Believe in America

This was great, the only one of these that isn't an enormous Democrat wank.
Until I saw 86% of Americans favoring Obamacare. Not likely.:mad:

But other than that, good.

Only 86% of people approving of it was being generous to the anti-obamacare crowd, especially after most of the provisions that go into affect in 2013 and 2014 have already been activated in ATL.

Here's a list of all the stuff that has yet to go into affect OTL, but will go into affect in the future (meaning they've already happened ATL but there's still more to come in 2017)
Effective by August 1, 2012
  • All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Women's Preventive Services – including well-woman visits, support for breastfeeding equipment, contraception and domestic violence screening – will be covered without cost sharing.
[edit] Effective by January 1, 2013


  • Income from self-employment and wages of single individuals in excess of $200,000 annually will be subject to an additional tax of 0.9%. The threshold amount is $250,000 for a married couple filing jointly (threshold applies to joint compensation of the two spouses), or $125,000 for a married person filing separately.[79] In addition, an additional tax of 3.8% will apply to the lesser of net investment income or the amount by which adjusted gross income exceeds $200,000 ($250,000 for a married couple filing jointly; $125,000 for a married person filing separately.)[80]
[edit] Effective by January 1, 2014



Maximum Out-of-Pocket Premium Payments Under PPACA by Family Size and federal poverty level.[17] (Source: CRS)


  • Insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individuals based on pre-existing medical conditions.[44][81]
  • Impose an annual penalty of $95, or up to 1% of income, whichever is greater, on individuals who do not secure insurance; this will rise to $695, or 2.5% of income, by 2016. This is an individual limit; families have a limit of $2,085.[23][82] Exemptions to the fine in cases of financial hardship or religious beliefs are permitted.[23]
  • Insurers are prohibited from establishing annual spending caps.[44]
  • Expand Medicaid eligibility; all individuals with income up to 133% of the poverty line qualify for coverage, including adults without dependent children.[23][83]
  • Two years of tax credits will be offered to qualified small businesses. In order to receive the full benefit of a 50% premium subsidy, the small business must have an average payroll per full time equivalent ("FTE") employee, excluding the owner of the business, of less than $25,000 and have fewer than 11 FTEs. The subsidy is reduced by 6.7% per additional employee and 4% per additional $1,000 of average compensation. As an example, a 16 FTE firm with a $35,000 average salary would be entitled to a 10% premium subsidy.[84]
  • Impose a $2,000 per employee tax penalty on employers with more than 50 employees who do not offer health insurance to their full-time workers (as amended by the reconciliation bill).[85]
  • Set a maximum of $2,000 annual deductible for a plan covering a single individual or $4,000 annual deductible for any other plan (see 111HR3590ENR, section 1302). These limits can be increased under rules set in section 1302.
  • The CLASS Act provision would have created a voluntary long-term care insurance program, but in October 2011 the Department of Health and Human Services announced that the provision was unworkable and would be dropped, although an Obama administration official later said the President does not support repealing this provision.[86][87][88][89]
  • Pay for new spending, in part, through spending and coverage cuts in Medicare Advantage, slowing the growth of Medicare provider payments (in part through the creation of a new Independent Payment Advisory Board), reducing Medicare and Medicaid drug reimbursement rate, cutting other Medicare and Medicaid spending.[46][90]
  • Revenue increases from a new $2,500 limit on tax-free contributions to flexible spending accounts (FSAs), which allow for payment of health costs.[91]
  • Establish health insurance exchanges, and subsidization of insurance premiums for individuals in households with income up to 400% of the poverty line. To qualify for the subsidy, the beneficiaries cannot be eligible for other acceptable coverage.[92][83][93][94] Section 1401(36B) of PPACA explains that the subsidy will be provided as an advanceable, refundable tax credit[95] and gives a formula for its calculation.[96] Refundable tax credit is a way to provide government benefit to people even with no tax liability[97] (example: Earned Income Credit). The formula was changed in the amendments (HR 4872) passed March 23, 2010, in section 1001. According to DHHS and CRS, in 2014 the income-based premium caps for a "silver" healthcare plan for family of four would be the following:
Health Insurance Premiums and Cost Sharing under PPACA for average family of 4.[17][98][99][100]Income % of federal poverty levelPremium Cap as a Share of IncomeIncome $ (family of 4)aMax Annual Out-of-Pocket PremiumPremium SavingsbAdditional Cost-Sharing Subsidy133%3% of income$31,900$992$10,345$5,040150%4% of income$33,075$1,323$9,918$5,040200%6.3% of income$44,100$2,778$8,366$4,000250%8.05% of income$55,125$4,438$6,597$1,930300%9.5% of income$66,150$6,284$4,628$1,480350%9.5% of income$77,175$7,332$3,512$1,480400%9.5% of income$88,200$8,379$2,395$1,480

