Replies

The law in Hawaii requires that any documentation used by a public official making a public pronouncement be made public. That’s it. Real Simple.

_______________________________________________________________________

A good observation.

What if it were applied to the HDP candidate declaration of 2008 signed by Brian Schatz? Schatz is now Lt. Gov under Abercrombie. In 2008 he was head of HDP.

Why apply FOIA to that particular document?

That document did not do what it was supposed to do - provide a declaration of constitutional eligibility. It contained wording indicating the National Democratic Party had named the said candidates but it lacked the legally required wording. That wording was in the 2004 and 2000 HDP candidate documents.

So what background lead Brian Schatz to change the template used in 2004 to specifically avoid declaring Obama eligible under AII?

The ‘backup’ to this document would be interesting.

That document did not do what it was supposed to do - provide a declaration of constitutional eligibility. It contained wording indicating the National Democratic Party had named the said candidates but it lacked the legally required wording. That wording was in the 2004 and 2000 HDP candidate documents.

Blind alley. Obama eventually was certified by Cronin, perhaps after a hearing, and placed on the ballot. In accepting the word of the DNC, Cronin was acting completely within his legal authority. There is no obligation to ask for documentation.

There should be.

I also meant to say that all documentation used by Cronin, such as it is, and the record of all hearings, or correspondence, is publicly available to any citizen upon request, if the laws of the sate of Hawaii are followed.

BTW, is it possible this whole Abercrombie Brouhaha is some sort of misdirection?