This correspondence had an email, with a document attached to it. First the email:
------------
Mr. Sandler,
I've been told that you're office is the correct one to forward this correspondence to. Please find attached some questions regarding the potential release of documents to the public from the DNC. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Dear Mr. Sandler,
Please allow me to thank you for your prompt and courteous reply to my records request. While I disagree with your assessment of the situation, I respect your judgment, and will proceed with my inquiry through the proper channels.
I thank you for the information regarding the various State Party's Delegate Selection Plans for the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Please know that many of those documents have been reviewed by myself and other concerned citizens. We have also contacted a large number of Secretaries of State, who have unanimously told us that it is the legal responsibility of the political party to ensure that the candidates they put forth for election are legally qualified to serve in the office they are seeking; hence our decision to contact you.
I hope you won't consider it impertinent of me to ask you to clear up some confusion on my part. To the best of my knowledge, each of the State Party's Delegate Selection Plans must comply with the policies, procedures, and rules that are put forth in the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention that was adopted by the Democratic National Committee on August 19th of last year. In that document, under heading 12 (Presidential Preference), rule K, it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
This document leads me to believe that there are policies and procedures that have been established by the party in which a candidate is determined to be legally qualified to hold office. As far as I am able to determine, each of these necessary qualification could be established by the presentation of documentary evidence. I am hopeful that the party will be willing to share this information with the public because in the Delegate Selection Rules it also states, under the heading An Open Party: “The Democratic Party in each state should publicize fully and in such a manner as to assure notice to all interested parties a full description of the legal and practical procedures for selection of Democratic Party officers and representatives on all levels”. I have made this request of my state party, and was rebuffed – perhaps the national party organization is willing to receive a “full description of the legal and practical procedures” for the selection of the Democratic Party's presidential nominee for the office of President of the United States of America. Is there any circumstance under which the Democratic National Party would be willing to share this information with the public? Is there any circumstance under which the party would be willing to share with the public the evidence that was considered in making the determination that Mr. Obama was legally eligible to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution and the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention?
Finally, please know that I come to you in a spirit of cooperation and, hopefully, coordinated effort. I am anything but a litigious person, and am willing to exhaust any and all necessary efforts to bring this information to light before considering the option of petitioning the judicial branch of our governmental system. I wish you the very best, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
A Hand Delivered Letter to Nancy Pelosi?
I received an interesting letter from an an unnamed source today. This person wrote:
------------
If you want to draft a letter to NP (Nancy Pelosi) regarding the differences in the HI DNC Certification, I have someone who will hand-deliver this to NP in D.C.
------------
Obviously, I jumped at the offer. Here's the letter I wrote:
------------
January 2nd, 2009
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Washington, D.C. Office
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
202.225.4965
Congresswoman Pelosi,
First, please allow me the opportunity to wish you a Happy New Year, and express my gratitude for the chance to present this letter to you. I know that you are an extremely busy woman, and I will seek to be as brief and to the point as possible.
On the 22nd of December last year, I received a document from the Hawaii Office of Elections that included an Official Certification of Nomination from the Democratic Party that bears your signature on it. On that document, it states in part that: “the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States (referring to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively) are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” I was interested in this document because it was different from all the other Certifications of Nomination which I have received, which simply state that the candidates had been nominated at the convention. I am assuming that this difference is a result of Section 11-113 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which stipulates that the political party of a candidate must provide a statement that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
As I'm sure you know, there has been some concern on the part of the citizens of this country that Mr. Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President; and, as of yet, no evidence has been made available to the public that would allow for a determination of eligibility to be made. Because you signed your name to this document, I have been asked by other concerned citizens to make a request that you provide us access to and copies of any documents that you used when making a determination of eligibility regarding Mr. Obama's qualifications to serve as President of the United States of America.
Again, I thank you for your time, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
If I hear anything, I'll post it right away...
------------
If you want to draft a letter to NP (Nancy Pelosi) regarding the differences in the HI DNC Certification, I have someone who will hand-deliver this to NP in D.C.
------------
Obviously, I jumped at the offer. Here's the letter I wrote:
------------
January 2nd, 2009
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Washington, D.C. Office
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
202.225.4965
Congresswoman Pelosi,
First, please allow me the opportunity to wish you a Happy New Year, and express my gratitude for the chance to present this letter to you. I know that you are an extremely busy woman, and I will seek to be as brief and to the point as possible.
On the 22nd of December last year, I received a document from the Hawaii Office of Elections that included an Official Certification of Nomination from the Democratic Party that bears your signature on it. On that document, it states in part that: “the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States (referring to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively) are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” I was interested in this document because it was different from all the other Certifications of Nomination which I have received, which simply state that the candidates had been nominated at the convention. I am assuming that this difference is a result of Section 11-113 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which stipulates that the political party of a candidate must provide a statement that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
As I'm sure you know, there has been some concern on the part of the citizens of this country that Mr. Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President; and, as of yet, no evidence has been made available to the public that would allow for a determination of eligibility to be made. Because you signed your name to this document, I have been asked by other concerned citizens to make a request that you provide us access to and copies of any documents that you used when making a determination of eligibility regarding Mr. Obama's qualifications to serve as President of the United States of America.
Again, I thank you for your time, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
If I hear anything, I'll post it right away...
Response From the Democratic National Committee Regarding Document Request
Thanks to many new friends from the Plains Radio Network, I received a response to my document request today (note: the request came through others, not directly to my request). It looks like the request has been forwarded on to the legal department for review. Here's a sampling of the emails that were sent by the DNC to various petitioners (I've redacted the names of all senders for the privacy of those involved).
------------
Your request has been forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
and then:
Already received several duplicate copies. Forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
in response to a question about what department the correspondence was sent to, the DNC replied:
Legal.
------------
So we've made progress. We should hear back relatively soon, I would hope. I'll post something here as soon as there's news fit to print...
------------
Your request has been forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
and then:
Already received several duplicate copies. Forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
in response to a question about what department the correspondence was sent to, the DNC replied:
Legal.
------------
So we've made progress. We should hear back relatively soon, I would hope. I'll post something here as soon as there's news fit to print...
Request for Documents From Democratic National Party...
Although they aren't officially a public, governmental agency, I thought I would make a document request under the state open records act, and see what response I got. There is precedent for a private, non-profit organization being compelled to release information of this nature, so I would encourage anyone and everyone interested in this topic to send a similar request to the DNC:
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal information)
December 31, 2008
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Alice Travis Germond
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8000
germonda@dnc.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Democratic Party's 2008 Delegate Selection Plan in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the DNC Services Corporation is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 7th. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal information)
December 31, 2008
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Alice Travis Germond
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8000
germonda@dnc.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Democratic Party's 2008 Delegate Selection Plan in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the DNC Services Corporation is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 7th. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner
John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi signed the Hawaii Certification of Nominations. I wrote them through their Congressional offices.