a.^ Note: In 2016, the FPL is projected to equal about $11,800 for a single person and about $24,000 for family of four.[101][102] See Subsidy Calculator for specific dollar amount.[103]
b.^ DHHS and CBO estimate the average annual premium cost in 2014 to be $11,328 for family of 4 without the reform.[98]

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on August 12, 2011, issued joint proposed rules regarding implementation of new state-based health insurance exchanges to cover how the exchanges will determine eligibility for uninsured individuals and employees of small businesses seeking to buy insurance on the exchanges, as well as how the exchanges will handle eligibility determinations for low-income individuals applying for newly expanded Medicaid benefits.[100][104][105][106]
  • Members of Congress and their staff will only be offered health care plans through the exchange or plans otherwise established by the bill (instead of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program that they currently use).[107]
  • A new excise tax goes into effect that is applicable to pharmaceutical companies and is based on the market share of the company; it is expected to create $2.5 billion in annual revenue.[82]
  • Most medical devices become subject to a 2.3% excise tax collected at the time of purchase. (Reduced by the reconciliation act to 2.3% from 2.6%)[108]
  • Health insurance companies become subject to a new excise tax based on their market share; the rate gradually raises between 2014 and 2018 and thereafter increases at the rate of inflation. The tax is expected to yield up to $14.3 billion in annual revenue.[82]
  • The qualifying medical expenses deduction for Schedule A tax filings increases from 7.5% to 10% of earned income.[109]
[edit] Effective by January 1, 2015


  • Physicians' payment will be modified to be based on the quality of care, not the volume.

All information from Wikipedia. Specifically here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obamacare

By the way, in case anyone is wondering how the Supreme Court ruled ATL, they ruled that the entire Healthcare law was constitutional... except for the individual mandate.
 
The US has Israeli forces on the ground helping, and also invoked NATO to help with peacekeeping. Romney also gave out more contracts to private security companies to help with peacekeeping operations by using mercenaries as a supplement to the Army so that the US doesn't need to go it alone.

Israel relies on a citizen army, to put enough ground troops into Iran to make any sort of difference, will wreck their economy pretty fast. Israel cannot afford heavy mobilization that goes on for years. I won't even go into the effect israeli occupying forces will have on a popular resistance.
or what this will do to destabilize Iraq or Afghanistan further.


NATO is not bound by treaty to help outside the territory of member states, so Romney would have to talk them into it. Other than a few eastern european countries with token forces, i cannot see anyone who would want to go, or have the political support to do so. Maybe Canada and Britain, but after afghanistan and iraq there is not much will left for supporting endless intervention ala iraq 2.0.

This is going to be a disaster.
 
Israel relies on a citizen army, to put enough ground troops into Iran to make any sort of difference, will wreck their economy pretty fast. Israel cannot afford heavy mobilization that goes on for years. I won't even go into the effect israeli occupying forces will have on a popular resistance.
or what this will do to destabilize Iraq or Afghanistan further.


NATO is not bound by treaty to help outside the territory of member states, so Romney would have to talk them into it. Other than a few eastern european countries with token forces, i cannot see anyone who would want to go, or have the political support to do so. Maybe Canada and Britain, but after afghanistan and iraq there is not much will left for supporting endless intervention ala iraq 2.0.

