Into the Cincoverse - The Cinco de Mayo EU Thread and Wikibox Repository

🤐🤐🤐

One doubts the Grits could have achieved what they did in 2015 without Justin during his peak honeymoon phase at the helm (especially considering how en vogue his brand of empty performative progressivism was during 2014-16). A 2015 with, say, Carolyn Bennett at the helm and a Mulcair Majority would be a fascinating TL…

This is not the ASB thread sir

Well you can always just have casinos and money laundering if that’s your concern!
Hmm. Miami equals 1950 Havana? Hmm. For bonus points, the alternate Ian Fleming is from Spain. :)

Well, after Long falls in a Uber-socialist revolution (funded from Chile, of course), the resulting CSSR would be fairly likely... :)

Seriously, I don't think that you'd give too much away if you indicated that a country in the Western Hemisphere with land south of 38 degrees South is the first one with Marriage Equality would give too much away. (That would be either Argentina, Chile or the UK (Falklands)). OTOH, if you said it was Flanders. :)

Which leads to the question of Antarctic claims. Compared to OTL, I think Chile and Norway are out, Brazil is in and beyond that, 50 years too early to guess. Bonus points if the Ottomans have a decent size claim. (I mean, they certainly know how to operate in Deserts and Antarctica is mostly Desert)
 
Hmm. Miami equals 1950 Havana? Hmm. For bonus points, the alternate Ian Fleming is from Spain. :)

Well, after Long falls in a Uber-socialist revolution (funded from Chile, of course), the resulting CSSR would be fairly likely... :)

Seriously, I don't think that you'd give too much away if you indicated that a country in the Western Hemisphere with land south of 38 degrees South is the first one with Marriage Equality would give too much away. (That would be either Argentina, Chile or the UK (Falklands)). OTOH, if you said it was Flanders. :)

Which leads to the question of Antarctic claims. Compared to OTL, I think Chile and Norway are out, Brazil is in and beyond that, 50 years too early to guess. Bonus points if the Ottomans have a decent size claim. (I mean, they certainly know how to operate in Deserts and Antarctica is mostly Desert)
I have a few ideas of how to do an alt-Florida ITTL and some of them are fairly bleak. It’s interesting, I’ll just say, to approach the question of seasonal snowbirds when taking a much more reactionary Confederate culture into account, and when said snowbirds are external rather than internal visitors
 
2023 is a presidential election year in the CSA.

Assuming, that is, that the CS election cycle made it through the 20th century intact. Which i somehow doubt...
I would imagine that a good number of the USA founding fathers would be amazed that the USA election cycle made it to the 21st century intact. (Yes, I know we've standardized things a bit, but the only thing that "broke" the cycle is the March 3, 4x+1 to January 20, 4x+1 start of term and that was done in perhaps *the* most boring way)

But I will give you that you could stack every iOTL US Military war "loss" together and it doesn't even get to what the CSA has *already* lost since the beginning of the year.
 
If you are taking requests...

Can we get some electoral stuff from the 21st Century CSA and/or Texas?

No worries if you can't.
CSA is a bit tougher since I have some decisions to make but I did have some Texan content in mind
2023 is a presidential election year in the CSA.

Assuming, that is, that the CS election cycle made it through the 20th century intact. Which i somehow doubt...
I would imagine that a good number of the USA founding fathers would be amazed that the USA election cycle made it to the 21st century intact. (Yes, I know we've standardized things a bit, but the only thing that "broke" the cycle is the March 3, 4x+1 to January 20, 4x+1 start of term and that was done in perhaps *the* most boring way)

But I will give you that you could stack every iOTL US Military war "loss" together and it doesn't even get to what the CSA has *already* lost since the beginning of the year.
And this is, indeed, one of said decisions I need to make…
 
National ID Standards Act of 2005
National ID Standards Act of 2005, commonly known as the NIDS Act, was a major act of legislation in the United States that for the first time standardized identity documents nationwide, hybridizing a federal standard known as the National Identification Documents Standard (NIDS) as a national identification card for every American citizen, permanent resident (also known as green card holders) and long-term visa resident. NIDS was paired with the North American Passport Standard (NAPS) to create uniform standards for personal domestic and international identity documents for all current and potential future members of the North American Free Travel Area (NAFTA), one of the major endeavors of President Roger Goodell and his successors of both parties.

