I hate to say but I believe these bills are mostly symbolic with content such as that above. If they do get through and passed, which would be a major step forward, they will then get challenged in Federal court. My guess is they would be thrown out due to states having ‘different standards’. We have already seen this approach with the immigration laws.
I think states should beef their penalties for perjury and fraud related to the current requirements. Some states already require the local or national party to ‘certify’ their candidates as Constitutionally eligible before they can be placed on the ballot. I am not sure if Georgia is one of these, but Hawaii was. And the local party refused to provide certification. But Nancy P and the DNC did and they saved the day.
So states that already require a formal ‘sign-off’ of eligibility should simply put a specific and harsh penalty on those that provide the formal ‘sign-off’. You would see a lot more hesitation of putting a name on the ballot if someone specific may go to jail. It has worked for businesses! SBX makes CEO and CFO crazy for paperwork in todays world. Why? Because they may personally go to jail for bad paperwork. So what is good for business leaders should be good for politicians.
In my view if someone want to do legal action at a grass roots level the key starting place is in the those states that already do require sign-off. You will find Democratic party leader, almost all, if not all at a state level, that have ‘signed-off’ legally, in their state, on the edibility of the 2008 Democratic ticket. These are really the only people who could be held directly accountable. Of course, most were only going through the motions. They would not really be part of a cover-up. But, it is they that signed on the dotted line. They are ultimately responsible. That is were the legal action should be. To much of the activity has started out at the wrong level.
You made a slew of excellent points. It sounds like a winning strategy to me.
The trouble is that the only people who can file criminal charges against people like Pelosi are political appointees who don’t want to rock the boat, or elected officials who need the smile of the media (or so they think). Part of the bigger problem we’re dealing with on the eligibility issue is something much more far-reaching and serious: the inability of the people to get justice from law enforcement. It’s like the political class gets a get-out-of-jail-free card, because only their cronies have the authority to file criminal charges.
Any bills that are passed really need to have a way for a NORMAL PERSON to initiate legal action. And that’s not just true for the eligibility issue, but for everything. What would happen if a normal person could sue government officials who change the locks on buildings in order to keep the voters’ representative from being able to participate? What would happen if citizens of Wisconsin could sue their absent legislators for work those legislators are being paid to do but refuse to do?
The political class is way too comfy, knowing that the people can’t do anything to hold them accountable to the law between elections. That’s the only way we get the crap sandwiches shoved down our throats like we’ve had for the last 2 years.
Regarding the “different standards”, that wouldn’t be a basis for throwing out the state laws because, unlike immigration, the federal government has no jurisdiction over state Presidential elections. The Constitution specifically gives the states the responsibility and authority to choose their own electoral voters. The states don’t violate the US Constitution simply by having their own standards, as long as those standards are compliant with the Constitution.