Offering dollar equity to Canadians has been mentioned as one inducement, possibly a necessary one, for annexation. No discussion so far has seriously mentioned the potential cost of this, much less ventured any specific draft proposal.

In the event of annexation, which medical and retirement system would prevail in Canada?

The American and Canadian governments provide many of the same types of services for people who have reached retirement age. However, Canada has a more generous retirement system.

The poverty rate for Canadians over age 65 was 4.7%, according to Canada’s latest census. That’s lower than any other age group in the country and half the poverty rate for U.S. citizens of the same age.

A major benefit for Canadians is the publicly funded universal healthcare system, which provides them with essential medical services throughout their lives, as well as in retirement. It has no co-pays or deductibles.

In contrast, Americans have no single-payer insurance unless they’re disabled or extremely low-income until they reach age 65, when they can qualify for Medicare.

Medicare doesn’t cover most vision, dental, or hearing care costs. About one in five Medicare recipients reported paying more than $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, according to a Commonwealth Fund study.

On the other hand, according to a 2024 Canadian poll,

[M]any are willing to journey southward in pursuit of timely health care, even if it means paying out of pocket.

The Ipsos poll conducted exclusively for Global News found that 42 per cent of respondents would go to the United States and personally pay for more routine health care if needed. That is up 10 percentage points compared with January 2023.

And 38 per cent of respondents said they would travel to the U.S. and personally pay for emergency care (up nine points from a year ago).

. . . The Ipsos polling comes as provinces continue to struggle with shortages of family physicians, escalating wait times for surgeries and escalation of emergency room backlogs.

But leaving those issues aside, how coulld the US annex Canada consitutionally (at least on the US side), legally, and diplomatically?

Treaties are the tools the U.S. uses to take “nothing by conquest” after the Senate ratifies those treaties by a two-thirds majority.

In 1848, President Zachary Taylor proposed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to Congress to annex Mexican lands. Even though some wanted to take all of Mexico, Congress ratified the treaty.

In 1898, Congress passed House Joint Resolution 259. It ratified President William McKinley’s treaty of the annexation of Hawaii. Due to protest, petition and dissent, it took 60 years for Hawaii to become an official state in 1957.

. . . Trump’s calls for Canada to join the U.S. could only happen by drafting a treaty demonstrating that a process of cession, purchase or occupation is legal. Only then could Congress approve it, and only with a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Trump does not have two-thirds of the Senate.

With whom would such a treaty annexing Canada be made? A Canadian nation-state about to disappear? The British Commonwealth?

It's been suggested that it might be easier to annex individual provinces, in particular Alberta, although the extent of actual support there for either separation or joining the US is unclear.

A May 2020 poll by Northwest Research for the Western Standard found that 41% of respondents would support independence in a referendum, 50% would be opposed, and 9% weren't sure. Removing undecideds, 45% would support and 55% would be opposed. Respondents were also asked if they would support a referendum if "the federal government is unwilling to negotiate with Alberta on a new constitutional arrangement", 48% said yes, while 52% said no. Support for independence was higher outside of Alberta's two biggest cities, with Edmonton being the most opposed.

Based on the business-school analysis of Trump's negotiating style I looked at last week, we know that Trump tends to ask for the absolute maximum he might be able to get, but may be willing to settle for less -- for inistance, Alberta alone if he can't get the whole country.

But there would have to be circumstances far more exigent than we currently have to convince enough Albertans, much less Canadians as a whole, to go along with annexation, and there are major issues that nobody in either country has been willing to address seriously so far.