Prior to the passage of the NIDS Act, standards for identification had varied widely from state to state, and the standards for border controls between various North American countries was somewhat ad hoc. The terrorism waves of the mid-1990s and again in the early 2000s had threatened to derail conversations in North America about a potential free travel area and passport union, and common standards for ID documents for such a union were regarded as a prerequisite. With multiparty talks on the proposed free travel area largely collapsing after the 2003 bombing campaign by the Fellowship Army and heightened illegal migration thanks to the economic fallout of the 2002 financial crisis, the incoming Goodell administration in early 2005 elected to pursue the NIDS program as a unilateral first step to create a simple, secure process for a national identification card that could be used as a springboard of common document safety standards across North America. The proposal was not without controversy; the small Socialist and Independent Conservatives caucuses both unilaterally announced they would oppose the act on principle, the latter due to their firm opposition to free travel. The initial versions of the act introduced by Representative Mike Castle (L-DE) proposed a single, separate National ID Card that all Americans would be required to apply for, drawing robust opposition from Democrats. A compromise was pieced together from Democratic leaders in the Senate who instead proposed an alternative, suggesting uniform standards for various types of state identification that would be NIDS compliant, tying approval of NIDS into the renewal that same year of the National Voter Registration Act's funding separate from the controversial 2005 omnibus budget. This lost the bill support amongst many conservative Liberals, but it nonetheless passed by healthy margins and was signed into law by Goodell.

NIDS was not without controversy outside of the United States, as upon the resumption of FTAA talks in the 2006 Panamerican Congress in San Juan, Puerto Rico the Goodell administration outlined its intention to use NIDS as a standard for national identification cards in any future free association area, and the adoption of the NAPS Protocol for passports of member states via multilateral agreement between the United States, Mexico, Cuba and Nicaragua in 2008 solidified NIDS as the identity document standard moving forward. Canadian Prime Minister Jack Layton and Quebecois Prime Minister Gilles Duceppe were famously opponents of Canada adopting NIDS/NAPS during the late 2000s and early 2010s despite their maneuvers towards greater economic integration with the United States, though both would be adopted in the mid-2010s by their successors.

1686711956114.png


(All a bit down in the weeds, but hopefully gives a taste of what North America is like in present day with the implementation of a common travel area/passport union, vs. the North America of today which is... definitely not that)
 

Attachments

  • 1686711758313.png
    1686711758313.png
    197 KB · Views: 103
National ID Standards Act of 2005, commonly known as the NIDS Act, was a major act of legislation in the United States that for the first time standardized identity documents nationwide, hybridizing a federal standard known as the National Identification Documents Standard (NIDS) as a national identification card for every American citizen, permanent resident (also known as green card holders) and long-term visa resident. NIDS was paired with the North American Passport Standard (NAPS) to create uniform standards for personal domestic and international identity documents for all current and potential future members of the North American Free Travel Area (NAFTA), one of the major endeavors of President Roger Goodell and his successors of both parties.

Prior to the passage of the NIDS Act, standards for identification had varied widely from state to state, and the standards for border controls between various North American countries was somewhat ad hoc. The terrorism waves of the mid-1990s and again in the early 2000s had threatened to derail conversations in North America about a potential free travel area and passport union, and common standards for ID documents for such a union were regarded as a prerequisite. With multiparty talks on the proposed free travel area largely collapsing after the 2003 bombing campaign by the Fellowship Army and heightened illegal migration thanks to the economic fallout of the 2002 financial crisis, the incoming Goodell administration in early 2005 elected to pursue the NIDS program as a unilateral first step to create a simple, secure process for a national identification card that could be used as a springboard of common document safety standards across North America. The proposal was not without controversy; the small Socialist and Independent Conservatives caucuses both unilaterally announced they would oppose the act on principle, the latter due to their firm opposition to free travel. The initial versions of the act introduced by Representative Mike Castle (L-DE) proposed a single, separate National ID Card that all Americans would be required to apply for, drawing robust opposition from Democrats. A compromise was pieced together from Democratic leaders in the Senate who instead proposed an alternative, suggesting uniform standards for various types of state identification that would be NIDS compliant, tying approval of NIDS into the renewal that same year of the National Voter Registration Act's funding separate from the controversial 2005 omnibus budget. This lost the bill support amongst many conservative Liberals, but it nonetheless passed by healthy margins and was signed into law by Goodell.

