National efforts to put a price on carbon in the United States largely petered out years ago, but the climate policy is gaining traction in a handful of states out west. The governors of California, Washington, and Oregon, along with the premier of British Columbia in Canada, signed an agreement Monday to coordinate efforts to reduce carbon emissions in the region. Washington and Oregon will aim to implement their own pricing structures to mimic those already in place in California and British Columbia.

Jonathan Kay presents an excellent introduction to why most Canadians would reject the Canada/U.S. merger proposed by Diane Francis. Ms. Francis suggests a possible American merger incentive payment to Canada of $17-trillion (coincidentally currently equal to the total U.S. debt), payable over 20 years. But there is a big problem for Canadians with that. As a percentage of GDP, the U.S. government now projects its revenue to remain constant, and its debt interest and entitlement costs to continue rising linearly and match revenue by 2025.

During the first years of the implementation of the North American free-trade agreement, commentators argued that it in fact stood for two bilateral agreements: the first between Canada and the United States, and the second between the United States and Mexico. This has now become an outdated point of view. Today, almost twenty years after its implementation, NAFTA is no longer considered a two-part deal between three countries. NAFTA is both a mirror and a motor of a far more integrated North American region.

The project was initiated by El Al CEO Eliezer Shkedi, a former head of the Israel Air Force, who said the national carrier would encourage its flight staff to engage in public diplomacy efforts in three North American cities served by the airline - New York, Los Angeles and Toronto.