------------
On the 4th of September, 2008, Mr. Boehner signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that John McCain met the Constitutional requirements for holding the office of President. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Mr. Boehner was presented with that allowed him to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 28th of August, 2008, Ms. Pelosi signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that Barack Obama was legally qualified to hold the office of President under the provisions of the Constitution. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Ms. Pelosi was presented with that allowed her to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 4th of September, 2008, Mr. Boehner signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that John McCain met the Constitutional requirements for holding the office of President. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Mr. Boehner was presented with that allowed him to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 28th of August, 2008, Ms. Pelosi signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that Barack Obama was legally qualified to hold the office of President under the provisions of the Constitution. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Ms. Pelosi was presented with that allowed her to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
Lynne Matusow, Secretary of the Hawaiian Democratic Party
Ms. Matusow,
Hi! My name is Justin Riggs, and I'm writing you from Denver, Colorado, mainland USA. I've been working on a research project for about a month now, and am hoping that you might be able to help me put one more piece of the puzzle together.
My project has centered around how presidential candidates gain access to the general election ballot in various states. Over the past month, I've contacted nearly every Secretary of State's office in the country, and been lucky enough to receive answers to my questions from nearly all of them. Hawaii has been my latest project, and I'm contacting you because your name was on one of the documents sent to me by Kevin Cronin, the Chief Election Officer in the Office of Elections of Hawaii.
As you may or may not know, Hawaii is a bit different than most other states in that it requires the political party of the candidate to declare that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the Constitution.
Where I'm hoping you can help me is in providing me with a small description of how you and the Hawaii state parties determine whether or not the candidate meets this criteria.
I want to thank you in advance for your time, and sincerely wish you a happy holiday season. I look forward to your response, and hope that you might be able to help me finish off my research project strong!
Thanks again,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Hi! My name is Justin Riggs, and I'm writing you from Denver, Colorado, mainland USA. I've been working on a research project for about a month now, and am hoping that you might be able to help me put one more piece of the puzzle together.
My project has centered around how presidential candidates gain access to the general election ballot in various states. Over the past month, I've contacted nearly every Secretary of State's office in the country, and been lucky enough to receive answers to my questions from nearly all of them. Hawaii has been my latest project, and I'm contacting you because your name was on one of the documents sent to me by Kevin Cronin, the Chief Election Officer in the Office of Elections of Hawaii.
As you may or may not know, Hawaii is a bit different than most other states in that it requires the political party of the candidate to declare that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the Constitution.
Where I'm hoping you can help me is in providing me with a small description of how you and the Hawaii state parties determine whether or not the candidate meets this criteria.
I want to thank you in advance for your time, and sincerely wish you a happy holiday season. I look forward to your response, and hope that you might be able to help me finish off my research project strong!
Thanks again,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Hawaii Answers TWO of My Questions
Today was a landmark day in my search. Hawaii has answered two of the questions I originally asked.
1) WHO was responsible for ensuring that our presidential candidate's were eligible?
For the Republicans, the answer to that question is 1) John Boehner, Chairman of the Republican National Convention, 2) Jean A. Inman, Secretary of the Republican National Convention, and 3) Willes K. Lee, Chairman of the Republican Party of Hawaii.
For the Democrats, it was 1) Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, 2) Alice Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention 3) Brian E. Schatz, Chair of the Democratic Party of Hawaii, and 4) Lynne Matusow, Secretary of the Democratic Party of Hawaii.
2) WHEN was the final determination regarding the presidential candidates eligibility made?
For the Republicans, the date was September 4th, 2008.
For the Democrats, the date was the 28th of August.
This only leaves us with one final question to answer:
3) WHAT EVIDENCE did the candidates provide to the above named officials which allowed a determination of eligibility to be made? At least we know who to ask!
I've attached the documents for you to review, and wish to express again my thanks for Hawaiian officials, who have been more than helpful during my correspondence with them.
Hawaii - Dems and Repubs Say Constitutionally Eligible
1) WHO was responsible for ensuring that our presidential candidate's were eligible?
For the Republicans, the answer to that question is 1) John Boehner, Chairman of the Republican National Convention, 2) Jean A. Inman, Secretary of the Republican National Convention, and 3) Willes K. Lee, Chairman of the Republican Party of Hawaii.
For the Democrats, it was 1) Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, 2) Alice Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention 3) Brian E. Schatz, Chair of the Democratic Party of Hawaii, and 4) Lynne Matusow, Secretary of the Democratic Party of Hawaii.
2) WHEN was the final determination regarding the presidential candidates eligibility made?
For the Republicans, the date was September 4th, 2008.
For the Democrats, the date was the 28th of August.
This only leaves us with one final question to answer:
3) WHAT EVIDENCE did the candidates provide to the above named officials which allowed a determination of eligibility to be made? At least we know who to ask!
I've attached the documents for you to review, and wish to express again my thanks for Hawaiian officials, who have been more than helpful during my correspondence with them.
Hawaii - Dems and Repubs Say Constitutionally Eligible
Question Regarding Filing a Complaint Against State Political Parties
Although I am loathe to travel this road, the political parties seem resistant to releasing what ought to be simple, factual information. Today, I opened a correspondence with Troy Bratton, a Legal Specialist with the Colorado Secretary of State's office, in regards to how one would file a complaint against the political parties. Here is the correspondence, in full:
------------
Ms. Geiger,
In an email communication, the Colorado Secretary of State's office is quoted as saying:
"The Colorado Secretary of State's office, has received numerous calls and emails inquiring into the procedures undertaken to ensure that presidential candidates are qualified to be placed on the ballot. This email is intended to answer your questions regarding the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States.First, please understand that, pursuant to Colorado statute, the process of nominating and certifying presidential candidates to the ballot is party-oriented; candidates are certified to the state and, therefore, the legal responsibility for confirming citizenship (or any other qualification) lies with the certifying entity.Any questions regarding the qualifications of a presidential candidate should be directed to the parties, who are the certifying entities in this case."
I have directed my questions to the parties, and they have, unfortunately, been unresponsive to my requests for information. I would now like to inquire as to how I might file an official complaint against the parties, and perhaps open an investigation into whether or not they performed their "legal responsibility" of confirming their presidential candidate's qualifications before certifying him to the state. Any help you might be able to offer in regards to this unpleasant business is gratefully received.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Mr. Riggs:
Because the legal dispute appears to be between you and the parties, I recommend that you consult an attorney for legal advice on how to proceed. This office is unable to provide you with legal advice on how to file a protest regarding the certification of candidates by a political party. Further, as expressed in the original email response from this office, the proper forum for complaints is the district court, not the Secretary of State’s office. As such, this office lacks the authority to investigate the certification of candidates by a political party. Please see sections 1-4-501(3) and 1-4-909, C.R.S., for more information.
------------
Mr. Bratton, et al...
Thank you for your timely response to my question. However, I'm not sure I made myself very clear in my previous message.
I am not a litigous man, and don't have the time, energy or resources to pursue this matter in a court of any kind. I am not seeking legal advice from your office - I simply want to know where I can file a *complaint* against the parties, claiming that that they didn't perform the duties prescribed to them by the Secretary of State's office.
In other words, I don't want to challenge the candidate's eligibility - that would be foolish, as I don't know if the candidate is eligible, because if the parties checked the candidates' qualifications, they won't release a) who did it, b) when it was done, or c) what evidence was provided by the candidate to the party that allowed the party to decide that the candidate was eligible.