This is going to be a disaster.

Mofaz gave whatever he could spare for peacekeeping efforts, which wasn't much, and Israel's part in the invasion was limited to co-ordinated air strikes on Iranian military targets with the US Air Force.

And Romney managed to talk at least some of the NATO countries into honoring the pact and chipping in, like Great Brittain, France, and Germany, who took massive lobbying and some incentive to agree to it. Canada also threw some troops in and worked with the US in conducting air strikes. All of the above countries have committed troops for peacekeeping, but they're still not noteworthy enough, or very supportive of the war. And the US has a good amount of its own soldiers in there. Romney made up the difference by contracting with private security companies and using hired mercenaries as a supplement to US forces in the country.
 
Mofaz gave whatever he could spare for peacekeeping efforts, which wasn't much, and Israel's part in the invasion was limited to co-ordinated air strikes on Iranian military targets with the US Air Force.

And Romney managed to talk at least some of the NATO countries into honoring the pact and chipping in, like Great Brittain, France, and Germany. Canada also threw some troops in and worked with the US in conducting air strikes. All of the above countries have committed troops for peacekeeping, but they're still not noteworthy enough. And the US has a sizeable force there. Romney made up the difference by contracting with private security companies and using hired mercenaries as a supplement to US forces in the country.

Israel putting troops on the ground in Iran would be more of a hindrance to the Allies than a help. Iranians wouldn't be too happy with the "Great Satan" occupying their country, but the "evil Zionists" as well?? They'll all go crazy. Also if most of Israel's army is in Iran, then Hamas and Hezbollah would probably launch attacks on Israel, and there could be another intifada.

As for the European powers, France is unlikely to help under Socialist President Hollande. Germany is definetly not going to help - they refused to help the Libya mission and abstained during the UN vote on it - and intervening in Libya to save Benghazi from a massacre would be seen as a more worthy cause than invading Iran on the pretext that they might have nukes. In Britain, while a lot of Tories in the cabinet would be in favour of joining Romney and sending troops, the Lib Dems would be absolutely against it, and would walk out of the coalition if Cameron decided to invade Iran. Also, the UK public would be very strongly against it, and spending billions invading another Middle East country (one which will be more difficult to conquer and occupy than Afghanistan & Iraq combined), while imposing large spending cuts on the British military is not going to go down well to say the least.

So the US would pretty much be alone.
 
Israel putting troops on the ground in Iran would be more of a hindrance to the Allies than a help. Iranians wouldn't be too happy with the "Great Satan" occupying their country, but the "evil Zionists" as well?? They'll all go crazy. Also if most of Israel's army is in Iran, then Hamas and Hezbollah would probably launch attacks on Israel, and there could be another intifada.

As for the European powers, France is unlikely to help under Socialist President Hollande. Germany is definetly not going to help - they refused to help the Libya mission and abstained during the UN vote on it - and intervening in Libya to save Benghazi from a massacre would be seen as a more worthy cause than invading Iran on the pretext that they might have nukes. In Britain, while a lot of Tories in the cabinet would be in favour of joining Romney and sending troops, the Lib Dems would be absolutely against it, and would walk out of the coalition if Cameron decided to invade Iran. Also, the UK public would be very strongly against it, and spending billions invading another Middle East country (one which will be more difficult to conquer and occupy than Afghanistan & Iraq combined), while imposing large spending cuts on the British military is not going to go down well to say the least.

So the US would pretty much be alone.

Israel doesn't have most of it's army in Iran. It doesn't even have anything worth mentioning, just a few token forces because they were the ones (under Netenyahu) who got the US to go to war in the first place. The European countries took heavy lobbying by the Romney Administration and it's allies to get them to agree to go in. Even then, the rest of them only sent token forces in to show "solidarity" or whatever with the US. The main force in Iran is mostly made up of US troops, as I said before, with the other allied nations committing some of their air forces as well. To attempt to avoid stretching the US Army too thinly, Romney contracted with private security companies and is using mercenaries as a supplement to US occupation forces.
 
going broke fast then

During the surge, the US had 166k in Iraq, plus an estimated same again in contractors. Based on even those level of forces, to achieve the same kind of coverage the US is going to have to have what? 500,000 troops and the same again in contractors? The US only has 560k in the regular army and 360k in the guard. This sound like a draft to me, unless the US is stripping everywhere else?