NIDS was not without controversy outside of the United States, as upon the resumption of FTAA talks in the 2006 Panamerican Congress in San Juan, Puerto Rico the Goodell administration outlined its intention to use NIDS as a standard for national identification cards in any future free association area, and the adoption of the NAPS Protocol for passports of member states via multilateral agreement between the United States, Mexico, Cuba and Nicaragua in 2008 solidified NIDS as the identity document standard moving forward. Canadian Prime Minister Jack Layton and Quebecois Prime Minister Gilles Duceppe were famously opponents of Canada adopting NIDS/NAPS during the late 2000s and early 2010s despite their maneuvers towards greater economic integration with the United States, though both would be adopted in the mid-2010s by their successors.

View attachment 837845

(All a bit down in the weeds, but hopefully gives a taste of what North America is like in present day with the implementation of a common travel area/passport union, vs. the North America of today which is... definitely not that)
In which the US realizes national ID cards aren't the end of the world and, in fact, pretty damn useful.
Can't help but notice our friends down Dixie way aren't a part of all this.
Dixie gets what Dixie begets.
 
In which the US realizes national ID cards aren't the end of the world and, in fact, pretty damn useful.

Dixie gets what Dixie begets.
National ID cards and passport-free travel with your neighbors! (Obviously the contours of this proto-EU in North America are for very different reasons than the OTL EU - this is in many ways a mechanism for the US to dominate the hemisphere at its leisure under a classically liberal umbrella, with its intellectual origins dating back to the continentalism of Blaine - but hopefully that gives a taste of where we're headed)
Roger Goodell as in OTL Commissioner of the NFL?
Yeah
 
I think from discussions of enlarging the house that 593 representatives would require significant construction to enlarge the size of the House chamber.

Also, sort of fascinating that Cuba could join without Puerto Rico or the DR. Looks like the individual current Spanish posessions will have more independence from each other. (Or Cuba is now used as a group term for OTL Cuba, PR & DR, which I find *unlikely)

Also sort of curious that Texas and Alt-Oklahoma aren't mentioned...
 
Last edited:
I think from discussions of enlarging the house that 593 representatives would require significant construction to enlarge the size of the House chamber.
Well, the government is going to move out of Washington anyway, so...that may or may not still be true once everything gets relocated.
 

kham_coc

Banned
I think from discussions of enlarging the house that 593 representatives would require significant construction to enlarge the size of the House chamber.

Also, sort of fascinating that Cuba could join without Puerto Rico or the DR. Looks like the individual current Spanish posessions will have more independence from each other. (Or Cuba is now used as a group term for OTL Cuba, PR & DR, which I find *unlikely)

Also sort of curious that Texas and Alt-Oklahoma aren't mentioned...
given that the text refered to:
and the adoption of the NAPS Protocol for passports of member states via multilateral agreement between the United States, Mexico, Cuba and Nicaragua in 2008 solidified NIDS as the identity document standard moving forward
The implication seems to be that Cuba isn't using Spanish passports, now it's entirely plausible that an area is it's own passport area, so even if one is flying from say Madrid to Puerto Rico there are passport controls, even if it's all spain, that's not uncommon. But Cuba would in that case still be issuing Spanish passports, and could certainly not make an agreement to issue any passport to any particular standard.
So it seems that Cuba is an indpendent state, wheter or not Puerto Rico is, is another question.
 
given that the text refered to:

The implication seems to be that Cuba isn't using Spanish passports, now it's entirely plausible that an area is it's own passport area, so even if one is flying from say Madrid to Puerto Rico there are passport controls, even if it's all spain, that's not uncommon. But Cuba would in that case still be issuing Spanish passports, and could certainly not make an agreement to issue any passport to any particular standard.
So it seems that Cuba is an indpendent state, wheter or not Puerto Rico is, is another question.
Given Cuba and Puerto Rico seem to be headed the Canada/Australia dominion route this would make sense. Plus Cuba being friendly to the US fits with TTL's Spain's disdain for the CSA owing to memories of Forrest's Groovy Malaria Misadventure.
 
Top