The Secretary of State's office is on the record as stating that it is the "legal responsibility" of the party to confirm the qualifications of their candidates before certifying them to the state. If this is the case, surely there is an enforcement mechanism in place, and an authorized body that has been established to investigate such complaints as the one I propose..
Again, I am not challenging any candidate's eligibility - I am complaining that, to the best of my knowledge, the state parties did not perform their legal duty to check those same candidates' qualifications - or that if they did, they will not release the pertinent information to the public.
Sorry for the confusion, and I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Please see below:
1-1-113. Neglect of duty and wrongful acts - procedures for adjudication of controversies -
review by supreme court.
(1) When any controversy arises between any official charged with any duty
or function under this code and any candidate, or any officers or representatives of a political party, or
any persons who have made nominations or when any eligible elector files a verified petition in a district
court of competent jurisdiction alleging that a person charged with a duty under this code has committed
or is about to commit a breach or neglect of duty or other wrongful act, after notice to the official which
includes an opportunity to be heard, upon a finding of good cause, the district court shall issue an order
requiring substantial compliance with the provisions of this code. The order shall require the person
charged to forthwith perform the duty or to desist from the wrongful act or to forthwith show cause why
the order should not be obeyed. The burden of proof is on the petitioner.
(2) The petitioner shall be required to deposit in court the statutory witness fees pursuant to section
13-33-102, C.R.S., for each person cited or summoned into court as a party or a witness, to be paid to the
party or witness if the charge is not sustained. The money so deposited shall be returned to the party
depositing it if any of the charges are sustained.
(3) The proceedings may be reviewed and finally adjudicated by the supreme court of this state, if
either party makes application to the supreme court within three days after the district court proceedings
are terminated, unless the supreme court, in its discretion, declines jurisdiction of the case. If the
supreme court declines to review the proceedings, the decision of the district court shall be final and not
subject to further appellate review.
(4) Except as otherwise provided in this part 1, the procedure specified in this section shall be the
exclusive method for the adjudication of controversies arising from a breach or neglect of duty or other
wrongful act that occurs prior to the day of an election.
(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the procedures specified in section 1-1.5-105 shall
constitute the exclusive administrative remedy for a complaint arising under title III of the federal "Help
America Vote Act of 2002", Pub.L. 107-252.
Thank you.
------------
Mr. Bratton,
One final question: In the Secretary of State's communication, it refers to "the party" and "the parties", but does not specify whether it is referring to the state organization and/or the national organization. Is it the Secretary of State's official position that the legal responsibility for checking the candidate's qualifications lies at the feet of the state or the national party organization?
Thanks again...
Justin
------------
I am disheartened by the fact that the only opportunity I have to file a grievance is through a court of law. I do not want to clog our system with a case that ought to be handled with a simple, straightforward answer.
As of yet, I have not decided what to do. I will, of course, post when I make a final determination.
------------
Ms. Geiger,
In an email communication, the Colorado Secretary of State's office is quoted as saying:
"The Colorado Secretary of State's office, has received numerous calls and emails inquiring into the procedures undertaken to ensure that presidential candidates are qualified to be placed on the ballot. This email is intended to answer your questions regarding the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States.First, please understand that, pursuant to Colorado statute, the process of nominating and certifying presidential candidates to the ballot is party-oriented; candidates are certified to the state and, therefore, the legal responsibility for confirming citizenship (or any other qualification) lies with the certifying entity.Any questions regarding the qualifications of a presidential candidate should be directed to the parties, who are the certifying entities in this case."
I have directed my questions to the parties, and they have, unfortunately, been unresponsive to my requests for information. I would now like to inquire as to how I might file an official complaint against the parties, and perhaps open an investigation into whether or not they performed their "legal responsibility" of confirming their presidential candidate's qualifications before certifying him to the state. Any help you might be able to offer in regards to this unpleasant business is gratefully received.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Mr. Riggs:
Because the legal dispute appears to be between you and the parties, I recommend that you consult an attorney for legal advice on how to proceed. This office is unable to provide you with legal advice on how to file a protest regarding the certification of candidates by a political party. Further, as expressed in the original email response from this office, the proper forum for complaints is the district court, not the Secretary of State’s office. As such, this office lacks the authority to investigate the certification of candidates by a political party. Please see sections 1-4-501(3) and 1-4-909, C.R.S., for more information.
------------
Mr. Bratton, et al...
Thank you for your timely response to my question. However, I'm not sure I made myself very clear in my previous message.
I am not a litigous man, and don't have the time, energy or resources to pursue this matter in a court of any kind. I am not seeking legal advice from your office - I simply want to know where I can file a *complaint* against the parties, claiming that that they didn't perform the duties prescribed to them by the Secretary of State's office.
In other words, I don't want to challenge the candidate's eligibility - that would be foolish, as I don't know if the candidate is eligible, because if the parties checked the candidates' qualifications, they won't release a) who did it, b) when it was done, or c) what evidence was provided by the candidate to the party that allowed the party to decide that the candidate was eligible.
The Secretary of State's office is on the record as stating that it is the "legal responsibility" of the party to confirm the qualifications of their candidates before certifying them to the state. If this is the case, surely there is an enforcement mechanism in place, and an authorized body that has been established to investigate such complaints as the one I propose..
Again, I am not challenging any candidate's eligibility - I am complaining that, to the best of my knowledge, the state parties did not perform their legal duty to check those same candidates' qualifications - or that if they did, they will not release the pertinent information to the public.
Sorry for the confusion, and I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Please see below:
1-1-113. Neglect of duty and wrongful acts - procedures for adjudication of controversies -
review by supreme court.
(1) When any controversy arises between any official charged with any duty
or function under this code and any candidate, or any officers or representatives of a political party, or
any persons who have made nominations or when any eligible elector files a verified petition in a district
court of competent jurisdiction alleging that a person charged with a duty under this code has committed
or is about to commit a breach or neglect of duty or other wrongful act, after notice to the official which
includes an opportunity to be heard, upon a finding of good cause, the district court shall issue an order
requiring substantial compliance with the provisions of this code. The order shall require the person
charged to forthwith perform the duty or to desist from the wrongful act or to forthwith show cause why
the order should not be obeyed. The burden of proof is on the petitioner.
(2) The petitioner shall be required to deposit in court the statutory witness fees pursuant to section
13-33-102, C.R.S., for each person cited or summoned into court as a party or a witness, to be paid to the
party or witness if the charge is not sustained. The money so deposited shall be returned to the party
depositing it if any of the charges are sustained.
(3) The proceedings may be reviewed and finally adjudicated by the supreme court of this state, if
either party makes application to the supreme court within three days after the district court proceedings
are terminated, unless the supreme court, in its discretion, declines jurisdiction of the case. If the
supreme court declines to review the proceedings, the decision of the district court shall be final and not
subject to further appellate review.
(4) Except as otherwise provided in this part 1, the procedure specified in this section shall be the
exclusive method for the adjudication of controversies arising from a breach or neglect of duty or other
wrongful act that occurs prior to the day of an election.
(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the procedures specified in section 1-1.5-105 shall
constitute the exclusive administrative remedy for a complaint arising under title III of the federal "Help
America Vote Act of 2002", Pub.L. 107-252.
Thank you.
