Posted on 03/08/2011 6:42:03 PM PST by STARWISE
Presidential hopefuls looking to compete in New Hampshire might soon have to provide their birth certificate to get on the ballot.
The Granite State’s legislature is the latest to pile on to the flurry of birther-related bills since the opening of 2011 state legislative sessions in January.
Republican State Rep. David Bates, who chairs the New Hampshire House's election law committee, told the Associated Press his panel will hear a bill Wednesday that would require candidates to provide a birth certificate and affidavit swearing they are at least 35 years old and have lived in the United States for 14 years.
"They need to produce a certified copy of the long form of their birth certificate and an affidavit swearing to residency," Bates said.
If the committee approves the bill Wednesday, it would go to the full House for a vote.
Ballot qualifications like this one were designed to address the long-since-discredited rumors that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, rumors that have dogged him since the infancy of his White House run.
Bates insisted the measure was not aimed at Obama, and said he might amend the bill to take effect in 2013, after the next election.
But some state lawmakers say the measure still could threaten New Hampshire's status as an early primary state.
"This potential amendment could represent a threat to our first in the nation primary as it gives other states reason and desire to try to jump us in line," House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt, who opposes the measure, said in a statement.
~ ~ ~
ROFL! Dream on, twist the truth .. you ignoramuses. Why don't you actually earn your keeps .. DO your jobs .. report facts .. investigate the issue. Lame brains.
Get on board, American states!
.. Ping!
I hope NH has the guts that the reset of the country seems to be lacking. NH used to be rock solid conservative then faded but they seem to be waking up.
Why skip 2012? NH has the first primary. It would be rather strange if Obama decided to not run in the NH primary rather than show his birth certificate.
Actually if this becomes law the rest of the states won’t have to worry about it. Urkel has to prove it in NH or he will be out.
Will this be sufficient to oust the usurper? Who will make the decision that the BC is legit and not a forgery?
The only way to discredit this rumor would be to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate. I must have missed when that happened.
“Bates insisted the measure was not aimed at Obama, and said he might amend the bill to take effect in 2013, after the next election.”
I have been of the private personal opinion for the last approximately 20 years that New Hampshire had degenerated froma staunch sensible bastion of conservatism, to a whimpy, pantywaist. limp-writsted nest of commie-lib caspar milquetoasts!
The line quoted above puts the cherry on top as far as I’m concerned! I rest my case. If they’re going to pass a birth certificate law, but post-date it until AFTER Obummer gets his SECOND chance at defrauding the country; to quote Archie Bunker, “What’s the pernt?!”
Why so sensitive, BO?
But some state lawmakers say the measure still could threaten New Hampshire's status as an early primary state.
How?
This is actually a very clever extortion scheme. A couple of the legislators here in Georgia sponsored a similar bill, then when federal money started funding their pet projects they withdrew their sponsorship.
If he is sensitive about it then he is a fraud. TV and all the newsmedia are covering for him.
Just providing it is not enough. There must be a validation process. Personally, I would vote against if there were no validation process because Obama and others would merely provide a fraudulent document.
Obama has refused to release his long form birth certificate. That's not a rumor, it is a well-known fact, though the long-discredited MSM propagandists won't touch the subject.
Typical response: B-b-but that doesn't mean he was born in Kenya!!!
Correct. Stop obsessing about Kenya and tell us why he won't release his long form birth certificate.
Agree with a previous post....just produce the dang thing and it all goes away.
Does anyone know what the vetting process is for a president? How many people and who is involved in this process? My sister insists he was vetted - I say he wasn’t.
There are excellent forensic validation methods available to confirm the authenticity of original documents (not copies.)
These must never be allowed to be applied by any government agency or government supported educational facilities.
I share your reservations about what can develop into a sad phony process of "Trust us, it's real,"
In 2008 that would have been true, but not now. The explanation he gives for his failure to release the long form is certain to cause problems, and the authenticity of the document will be doubted (to say the least.)
Here is what I think will happen: During the 2012 primaries a state will demand Obama's long form, and he will provide them with a COLB. The state's Secretary of State will say, "That's not good enough! Where's the long form?" Obama will answer, "The COLB will have to do, since Hawaii seems to have lost all my original birth documentation. I can't be held responsible for Hawaii's problems with record keeping." The MSM will strongly defend Obama's position, never mentioning that the birthers were proved right to have raised the issue. The states requiring a long form will cave, accepting the COLB as sufficient documentation of American birth.
LD 34
"An Act To Require Candidates for Public Office To Provide Proof of Citizenship"
Bill Summary
This bill requires candidates for public office to show proof of United States citizenship in the form of a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and the candidate's driver's license or other form of government-issued identification to the Secretary of State.
The Constitution says nothing about birth certificates and probably a large percentage of our presidents did not have birth certificates. I cannot conceive of an originalist like Justice Scalia ruling that the Founders intended that presidential qualifications be proved exclusively by county or state birth certificates.
Since you’re an originalist, can you conceive of the Founders sanctioning the acceptance of the offspring of a so stated African UK citizen being permitted to hold the highest office in the land? Especially, since the bloody memories of horrific suffering, horrendous bloodshed and loss in the Revolutionaly War with the Brits ?
1775 - John Jay:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
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.