Posted on 09/08/2010 7:21:00 PM PDT by butterdezillion
Nancy Pelosi signed one certificate of nomination which was sent to 49 states and another - saying that Obama is Constitutionally eligible - to Hawaii. People have asked why she didn't send the eligibility-certifying one to all the states, but the more pressing question is, "Why did the Hawaii Democratic Party refuse to certify Obama's eligibility?"
This is on my blog but I'll post the whole thing in the first response and the link to the blog post in the 2nd response so the links will be (hopefully) clickable.
Actually... My mom requested a short form COLB in 2000. I requested one in 2007 that I don’t clearly remember, it was just days after reconstructive knee surgery and I was on a lot of pain meds. Yea. Sigh. I ordered it online, and pain meds do mess with memory. That was in 2007. During the Polarik fiasco, I asked HDOH how many had been ordered under my Mom’s name as that was the one I remembered clearly. That request was filed under HER name. Not mine. The order I placed in 2007 was under MY name. There were two different places those receipts were kept!!! So, ask how many colb’ Stanley Ann requested, for receipts Madelin Dunham ordered. They are deceased. I think you can Ask for those.
I would bet that all of the receipts are part of your vital records but that the requestor's name is a field by which they can sort when querying those records. The requestor has to demonstrate a tangible interest in your records, so they would have to tie that receipt to your BC.
You didn't have to make a UIPA request just to order a copy of your BC, right?
Yes, more or less. However, the ladies I spoke to about the thing, led me to believe that the receipts were part of the records of those requesting them. So My Mom’s request was filed under HER name, not mine. My request was filed under my name of course.
No UIPA request is necessary for filing a copy request. Its just a straightforward form. I just recently ordered a copy of my LONG FORM. I was told I had to write a special letter to Dr. Onaka, as he has to personally authorize requests for Long Form Certificates, requesting my full Long Form for Genealogy Purposes. My brother is doing a huge project right now, and is looking for that sort of stuff.
This is my second request, the first one they “lost” along with the 10$ fee in the form of a cashier’s check - how they prefer to be paid for such records requests - how convenient. So the second one I sent I used a Return Receipt Request with the green postcard on it. So that was another oh 15$ altogether. I have gotten the post card back with a stamped signature on it, so I know HDOH has my request.
I have not gotten anything back from them at this time. They are not exactly quick. They really can and sometimes DO take 6 weeks to respond.
So contrary to the popular faither myth, you can order a long form and they do have a process for getting you a copy. Now if only Obama would follow up and order his.
A digital copy of President Obama’s own personal UIPA request to access his Birth Certificate in order to AMEND it.
A digital copy of the invoice and receipt for that AMENDMENT.
Why would Obama need to file a UIPA request to access his BC? To change information on a BC, one would need a legal document of some kind, a court order from an adoption, a DNA test for paternity, etc.
“So contrary to the popular faither myth, you can order a long form and they do have a process for getting you a copy. Now if only Obama would follow up and order his.”
Of course you can! In some instances in certain lines of work or various other reasons, you must have a full long form Birth Certificate. So its considered a special request, but I was told by the staff at HDOH that it was just a matter of doing so properly. That a letter had to be written to Dr. Onaka asking for special permission to obtain a long form instead of the regular computer generated short form. He has to approve it personally. Once he does, then the request is filled.
So, I have followed the instructions to the letter, not once (they lost that one) but twice. I have gotten the RRR receipt back, but as of Saturday’s snail mail, nothing from HDOH.
When I get some form of reply I will post it.
“Why would Obama need to file a UIPA request to access his BC? To change information on a BC, one would need a legal document of some kind, a court order from an adoption, a DNA test for paternity, etc.”
They need multiple documents to amend a personal record including a UIPA request under Part III for access. In researching the UIPA for my own requests I noticed that Part III lays out the protocol to access one’s own personal records in order to make corrections, changes, and amendments. There are seperate DOH requirements for filing evidence and support. The UIPA request was for gaining access only.
The reason I made the request was because Okubo sent me the second press release in response to an inquiry I made to the DOH asking if they had Obama’s Amended Birth Certificate on file in accordance with policy and procedure. That was my first contact with the DOH and it was early in the day on July 27, 2009. Later that evening, I received the press release that referred to Obama having “vital records”(plural) and Fukino made no mention in this press release about them being on file in accordance with policy and procedure which is what I asked her. In context, for me that was a direct ‘yes’ answer, but it was too vague and I couldn’t be certain. I was trying to corroborate that impression with my subsequent UIPA request.
Also, I felt that I had a good shot at getting his UIPA request if he made one, because there was no law protecting them from disclosure and no precedent case of someone requesting a UIPA request under Part III either.
From UIPA:
“PART III. DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL RECORDS
[§92F-24] Right to correct personal record; initial procedure. (a) An individual has a right to have any factual error in that person’s personal record corrected and any misrepresentation or misleading entry in the record amended by the agency which is responsible for its maintenance.