------------
Mr. Bratton,
One final question: In the Secretary of State's communication, it refers to "the party" and "the parties", but does not specify whether it is referring to the state organization and/or the national organization. Is it the Secretary of State's official position that the legal responsibility for checking the candidate's qualifications lies at the feet of the state or the national party organization?
Thanks again...
Justin
------------
I am disheartened by the fact that the only opportunity I have to file a grievance is through a court of law. I do not want to clog our system with a case that ought to be handled with a simple, straightforward answer.
As of yet, I have not decided what to do. I will, of course, post when I make a final determination.
Labels:
Colorado,
Constitution,
Democrats,
election,
eligibility,
President,
Republicans,
Secretary of State,
State
Colorado Democratic Party Legal Counsel
If I was going to contact the Republican Party's legal counsel, I decided I'd better contact the Democratic Party's, too. Here's the letter:
------------
Ms. Tierney,
I hope that my information is correct, and that you are still affiliated with the Colorado Democratic Party as part of their legal team. If not, please accept my apologies.
I am writing you in response to an email message that has been circulated by the Colorado Secretary of State's office stating:
"pursuant to Colorado statute, the process of nominating and certifying presidential candidates to the ballot is party-oriented; candidates are certified to the state and, therefore, the legal responsibility for confirming (the qualifications of a candidate) lies with the certifying entity. (my parantheses)Any questions regarding the qualifications of a presidential candidate should be directed to the parties, who are the certifying entities in this case."
Since the SoS' office used the term legal, I assume you would be the person to answer my questions.
In researching who determines whether or not a presidential candidate is eligible to hold office, I came across the following information in your party's 2008 Delegate Selection Rules:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
So it appears that the Democratic Party has some rather stringent requirements regarding who can and cannot represent the party as a presidential candidate - more stringent than the Constitution itself! My questions, then, are these:
1) Who in the Democratic Party is responsible for making sure that a presidential candidate meets all the requirements set out in the above quoted text?
2) When did the qualification process for presidential candidates take place during the 2008 election cycle?
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate to the party that allows the party to make a final determination regarding the eligibility of a presidential candidate? Is any of that documentation available to the public? If so, how would one go about requesting it?
4) Is there some sort of document that the party leadership signs that states, in effect, "this candidate is qualified to hold the office he/she is running for"? Again, where might I find a copy of such a document, should it exist?
I thank you for your time and attention to these questions. I congratulate the Democratic Party on their recent success, and wish you all the best as you attempt to govern our country through these difficult and perilous times.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Ms. Tierney,
I hope that my information is correct, and that you are still affiliated with the Colorado Democratic Party as part of their legal team. If not, please accept my apologies.
I am writing you in response to an email message that has been circulated by the Colorado Secretary of State's office stating:
"pursuant to Colorado statute, the process of nominating and certifying presidential candidates to the ballot is party-oriented; candidates are certified to the state and, therefore, the legal responsibility for confirming (the qualifications of a candidate) lies with the certifying entity. (my parantheses)Any questions regarding the qualifications of a presidential candidate should be directed to the parties, who are the certifying entities in this case."
Since the SoS' office used the term legal, I assume you would be the person to answer my questions.
In researching who determines whether or not a presidential candidate is eligible to hold office, I came across the following information in your party's 2008 Delegate Selection Rules:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
So it appears that the Democratic Party has some rather stringent requirements regarding who can and cannot represent the party as a presidential candidate - more stringent than the Constitution itself! My questions, then, are these:
1) Who in the Democratic Party is responsible for making sure that a presidential candidate meets all the requirements set out in the above quoted text?
2) When did the qualification process for presidential candidates take place during the 2008 election cycle?
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate to the party that allows the party to make a final determination regarding the eligibility of a presidential candidate? Is any of that documentation available to the public? If so, how would one go about requesting it?
4) Is there some sort of document that the party leadership signs that states, in effect, "this candidate is qualified to hold the office he/she is running for"? Again, where might I find a copy of such a document, should it exist?
I thank you for your time and attention to these questions. I congratulate the Democratic Party on their recent success, and wish you all the best as you attempt to govern our country through these difficult and perilous times.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Colorado Democratic Party Chair States, "(Obama) qualified as a U.S. citizen (While Running for Senator and President) by virtue of his BC"
I've had on again/ off again correspondence with Patricia Waak, Chair of the Colorado Democratic Party. I hadn't received a suitable answer to my questions to her, so I renewed our correspondence today. Her reply certainly surprised me:
------------
Ms. Waak,
I have reviewed the documentation you referred me to, and don't see the answer to my questions. Could you please provide me with further guidance in this matter? Again, my questions are:
1) The Colorado Secretary of State is on the record stating that it is the legal responsibility of the state party to check the candidate's qualifications before certifying the name of the candidate to the state. Who in your organization was responsible for checking Mr. Obama's credentials (this might be somebody from the national party who informed your office of his eligibility?)?
2) When did the qualification process take place?
3) What evidence was provided by Mr. Obama that allowed a determination of eligibility to be made?
I am certain that this process occured, because in the 2008 Delegate Selection Plan it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
This means that before the nomination occured, somebody checked Mr. Obama's qualifications ("all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall" meet the requirements the DNC specifies). I'm simply trying to ascertain WHO performed this check, WHEN it was done, and WHAT EVIDENCE was provided by the candidate.
Because of the legal nature of these questions, I understand your reticence to answer them. If there is a staff lawyer in your office, or somebody from the national party that would be better qualified (or authorized) to discuss these matters, I would be happy to speak with them instead.
I thank you for your time, and wish you the best during this busy holiday season.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Pat Waak pwaak@coloradodems.org
Subject: Re: Renewed request for information...
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Cc: "Sherry Jackson" sjackson@coloradodems.org
Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 3:45 PM
Mr. Riggs,
Sen. Obama has run for office numerous times and qualified as a U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth certificate. He was certified as a candidate under Federal Election Commission law, both during his Senate run and his Presidential contest. If you would like more information on specifics, please contact the Democratic National Committee.
P. Waak
------------
Ms. Waak,
I understand that Mr. Obama has qualified as a citizen to run for various offices, but to become President, he must be a "natural-born" citizen, which is a different requirement altogether. If he qualified to run by virtue of his birth certificate, I would very much like to know where a copy of that document resides, so that I can view it along with the rest of the paperwork he filed.
I would definitely like more specifics, but don't know how to get anyone from the Democratic National Committee to respond to my messages (I've sent them pretty much the same messages I've sent you). Perhaps you could provide an introduction for me, so that both of our problems go away? :)
I'm sorry to bother you - I'm not seeking to make enemies. I am determined to get an answer to these questions, however - I feel it lies within my rights as a citizen of Colorado and the United States of America.
I thank you for the information you've provided so far, and hope to resolve this issue quickly so that we both might go about our normal business.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Ms. Waak,
I have reviewed the documentation you referred me to, and don't see the answer to my questions. Could you please provide me with further guidance in this matter? Again, my questions are:
1) The Colorado Secretary of State is on the record stating that it is the legal responsibility of the state party to check the candidate's qualifications before certifying the name of the candidate to the state. Who in your organization was responsible for checking Mr. Obama's credentials (this might be somebody from the national party who informed your office of his eligibility?)?