Best guesstimates have the Iranians with 600k regulars,and roughly 1.8 million reservists, plus some 12 million who have served in the Basj paramilitaries although only a few million of these are combat able, but they will know the right end of the AK to point. Sounds like a disastrous bloodbath to me.

What will Romney do for an encore, invade China?
 
During the surge, the US had 166k in Iraq, plus an estimated same again in contractors. Based on even those level of forces, to achieve the same kind of coverage the US is going to have to have what? 500,000 troops and the same again in contractors? The US only has 560k in the regular army and 360k in the guard. This sound like a draft to me, unless the US is stripping everywhere else?

Best guesstimates have the Iranians with 600k regulars,and roughly 1.8 million reservists, plus some 12 million who have served in the Basj paramilitaries although only a few million of these are combat able, but they will know the right end of the AK to point. Sounds like a disastrous bloodbath to me.

What will Romney do for an encore, invade China?

It's a huge mess. And Romney hired more contracters for Iran than Bush did for Iraq; a lot more. There are more mercenaries than US troops stationed in Iran. And yes, it is a huge mess and a disaster, just like all the other wars we've fought this past decade.

And no, Romney won't invade China. Who else would we borrow money from?
 
By the way, in case anyone is wondering how the Supreme Court ruled ATL, they ruled that the entire Healthcare law was constitutional... except for the individual mandate.

What else is anyone saying is unconstitutional? The individual mandate is the major challenge, so that was a victory for the right. Also, I can't imagine the PPACA being so effective with no mandate.
 
What else is anyone saying is unconstitutional? The individual mandate is the major challenge, so that was a victory for the right. Also, I can't imagine the PPACA being so effective with no mandate.

The mandate, as far as I can tell, is the provision that forces people to buy health insurance from private insurance companies. Seeing that this was a Republican idea to begin with, and that the loss of the mandate would mean a huge loss in profits to the insurance companies that donate to the Republicans, I'd say it was more of a loss for the right.
 
The mandate, as far as I can tell, is the provision that forces people to buy health insurance from private insurance companies. Seeing that this was a Republican idea to begin with, and that the loss of the mandate would mean a huge loss in profits to the insurance companies that donate to the Republicans, I'd say it was more of a loss for the right.

Well, the insurance companies weren't exactly in favor of the mandate.
 
Well, the insurance companies weren't exactly in favor of the mandate.

Yes they are. They may pay lip service about the mandate to drum up resistance to the whole law from people who just don't like the mandate part, but why would insurance companies be against a mandate to buy their insurance? What the insurance companies really hate about the law is the 80/20 rule, where they must spend at least 80% of their revenue on healthcare. That and the other regulations like ending the ban on pre-existing conditions and eliminating lifetime spending caps are what the insurance companies really oppose about "Obamacare."
 
Yes they are. They may pay lip service about the mandate to drum up resistance to the whole law from people who just don't like the mandate part, but why would insurance companies be against a mandate to buy their insurance? What the insurance companies really hate about the law is the 80/20 rule, where they must spend at least 80% of their revenue on healthcare. That and the other regulations like ending the ban on pre-existing conditions and eliminating lifetime spending caps are what the insurance companies really oppose about "Obamacare."

Okay, fair enough. Of course, I'm not too happy with the mandate either, so...
 
Yes they are. They may pay lip service about the mandate to drum up resistance to the whole law from people who just don't like the mandate part, but why would insurance companies be against a mandate to buy their insurance? What the insurance companies really hate about the law is the 80/20 rule, where they must spend at least 80% of their revenue on healthcare. That and the other regulations like ending the ban on pre-existing conditions and eliminating lifetime spending caps are what the insurance companies really oppose about "Obamacare."

