“....why would ANY state vote against requiring the Commander-in-Chief to prove they are constitutionally eligible to hold the highest office in the land.?”
Because they’ve been threatened. That’s what makes sense to me.
It seems like in a few of the other states, they were ready to go forward the “Birther Bills” and then all of a sudden they back off.
Thirteen states have tried. Most bills are stuck in committee.
HI - HB1116 Rida Cabanilla (D!) intro'd bill 1/11 to supply BC for "persons of civic prominence" upon request and $100 fee. OK - Failed in '08. Trying again as of 2/11. MO - Failed in '09. Trying again, HB 283 hearing held as of 3/1/11. TX - HB 295 intro'd 11/10, in committee as of 2/15 TN - SB 1043 intro'd 1/11, in committee as of 2/23. NE - LB 654(PDF doc), intro'd 1/11. Dying in committee? CT - SB 391 intro'd 1/11. In committee. IA - SF 369, intro'd 3/11. In committee. GA - Failed in '10. (HB 1516). Supposedly trying again in '11. Found no details. MT - HB 205 intro'd 1/11. "Missed Deadline for General Bill Transmittal" AZ - Failed in '10 - passed house, senate refused to vote. Tried in 2/11, died in senate committee. IN - Intro'd 1/11. Died in committee. NH - Intro'd 3/11. Died in committee.