2) When did the qualification process take place?
3) What evidence was provided by Mr. Obama that allowed a determination of eligibility to be made?
I am certain that this process occured, because in the 2008 Delegate Selection Plan it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
This means that before the nomination occured, somebody checked Mr. Obama's qualifications ("all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall" meet the requirements the DNC specifies). I'm simply trying to ascertain WHO performed this check, WHEN it was done, and WHAT EVIDENCE was provided by the candidate.
Because of the legal nature of these questions, I understand your reticence to answer them. If there is a staff lawyer in your office, or somebody from the national party that would be better qualified (or authorized) to discuss these matters, I would be happy to speak with them instead.
I thank you for your time, and wish you the best during this busy holiday season.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Pat Waak pwaak@coloradodems.org
Subject: Re: Renewed request for information...
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Cc: "Sherry Jackson" sjackson@coloradodems.org
Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 3:45 PM
Mr. Riggs,
Sen. Obama has run for office numerous times and qualified as a U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth certificate. He was certified as a candidate under Federal Election Commission law, both during his Senate run and his Presidential contest. If you would like more information on specifics, please contact the Democratic National Committee.
P. Waak
------------
Ms. Waak,
I understand that Mr. Obama has qualified as a citizen to run for various offices, but to become President, he must be a "natural-born" citizen, which is a different requirement altogether. If he qualified to run by virtue of his birth certificate, I would very much like to know where a copy of that document resides, so that I can view it along with the rest of the paperwork he filed.
I would definitely like more specifics, but don't know how to get anyone from the Democratic National Committee to respond to my messages (I've sent them pretty much the same messages I've sent you). Perhaps you could provide an introduction for me, so that both of our problems go away? :)
I'm sorry to bother you - I'm not seeking to make enemies. I am determined to get an answer to these questions, however - I feel it lies within my rights as a citizen of Colorado and the United States of America.
I thank you for the information you've provided so far, and hope to resolve this issue quickly so that we both might go about our normal business.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
A Former Democratic Party Committee Chairman
I've had a hard time getting through to the national level of the Democratic so far, so today I decided to find a former chairman and pose my questions to him/her. The person I found was Terry McCauliffe. Here is the message I sent him:
-----------
Mr. McCauliffe,
I work for a small blog called www.yourfellowcitizen.com that is dedicated to answering the questions:
1) Who verifies that presidential candidates are eligible to hold the office they're running for?
2) When does the verification process take place? and
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate that allows a determination of eligibility to be made?
As a former Democratic National Committee Chairman, I was hoping you might be able to answer some of these questions for me and my audience.
In the 2008 Delegate Selection Plan it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
Obviously, if the party has requirements, I am sure they also have an enforcement mechanism in place to make sure those requirements are met. My reading of this particular clause leads me to believe that the candidate's qualifications must be verified sometime after he/she officially becomes a candidate (filing with the FEC?) and sometime before he/she is nominated. I say this because the above clause specifically says that "all candidates for the nomination shall" have met those requirements.
Any insights you might be able to offer into this process would be most appreciated. I thank you for your time, and for your consideration of my request.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
-----------
Mr. McCauliffe,
I work for a small blog called www.yourfellowcitizen.com that is dedicated to answering the questions:
1) Who verifies that presidential candidates are eligible to hold the office they're running for?
2) When does the verification process take place? and
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate that allows a determination of eligibility to be made?
As a former Democratic National Committee Chairman, I was hoping you might be able to answer some of these questions for me and my audience.
In the 2008 Delegate Selection Plan it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the
criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic
nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements
set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
Obviously, if the party has requirements, I am sure they also have an enforcement mechanism in place to make sure those requirements are met. My reading of this particular clause leads me to believe that the candidate's qualifications must be verified sometime after he/she officially becomes a candidate (filing with the FEC?) and sometime before he/she is nominated. I say this because the above clause specifically says that "all candidates for the nomination shall" have met those requirements.
Any insights you might be able to offer into this process would be most appreciated. I thank you for your time, and for your consideration of my request.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Obama's 'About the Issues'
The Democratic National Committee has a link on their site where people can ask questions about "the issues" - so I asked mine:
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
As you know both John McCain and Barack Obama have had their eligibility for office questioned during this election cycle.
My question is this: What is the process for checking a presidential candidate's qualifications? Who is responsible for doing this? When is it done? What evidence is provided by the candidate that establishes eligibility? Clearly, some process took place - otherwise, it would impossible to certify these candidates as eligible, would it not?
I am most grateful for your time and attention, and eagerly look forward to your response.
Sincerely, Your Fellow Citizen, Justin W. Riggs
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
As you know both John McCain and Barack Obama have had their eligibility for office questioned during this election cycle.
My question is this: What is the process for checking a presidential candidate's qualifications? Who is responsible for doing this? When is it done? What evidence is provided by the candidate that establishes eligibility? Clearly, some process took place - otherwise, it would impossible to certify these candidates as eligible, would it not?
I am most grateful for your time and attention, and eagerly look forward to your response.
Sincerely, Your Fellow Citizen, Justin W. Riggs
Thank you to South Carolina
Today I received the document that Carol Fowler had promised me. It is signed by Barack Obama, and states that he is eligible to hold the office of President. It will be posted at http://www.therightsideoflife.com no later than tomorrow evening - probably sometime before noon, if I can get it scanned in the morning.
I just wanted to thank Ms. Fowler for keeping her word. I greatly appreciate it.
I just wanted to thank Ms. Fowler for keeping her word. I greatly appreciate it.
Interesting Arkansas Law...
I found a very interesting law in the Code of Arkansas, and wanted to ask the Democratic Party Secretary about it. Here's the email I sent:
Ms. Binns,
According to 7-7-301.Party pledges and party filing fees of the Arkansas Code,
"(b)(1)Before the name of any person shall appear on the primary ballot of a political party as a candidate for any local, state, or federal office, the secretary of the county committee or the secretary of the state committee, as the case may be, of the political party must make an affirmative determination that the person complies with the eligibility requirements of the office."
As you know, the qualification requirements for the office of President are set out in Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution. In addition to these requirements, the Democratic Party has additional requirements that must be met by the candidate (2008 Delegate Selection Plan).
At this time, I am requesting that you provide me with a short description of the steps you took as you made an "affirmative determination" that Barack Obama and John McCain comply with the eligibility requirements of the office of President of the United States. I am also requesting a list and copies of any and all documents you reviewed as part of your process for determining that the candidates were eligible.
I thank you for your cooperation in this matter, as well as for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin
Ms. Binns,
According to 7-7-301.Party pledges and party filing fees of the Arkansas Code,
"(b)(1)Before the name of any person shall appear on the primary ballot of a political party as a candidate for any local, state, or federal office, the secretary of the county committee or the secretary of the state committee, as the case may be, of the political party must make an affirmative determination that the person complies with the eligibility requirements of the office."
As you know, the qualification requirements for the office of President are set out in Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution. In addition to these requirements, the Democratic Party has additional requirements that must be met by the candidate (2008 Delegate Selection Plan).
At this time, I am requesting that you provide me with a short description of the steps you took as you made an "affirmative determination" that Barack Obama and John McCain comply with the eligibility requirements of the office of President of the United States. I am also requesting a list and copies of any and all documents you reviewed as part of your process for determining that the candidates were eligible.