I'd just like to restate for the record that the SC ruled the entire law, except the mandate, constitutional in this timeline.
 
MARIO CUOMO: “WHEN MY SON IS PRESIDENT”
March 29th, 2015

Corbis-42-30340205.jpg

Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, the father of incumbent Governor Andrew Cuomo, made a slip of the tongue today when he was giving his opinion on President Romney’s budget proposal during a speech in New York City. Cuomo was talking about how it is unfair to give more tax breaks to the wealthy when the country has a massive national debt and an expensive war in Iran to pay for, when he said, “The President’s proposals are not only irresponsible, but they’re blatantly against what the American public wants. If you look at the polls, you’ll clearly see that Romney is on the wrong side of nearly every issue. And let me tell you something, when my son is President, things are going to be managed a lot better than they are now.” Andrew Cuomo’s staff released a response an hour later, stating that the Governor’s father had misspoken and that Andrew was focused on his current job. However, the response neither confirmed nor denied the Governor’s intentions to enter the Presidential race, and media speculation over a potential Cuomo candidacy is larger now than ever, as the nation enters into April, and the window of opportunity to enter the race is closing rapidly.

FORMER MONTANA GOVERNOR BRIAN SCHWEITZER LAUNCHES PRESIDENTIAL EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE
April 3rd, 2015

Corbis-DWF15-1139814.jpg

Former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer announced the formation of a presidential exploratory committee, in a move similar to Senator Sherrod Brown. Schweitzer, a former two-term Governor of Montana, is a relative unknown in national politics when compared to other, more high profile candidates like Andrew Cuomo and Sherrod Brown, and it is unclear how far his bid for the White House will go.

FORMER CONGRESSMAN DENNIS KUCINICH ENTERS DEMOCRATIC RACE FOR PRESIDENT
April 11th, 2015

Corbis-42-33194024.jpg

D.C. COMICS CONFIRMS NEW BATMAN MOVIE IN THE WORKS
April 13th, 2015

275px-Batman_028.jpg
 
SHERROD BROWN OFFICIALLY LAUNCHES PRESIDENTIAL BID
April 16th, 2015

Corbis-42-26491689.jpg

Almost two months since creating an exploratory committee, Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown has officially announced the beginning of his 2016 bid for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. New polls taken last week before the announcement show Brown as the number one choice for Democrats in Iowa, and he is rapidly closing the gap between himself and Governor Deval Patrick in New Hampshire. Senator Brown, who the media had been talking about as a possible Presidential candidate since May 2013, has long been seen as one of the top candidates for the spot.

ROMNEY APPROVAL RATING DOWN TO 41%
April 16th, 2015

Corbis-42-34176896.jpg

CHRISTIE SAYS “NO WAY IN HELL” HE’LL CHALLENGE THE PRESIDENT
April 17th, 2015

Corbis-42-34224323.jpg

SANTORUM AND PERRY SAY THEY ARE “SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING” PRIMARY CHALLENGE
April 19th, 2015

Corbis-42-34112102.jpg

Statements from the staffs of former Senator Rick Santorum and Governor Rick Perry have revealed that both politicians are giving serious thought into entering the Republican primary to challenge Mitt Romney for the party’s presidential nomination. Both veterans of the 2012 GOP primary, where they had faced off against Romney previously, seem to be interested in a rematch with the President. No one other than long-shot candidate Jimmy McMillan has officially entered the GOP race yet, but it seems that Conservatives may get their wish of an alternative to Romney that is more in line with their views.

