It is a state by state election for a federal office, just as the house and senate elections are.
The people in the individual states choose representatives to an assembly that chooses the president.
A state is fully empowered to choose who is on it’s ballot.
*******
Yes. It seems reasonable and logical to me that it should be left up to each state---not the federal government---to require a presidential candidate to provide some type of legal document that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the presidential candidate is at least 35 years old and that he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution.
1. Right now, it seems that all a presidential candidate has to do to get on a political party primary ballot and on the presidential ballot in Nov. 2012 is to (1) raise his hand and swear before a witness or witnesses that he is eligible, and (2) sign an affidavit that he is at least 35 years old and that he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution. That is it. No wonder Obama was able to sneak onto each state's election ballot without any state officials challenging his birth and citizenship.
2. However, there doesn't seem to be any law in any state that says that the Secretary of State has to make a strong effort to make sure that the candidate is not lying about his past.
3. To me, that is wrong, because state officials should be required to be positively sure, beyone a shadow of a doubt, that the presidential candidate is not lying about his birth and citizenship.
4. So it seems to me that it is most reasonable and logical that the Secretary of State in each state should be able to legally require a presidential candidate to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is who he says is by providing a legal document---like a certified birth certificate from the state of his birth--- to the Secretary of State in each state.
5. And to make sure that the candidate has not tampered with his birth certificate, the birth certificate must come directly from the candidate's birth state with the state's seal and not from the candidate himself or from the candidate's campaign headquarters.
6. To me, the Arizona presidential eligibility law is a fair one, because it will insure that presidential candidates will have to provide legal proof that they are who they say they are for many presidential elections to come and long after Obama has gone.
I agree with you. Let’s shift the argument to a different qualification to make the same point. Say a candidate was suspected of being actually 33 or 34 years old. That candidate would have to provide proof of his birth to determin his age. I don’t see any difference. We wouldn’t just assume he was 35 based on family and newspaper postings.