I thank you for your cooperation in this matter, as well as for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin
The Complete Correspondence With South Carolina
Today, Ms. Carol Fowler made good on her promise to fax me the document that she signed, certifying to the state that Mr. Obama is eligible to hold the office of President. I don't yet have the document in my possession, but I expect to have it either tomorrow or Monday. At that time, I will scan it and have it posted on http://www.therightsideoflife.com. In the meantime, I am posting the entire correspondence between Ms. Fowler and I.
I would be remiss if I didn't thank the fine lady for honoring her word; particularly when it seems that she might feel that I am out to undermine her and her candidate. I respect her integrity in this matter, and thank her sincerely.
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 12:07 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Chairwoman Fowler,
According to a document from you to the South Carolina Election Commission dated August 14, 2008, you stated that:
"In accordance with South Carolina Code of Laws 7-13-350 and 7-11-15, as amended, the South Carolina Democratic Party is pleased to submit our list of Democratic candidates for the 2008 general election ballot.
The South Carolina Democratic Party certifies that each candidate meets, or will meet by the time of the general election, or as otherwise required by law, the qualifications for the office for which he/she has filed.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 803-799-7798."
Instead of contacting your office by phone, I thought email might be more convenient. I have three questions that I hope you might be able to answer for me:
1) What individual or group of individuals was legally responsible for certifying that Barack Obama was and is eligible to hold the office of President?
2) Will you please provide a detailed chronology of the certification process, including the date and time that the final determination to certify was made?
3) Will you please provide a complete list of all documentary evidence that was required from then-Senator Obama by your office in regards to the certification process?
If for any reason you cannot provide some or all of the information I have requested, please provide specific and detailed reasoning as to why that information was not or may not be released to the public.
I respectfully request that a written response be sent to this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) no later than 12:00 pm, Thursday December the 4th, and thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 8:15 AM
Where in SC are you?
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 11:33 AMTo: Carol FowlerSubject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Ms. Fowler,
Thank you very much for your prompt reply to my message. I sincerely appreciate it.
I'm not located in South Carolina. I am from Denver, CO. I've been researching the issue of how Presidential candidates get certified as eligible since I learned that both John McCain and Barack Obama had their qualifications questioned during this latest campaign. This is non-partisan, personal research that I'm conducting.
During my research, I've contacted electors, government officials, and party representatives (from both major political parties) from several states, and not had any problem in having documents released to me. In this case, do I need to find a proxy from South Carolina to make the request for me? I'd be happy to do so, if need be.
Again, I thank you for your prompt reply, and look forward to meeting whatever requirements need to be met in order to receive the documents I've requested.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 9:33 AM
The only documentation our state law requires is that the candidate (for any office) certify to the party that he or she meets the requirements of the office.
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 12:33 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Interesting! Could I have you send me an electronic copy of the document where President-Elect Obama certified to you that he meets the requirements of the office?
Thanks again - I appreciate you taking the time to help.
Justin
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 2:23 PM
I can fax it to you when I get a chance. What's the number?
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:15 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Ms. Fowler,
I'm sorry it took me awhile to get back to you. I had to track down a fax machine that could accept a fax without me standing right next to it.
Here's the number you can fax the document(s) to: (303) 873-6101. Just put it to my attention. I understand that you must be very busy, but I request that you please try to fax it by the close of business on December 2nd.. Please let me know if that doesn't fit with your schedule.
I don't want you to feel like I'm backing you into a corner, but I'm also interested in getting answers to the original questions I asked. In particular, I'd like to know who in your office has the legal responsibility for certifying the candidates. I simply haven't been able to answer this question up to this point, but certainly someone carries the responsibility.
One last thing (I hope). Could you provide me with a reference to the state law that you referred to earlier in our conversation? You said:
"The only documentation our state law requires is that the candidate (for any office) certify to the party that he or she meets the requirements of the office."
If you could provide me the statute number, it would save me a great deal of time.
Once again, thank you for your help.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Ms. Fowler,
To the best of my knowledge, the document you have promised to fax me has not yet arrived. At the very least, could you please provide me a timeline as to when I can expect to see it? Ideally, I would request that you provide it to me by the end of business today.
Thank you for your attention to this matter...
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:50 PM
I will fax it in a few minutes.
I have legal responsibility for certifying candidates to the state for inclusion on the ballot. You will have to research the law yourself, as I don't have time to do that. But I can tell you that presidential qualifications are a federal, not state, issue. Nothing in SC law, whether or not it was followed in this case (which it was) will disqualify Barack Obama.
------------
Wonderful.
Thank you very much. I certainly don't expect you to research the law for me! I'm becoming fairly proficient at that myself, so I'll do it when I get some free time.
You say that "presidential qualifications are a federal, not a state, issue". I have no reason not to believe you. Since you seem to possess some knowledge on the subject, could you point me towards whom in the federal government might be responsible for checking Presidential candidates' qualifications? That would be a GREAT help.
Finally, I am very sorry that you believe that I am out to disqualify Barack Obama. That is NOT my inent. While I was drawn to this issue because of the questions surrounding Mr. Obama's eligibility, I am neither pro nor anti-Obama. I am an unaffiliated voter who is decidedly pro-Constitution, and I am gravely concerned in that it appears our Presidential candidates are not having their qualifications checked against those those our Constitution lays out for them. The MINUTE I have an answer to these questions:
a) WHO is responsible for ensuring that our Presidential candidates meet the Constitutional requirements for holding office?
b) WHEN does the certification process take place? and
c) WHAT EVIDENCE is provided by the candidate to the official responsible for certification, so that the certifier can declare the candidate eligible in good faith?
then I will disappear back into the ether, content that my Constitution has been followed. Until then, I'm afraid I can't rest easy - and I would hope, neither can you.
As for Mr. Obama, I have NO reason to believe that he is not eligible. Serious allegations have been leveled at him, but my efforts could equally be seen as PRO-Obama. After all, if he was properly certified, then SOMEBODY certified him SOMEWHERE, and EVIDENCE exists that he meets the qualifications set out in the Constitution. I'm just trying to locate that information.
I thank you again for your cooperation. If you come across any further information that you feel may help me answer my questions, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward that information on to me through this email address.
All my best to you and yours during this wonderful holiday season...
Respectfully Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
I would be remiss if I didn't thank the fine lady for honoring her word; particularly when it seems that she might feel that I am out to undermine her and her candidate. I respect her integrity in this matter, and thank her sincerely.
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 12:07 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Chairwoman Fowler,
According to a document from you to the South Carolina Election Commission dated August 14, 2008, you stated that:
"In accordance with South Carolina Code of Laws 7-13-350 and 7-11-15, as amended, the South Carolina Democratic Party is pleased to submit our list of Democratic candidates for the 2008 general election ballot.
The South Carolina Democratic Party certifies that each candidate meets, or will meet by the time of the general election, or as otherwise required by law, the qualifications for the office for which he/she has filed.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 803-799-7798."
Instead of contacting your office by phone, I thought email might be more convenient. I have three questions that I hope you might be able to answer for me:
1) What individual or group of individuals was legally responsible for certifying that Barack Obama was and is eligible to hold the office of President?
