Sun, 21 Nov 2010 12:51:11 +0000
Obama, you can run but you can’t hide.
Due to the unconscionable failure of Congress, state governments, and the Demonrat Party, you got away with not providing documentary proof of your constitutional eligibility to be President of the United State of America in 2008. But you will not in 2012!
Republican legislatures in four states — Texas, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona — have or plan to introduce bills that would require all candidates for president or vice president of the United States to show his or her birth certificate to be on the state ballot.
By Bob Unruh – WorldNetDaily – Nov 18, 2010
The GOP members of Congress who booted Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi from the speaker’s seat when they took the majority in the U.S. House this month may be the least of President Barack Obama’s concerns as the 2012 presidential campaign assembles.
That’s because in Pennsylvania, and in at least a couple of other states, there are Republican-controlled Houses, Senates and governors’ offices where being developed right now are plans to use state law to demand proof of constitutional eligibility from presidential candidates before they would be allowed on the state ballot.
From Pennsylvania, Georgia and Texas there already is confirmation of such plans. Arizona is likely to have the same plan, and other states are expected to be in the works as legislatures approach the dates when they will convene.
In Pennsylvania, there was excitement over the GOP majority of both houses of the state legislature as well as the governor’s office.
Assemblyman Daryl Metcalfe told WND he is preparing to circulate a memo among his fellow GOP lawmakers for cosponsors for his proposal that would demand documentation of constitutional eligibility. “We aren’t sworn in until Jan. 4,” he said. “Once we’re sworn in we’ll be introducing the legislation that would require presidential candidates to prove their natural born citizenship before they are allowed to file petitions to have their name on the state ballot.” He described it as a “problem” that there has been no established procedure for making sure that presidential candidates meet the Constitution’s requirements for age, residency and being a “natural born citizen.” “We hope we would be able to pass this legislation and put it into law before the next session,” he said. He said any one of the states imposing such a requirement would be effective in solving his concerns. “I think the public relations nightmare that would ensue if any candidate would thumb their noses at a single state would torpedo their campaign,” he told WND.
Another state that will be in play on the issue is Georgia, where Rep. Mark Hatfield confirmed to WND that he will have a similar proposal pending. He had introduced the legislation at the end of last year’s session to put fellow lawmakers on alert that the issue was coming.
“I do plan to reintroduce the bill,” he told WND today. “We’ll move forward with trying to get it before a committee.” In Georgia, Republicans hold majorities in both house of the legislature as well as “every constitutional statewide office,” he noted. “I would be optimistic that we can [adopt the legislation],” he said.
Hatfield said if only one or two states adopt such requirements, it readily will be apparent whether a candidate has issues with eligibility documentation or not. And while he noted a president could win a race without support from a specific state, a failure to qualify on the ballot “would give voters in other states pause, about whether or not a candidate is in fact qualified,” he said. “My goal is to make sure any person that aspires to be president meets the constitutional requirements,” he said. “This is a first step in that direction.”
It was last session when the Arizona House of Representatives adopted a provision that would have required documentation of eligibility from presidential candidates, but the measure died through the inaction of the state Senate in the closing days of the session. Sponsor Rep. Judy Burges told WND at the time that her plan would be renewed this session.
WND reported just days ago on a bill prefiled for the Texas Legislature by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, that would require such documentation. His effort was the first wave of a surging tide of developing questions that could be a hurdle to a second term for Obama, who escaped such demands last year when the Arizona Senate failed to act on a similar plan after the House approved it.
Berman’s legislation, House Bill 295, is brief and simple. It would add to the state election code the provision:
“The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate’s original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen.“
It includes an effective date of Sept. 1, 2011, in time for 2012 presidential campaigning.
Berman told WND he’s seen neither evidence nor indication that Obama qualifies under the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen,” a requirement not imposed on most other federal officers. “If the federal government is not going to vet these people, like they vetted John McCain, we’ll do it in our state,” he said. He noted the Senate’s investigation into McCain because of the Republican senator’s birth in Panama to military parents.
Berman also said there will be pressure on any lawmaker who opposes the bill, since voters would wonder why they wouldn’t want such basic data about a president revealed. And he said even if one state adopts the requirement, there will be national implications, because other states would be alerted to a possible problem.
“If Obama is going to run for re-election in 2012, he’ll have to show our secretary of state his birth certificate and prove he’s a natural-born citizen,” he said. “This is going to be significant.” Berman said he’s convinced there are problems with Obama’s eligibility, or else his handlers would not be so persistent in keeping the information concealed.
…much more continued at WND here