D.C. ANNOUNCES HORROR FILM DIRECTOR WES CRAVEN HAS SIGNED ON TO DIRECT NEW BATMAN MOVIE
April 21st, 2015

Corbis-42-30887015.jpg

In a surprising move by D.C. Comics, it has been announced that Wes Craven, the man behind the famous A Nightmare on Elm Street horror series, has been hired to direct a reboot of the Batman movie series. The announcement was met with mixed reactions from critics and fans alike. Many questioned Craven’s age (he will turn 76 in August) and whether he was the correct choice to be put in charge of a movie adaptation of one of D.C.’s biggest characters. Craven himself tweeted shortly after the announcement that he was very happy to be working on the project, and promised that the new movie will “blow everyone away” and would be "like nothing you've ever seen in Batman movies before". As of now, the movie is still in its early development stages, though the script has been described as being in the final stages of creation. More information will be released over the coming months.
 
Last edited:
Craven and Batman? That would be interesting. Craven is probably one of the better horror directors who could step outside the slasher genre and do a really good, intense non-horror thriller.
 
UNITED KINGDOM GEARS UP FOR GENERAL ELECTION
April 29th, 2015

Corbis-42-25089594.jpg

The United Kingdom prepares for its parliamentary elections on May 7th and it does not look good for David Cameron’s government. The Conservative Party came under fire in the past two years for it’s albeit reluctant support of the United States in the Iran War, as many in the UK questioned why their army is overseas fighting a war that many feel was unjustified. The Labour Party under the leadership of Ed Milliband, and the Liberal Democratic Party under the leadership of Nick Clegg, have used the war as a political weapon against Cameron’s government, blasting them for needlessly involving the UK in such a war. Popular support stands behind both parties, as many in the UK do not approve of their country’s troops being stationed in Iran. Cameron’s government has criticized the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party for politicizing the war, claiming that they were merely honoring the UK’s part in the NATO alliance, and pointing out that only about 300 soldiers are on the ground in Iran, and most of them serving as peacekeepers in what they claim to be relatively safe areas with little violence. It also seems that Cameron’s government is trying to avoid talk of the war altogether, and the Conservative Party has instead chosen to focus on the ailing economy as the centerpiece of their party’s platform. Critics of the opposition parties have made the claim that Labour and the Liberal Democrats are trying to focus the campaign on a non-issue to disguise “the fact that they have no real plan to fix the economy.”

HARPER AND ROMNEY AGREE ON NEED FOR TIGHTER BORDER SECURITY
May 1st, 2015

Corbis-42-22543429.jpg

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, following a visit from US Secretary of State Norm Coleman and repeated discussions with the Romney Administration, has come out in support of a proposal to strengthen the US-Canadian border to protect Canada from illegal immigration and to prevent possible terrorists from either entering Canada from the US, or vice versa. Opposition leader Thomas Mulcair of the NDP has criticized the Prime Minister’s support for the propsal as “paranoid” and claims that the friendly relationship between Canada and the US makes the proposed strengthening of the borders (which would be accomplished through increased border patrols, changes to standard operating procedure at border checkpoints, and increased security screenings at airports) unnecessary and a waste of money to implement and enforce. Canada’s next general election will be held in October of this year, and MP Mulcair stands a good chance of replacing Harper as Prime Minister. Whether or not the issue of border security with the US will be raised in the next election is the question on everyone’s mind.

RICK PERRY DENIES INTEREST IN ENTERING PRESIDENTIAL RACE
May 1st, 2015

Corbis-42-32950031.jpg

Texas Governor Rick Perry clarified a statement made by his staff last week that stated the Governor was “seriously considering” entering the Republican primary against Mitt Romney for the 2016 Republican nomination for President. Governor Perry admitted that he had seriously considered a primary challenge to the President since Romney’s election in 2012, but had ultimately decided against it for reasons he declined to reveal. Fresh off his re-election after an ugly campaign against San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, Perry was seen as one of the leading contenders for the nomination in 2016, and lead Romney in a number of southern and Midwestern states, including Florida and South Carolina, which are states rich in delegates and must-win states for Presidential hopefuls in the GOP.
 
Last edited:
You do realise that the Liberal Democrats are in a coalition with the Conservatives, and so are part of the government of the UK? Or has the coalition collapsed, resulting in a Tory minority government - since you state that by 2015 the Lib dems are an opposition party.
 
Top