2) Will you please provide a detailed chronology of the certification process, including the date and time that the final determination to certify was made?
3) Will you please provide a complete list of all documentary evidence that was required from then-Senator Obama by your office in regards to the certification process?
If for any reason you cannot provide some or all of the information I have requested, please provide specific and detailed reasoning as to why that information was not or may not be released to the public.
I respectfully request that a written response be sent to this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) no later than 12:00 pm, Thursday December the 4th, and thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 8:15 AM
Where in SC are you?
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 11:33 AMTo: Carol FowlerSubject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Ms. Fowler,
Thank you very much for your prompt reply to my message. I sincerely appreciate it.
I'm not located in South Carolina. I am from Denver, CO. I've been researching the issue of how Presidential candidates get certified as eligible since I learned that both John McCain and Barack Obama had their qualifications questioned during this latest campaign. This is non-partisan, personal research that I'm conducting.
During my research, I've contacted electors, government officials, and party representatives (from both major political parties) from several states, and not had any problem in having documents released to me. In this case, do I need to find a proxy from South Carolina to make the request for me? I'd be happy to do so, if need be.
Again, I thank you for your prompt reply, and look forward to meeting whatever requirements need to be met in order to receive the documents I've requested.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 9:33 AM
The only documentation our state law requires is that the candidate (for any office) certify to the party that he or she meets the requirements of the office.
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 12:33 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Interesting! Could I have you send me an electronic copy of the document where President-Elect Obama certified to you that he meets the requirements of the office?
Thanks again - I appreciate you taking the time to help.
Justin
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 2:23 PM
I can fax it to you when I get a chance. What's the number?
------------
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:15 PM
To: Carol Fowler
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Ms. Fowler,
I'm sorry it took me awhile to get back to you. I had to track down a fax machine that could accept a fax without me standing right next to it.
Here's the number you can fax the document(s) to: (303) 873-6101. Just put it to my attention. I understand that you must be very busy, but I request that you please try to fax it by the close of business on December 2nd.. Please let me know if that doesn't fit with your schedule.
I don't want you to feel like I'm backing you into a corner, but I'm also interested in getting answers to the original questions I asked. In particular, I'd like to know who in your office has the legal responsibility for certifying the candidates. I simply haven't been able to answer this question up to this point, but certainly someone carries the responsibility.
One last thing (I hope). Could you provide me with a reference to the state law that you referred to earlier in our conversation? You said:
"The only documentation our state law requires is that the candidate (for any office) certify to the party that he or she meets the requirements of the office."
If you could provide me the statute number, it would save me a great deal of time.
Once again, thank you for your help.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Ms. Fowler,
To the best of my knowledge, the document you have promised to fax me has not yet arrived. At the very least, could you please provide me a timeline as to when I can expect to see it? Ideally, I would request that you provide it to me by the end of business today.
Thank you for your attention to this matter...
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
From: Carol Fowler <cfowler@SCDP.ORG>
Subject: RE: Spam:RE: Certification of Presidential Candidates Eligibility - *TIME SENSITIVE*
To: juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:50 PM
I will fax it in a few minutes.
I have legal responsibility for certifying candidates to the state for inclusion on the ballot. You will have to research the law yourself, as I don't have time to do that. But I can tell you that presidential qualifications are a federal, not state, issue. Nothing in SC law, whether or not it was followed in this case (which it was) will disqualify Barack Obama.
------------
Wonderful.
Thank you very much. I certainly don't expect you to research the law for me! I'm becoming fairly proficient at that myself, so I'll do it when I get some free time.
You say that "presidential qualifications are a federal, not a state, issue". I have no reason not to believe you. Since you seem to possess some knowledge on the subject, could you point me towards whom in the federal government might be responsible for checking Presidential candidates' qualifications? That would be a GREAT help.
Finally, I am very sorry that you believe that I am out to disqualify Barack Obama. That is NOT my inent. While I was drawn to this issue because of the questions surrounding Mr. Obama's eligibility, I am neither pro nor anti-Obama. I am an unaffiliated voter who is decidedly pro-Constitution, and I am gravely concerned in that it appears our Presidential candidates are not having their qualifications checked against those those our Constitution lays out for them. The MINUTE I have an answer to these questions:
a) WHO is responsible for ensuring that our Presidential candidates meet the Constitutional requirements for holding office?
b) WHEN does the certification process take place? and
c) WHAT EVIDENCE is provided by the candidate to the official responsible for certification, so that the certifier can declare the candidate eligible in good faith?
then I will disappear back into the ether, content that my Constitution has been followed. Until then, I'm afraid I can't rest easy - and I would hope, neither can you.
As for Mr. Obama, I have NO reason to believe that he is not eligible. Serious allegations have been leveled at him, but my efforts could equally be seen as PRO-Obama. After all, if he was properly certified, then SOMEBODY certified him SOMEWHERE, and EVIDENCE exists that he meets the qualifications set out in the Constitution. I'm just trying to locate that information.
I thank you again for your cooperation. If you come across any further information that you feel may help me answer my questions, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward that information on to me through this email address.
All my best to you and yours during this wonderful holiday season...
Respectfully Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Colorado Democratic Party - Working Towards An Answer
Today, I decided to refocus on my home state of Colorado. I once again contacted party representatives with the following letter:
Justin
------------
As of yet, I haven't seen a reply.
Later in the day, I was pleasantly surprised to see an email from Patricia Waak, Chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party. Her response was:
------------
Mr. Riggs
The rules of the Colorado Democratic Party are on our website at www.coloradodems.org.
Pat Waak
------------
I responded:
I only ask because the Secretary of the State's office has informed me that the legal responsibility for checking the Presidential candidates qualifications lies with the candidate's party. They did not specify whether that meant the state or the national party. I am, as I mentioned in my earlier message, interested in understanding how your presidential candidates qualifications for the office are determined - what evidence is presented, to whom is it presented, when and where was it presented, who has the final authority for declaring the candidate as eligible, etc.
With Warm Regards,
Justin
-------------
I hope to hear back from Ms. Waak in the near future.
Chairwoman Waak,
Under Section VI of the Colorado 2008 Delegate Selection Plan, it states:
5. The Democratic Party in Colorado should publicize fully and in such a manner as to assure notice to all interested parties a full description of the legal and practical procedures for selection of Democratic Party officers and representatives on all levels.
As an interested party, I request a full description of the legal and practical procedures for selection of the Democratic Party Presidential candidate.
The same document also states:
6. The Democratic Party in Colorado should publicize fully and in such a manner as to assure notice to all interested parties, a complete description of the legal and practical qualifications of all positions as officers and representatives of the State Democratic Party.
Again, as an interested party, I request a complete description of the legal and practical qualifications for the office of President of the United States of America.
In addition, I request a complete description of policies and procedures followed by the Colorado State Democratic Party in relation to the certification of the party's Presidential candidate's qualifications to hold office, including a complete list of all documents required from the candidate in order to determine eligibility.
I thank you for time, and look forward to your prompt response. Please note that I have copied several of your staff members on this email, so that a timely response might be offered more easily.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
The first person to respond (I had cc'd several individuals) was Butch Hicks, Treasurer of the party. He wrote:
Isn't this on the web site ?