(b) Within twenty business days after receipt of a written request to correct or amend a personal record and evidence that the personal record contains a factual error, misrepresentation, or misleading entry, an agency shall acknowledge receipt of the request and purported evidence in writing and promptly:
(1) Make the requested correction or amendment; or
(2) Inform the individual in writing of its refusal to correct or amend the personal record, the reason for the refusal, and the agency procedures for review of the refusal. [L 1988, c 262, pt of §1]
§92F-25 Correction and amendment; review procedures. (a) Not later than thirty business days after receipt of a request for review of an agency refusal to allow correction or amendment of a personal record, the agency shall make a final determination.
(b) If the agency refuses upon final determination to allow correction or amendment of a personal record, the agency shall so state in writing and:
(1) Permit, whenever appropriate, the individual to file in the record a concise statement setting forth the reasons for the individual’s disagreement with the refusal of the agency to correct or amend it; and
(2) Notify the individual of the applicable procedures for obtaining appropriate judicial remedy. [L 1988, c 262, pt of §1; am L 1989, c 192, §6]”
(http://hawaii.gov/oip/uipa.html)
“I would bet that all of the receipts are part of your vital records but that the requestor’s name is a field by which they can sort when querying those records. The requestor has to demonstrate a tangible interest in your records, so they would have to tie that receipt to your BC.”
It’s irrelevant whether and where those receipts are maintained or not.
Fukino said the vital records verify he was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American Citizen.
A receipt cannot verify either. It’s simply irrelevant.
I should have copied you on this so that we are all clear on this question of whether receipts from obtaining certified copies could be part of the vital records Fukino referred to:
“It’s irrelevant whether and where those receipts are maintained or not.
Fukino said the vital records verify he was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American Citizen.
A receipt cannot verify either. It’s simply irrelevant.”
And didn’t you ask Okubo directly what was meant in that announcement by “vital records”, and she sent you a Wikipedia definition saying that “vital records” are birth, marriage, and death certificates?
Yes she did...
It is not irrelevant. The HDoH ruled that those requests were part of Obama's vital records, plural.
Fukino said the vital records verify he was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen. A receipt cannot verify either. It’s simply irrelevant.
What Fukino didn't say is that all of his vital records verify that he was born in Hawaii. One can have vital records that serve a purpose other than documenting one's birth. The purpose of the receipts (in Danae's case) documents who received copies of her BC. It is not simply irrelevant. The storage of those access requests (receipts) demonstrates the concept of multiple vital records for one person.
Yesterday, I called the Hawaii DoH regarding the procedure for amending a birth certificate. According to them, one does not have to make a UIPA request to amend a vital record. They provide various standard forms to amend a vital record. The form required depends upon the nature of the amendment. Associated documentary evidence supporting the need for an amendment is required.
I asked about the sections of the UIPA to which you referred. They said that the UIPA is a set of laws governing access to records maintained by the State of Hawaii and that there is no official form provided to make a request for access to records. They explained that the forms used to apply for an amendment to a vital record are essentially a UIPA request.
I also asked about the UIPA requests made by individuals seeking access to Obama’s records. They said that the emails themselves are requests for access made pursuant to the UIPA.
I’ve summarized all of the above in an e-mail to Okubo and Fukino asking for confirmation.
When you asked for a digital copy of Obama’s UIPA request, what exactly were you requesting? His “request,” if any, would have been in the format of standard DoH forms.
I consulted with an attorney at the OIP on drafting my request and have relayed to you exactly what happened. I can’t tell you if they applied my request to another DOH form requesting access to amend or not. I can only relay to you my experience.
She said the vital records verify where he is born and that he is a natural-born American citizen.
Using the words “all” is irrelevant as well. You may as well say, she didn’t say “both” vital records.
She didn’t have to say that either, she already said the “vital records verify...”
Geez.
“Geez.”
Exactly. That’s how absurd it gets when one tries to parse words.
Below is the request I made exactly. It was denied in it’s entirety by the DOH and OIP on appeal. And I have confirmed that with both agencies. Feel free to send this to either or both agencies and ask them to confirm for you their rulings that were sent to me:
“1.) I request an electronic copy of any and all UIPA requests made by President Barack Obama or anyone
claiming to represent him for access to his personal vital records so that he could make ‘corrections’ to his
vital record information.
2.) I request an electronic copy of the ruling(s) or opinion(s) of those record requests.
3.) Please provide me electronic copies of all communication concerning formal or informal UIPA request(s)
made by President Barack Obama or anyone claiming to represent him for access to his personal vital
records.
4.) Please send me an electronic copy of any and all invoices and receipts of fees paid on behalf of or by
President Obama for access to his vital records, amendments or anything pertaining to his vital records.”
It’s all part and parcel of the same thing. When there’s a communist coup the first thing they do is seize control of the critical infrastructure - the systems necessary for the maintenance of a free society. One of the top things is law enforcement.
The DOJ is suing Arizona because it believes Arizona has crossed a Constitutional line infringing on the federal government's territory. There is no seizing going on (unless its Arizona doing the seizing).
Using the word ‘all’ is not only redundant and unecessary, but it wouldn’t even work in the sentence she used. I refuse to engage in a conversation where I have to answer why someone else didn’t use language that would make it easier for you to be certain she meant what she said.’
“I have seen the original vital records all verifying....” Uhm, ok.
I’m trying to engage you or ask you to defend someone else’s statement. I was just making a point about parsing words.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.