------------
I responded:
Mr. Hicks,
Thank you for the prompt reply! If it is on the website, I haven't been able to locate it - and believe me, I've looked. Could you point me to where on the website you think this information might be? And thanks again for the quick response - Blackberries are a wonderful thing.
Justin
------------
As of yet, I haven't seen a reply.
Later in the day, I was pleasantly surprised to see an email from Patricia Waak, Chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party. Her response was:
------------
Mr. Riggs
The rules of the Colorado Democratic Party are on our website at www.coloradodems.org.
Pat Waak
------------
I responded:
Ms. Waak,
Thank you for your timely reply. I'm aware of the Colorado Rules, and have reviewed them thoroughly, but none of the information I am seeking is available in those documents. Am I to understand that there are no "legal and practical procedures" for selecting the Democratic Presidential candidate? And that there are no "legal and practical qualifications" that the Democratic Presidential Candidate must meet in order to receive the nomination and certification of eligibility of the party?
I only ask because the Secretary of the State's office has informed me that the legal responsibility for checking the Presidential candidates qualifications lies with the candidate's party. They did not specify whether that meant the state or the national party. I am, as I mentioned in my earlier message, interested in understanding how your presidential candidates qualifications for the office are determined - what evidence is presented, to whom is it presented, when and where was it presented, who has the final authority for declaring the candidate as eligible, etc.
If you could be of assistance in this matter, I would greatly appreciate it. If the information I am seeking can be found on your website, please point me to the page and document to search - I tried to search the site as thoroughly as possible, but might have missed what I was looking for. Please note that my request is time sensitive, and I therefore request a timely response - although I do not expect a response as timely as the last one!
With Warm Regards,
Justin
-------------
I hope to hear back from Ms. Waak in the near future.
Labels:
Colorado,
Constitution,
Democrats,
election,
eligibility,
President,
Secretary of State,
State
Arkansas Responds
Natasha Naragon, my contact point in Arkansas, kindly responded to my questions this afternoon. The format is slightly different than normal, but I would like to post the response as it came to me.
------------
From: Natasha Naragon natasha.naragon@sos.arkansas.gov
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential candidate by Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
To: "Justin Riggs" juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 3:43 PM
Mr. Riggs,
The answers to your questions are below in red.
Please let me know if I may be of further assistance.
Natasha
----------------------------------------------
Natasha Naragon
Public Affairs Coordinator
Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
Arkansas State Capitol, Room 24
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
501-683-1441 (Phone)
501-683-3732 (Fax)
natasha.naragon@sos.arkansas.gov
www.sos.arkansas.gov
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 2:25 PM
To: Natasha NaragonCc: arsos@sos.ar.gov
Subject: Certification of Presidential candidate by Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
Ms. Naragon,
According to a press release posted at http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/newsroom/index.php?do:newsDetail=1&news_id=29, Secretary of State Charlie Daniels certified the list of candidates for the office of U.S. President on February 5th, 2008. I have a few questions about this event that I was hoping you might be able to clear up for me.
1) In most states, the political parties are legally responsible for certifying that their candidates are eligible. According to this document, it seems that the Secretary of State is legally responsible to perform this function in Arkansas. Am I reading that correctly?
No. The political parties are responsible in Arkansas.
2) If Mr. Daniels certified the list of candidates, does that mean he reviewed the qualifications of each candidate individually? If so, what documentary proof was required from the candidates so that Mr. Daniels could certify them in good faith?
The candidates file a political practices pledge and party certificate with the secretary of state for certification.
3) In my research, I've also noticed that your state requires each candidate to complete an Affidavit of Eligibility. How would I go about requesting a copy of that document from your office?
The affidavit is filed with the party.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I sincerely appreciate your help.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
p.s. - please note that I have cc'd the Secretary of State on this message
------------ I responded:
Ms. Naragon,
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my questions. I now have two more questions, after which, I promise to leave you alone!
1) How do I request copies of the political practices pledge and party certificate that you referenced?
2) Are you aware of any law in your state that coerces the state party to release documents that have been filed with their organization? I have had some troubles with other states, and any help you could offer would be gratefully received.
Thank you again for your reply,
Justin
------------
From: Natasha Naragon natasha.naragon@sos.arkansas.gov
Subject: RE: Certification of Presidential candidate by Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
To: "Justin Riggs" juriggs@yahoo.com
Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 3:43 PM
Mr. Riggs,
The answers to your questions are below in red.
Please let me know if I may be of further assistance.
Natasha
----------------------------------------------
Natasha Naragon
Public Affairs Coordinator
Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
Arkansas State Capitol, Room 24
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
501-683-1441 (Phone)
501-683-3732 (Fax)
natasha.naragon@sos.arkansas.gov
www.sos.arkansas.gov
From: Justin Riggs [mailto:juriggs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 2:25 PM
To: Natasha NaragonCc: arsos@sos.ar.gov
Subject: Certification of Presidential candidate by Secretary of State Charlie Daniels
Ms. Naragon,
According to a press release posted at http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/newsroom/index.php?do:newsDetail=1&news_id=29, Secretary of State Charlie Daniels certified the list of candidates for the office of U.S. President on February 5th, 2008. I have a few questions about this event that I was hoping you might be able to clear up for me.
1) In most states, the political parties are legally responsible for certifying that their candidates are eligible. According to this document, it seems that the Secretary of State is legally responsible to perform this function in Arkansas. Am I reading that correctly?
No. The political parties are responsible in Arkansas.
2) If Mr. Daniels certified the list of candidates, does that mean he reviewed the qualifications of each candidate individually? If so, what documentary proof was required from the candidates so that Mr. Daniels could certify them in good faith?
The candidates file a political practices pledge and party certificate with the secretary of state for certification.
3) In my research, I've also noticed that your state requires each candidate to complete an Affidavit of Eligibility. How would I go about requesting a copy of that document from your office?
The affidavit is filed with the party.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I sincerely appreciate your help.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
p.s. - please note that I have cc'd the Secretary of State on this message
------------ I responded:
Ms. Naragon,
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my questions. I now have two more questions, after which, I promise to leave you alone!
1) How do I request copies of the political practices pledge and party certificate that you referenced?
2) Are you aware of any law in your state that coerces the state party to release documents that have been filed with their organization? I have had some troubles with other states, and any help you could offer would be gratefully received.
Thank you again for your reply,
Justin
Roll, Tide, Roll...
BREAKING NEWS: Alabama seems to have the most clear-cut requirements for placing a name on the ballot that I've seen. I wrote a particularly pointed letter to the Honorable Jean Brown, Chief Legal Council at the Alabama Secretary of State's office. Here is the letter, in its entirety:
NOTE: The original letter was sent before it was intended to be. The following is the second email sent to Ms. Brown.
------------
Ms. Brown,
I apologize for the multiple messages. I'm not sure how my other message got sent. My tired fingers must have pressed a button they weren't supposed to!
As I was saying, Section 17-13-6 of the Alabama Code reads:
Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.
The name of no candidate shall be printed upon any official ballot used at any primary election unless such person is legally qualified to hold the office for which he or she is a candidate and unless he or she is eligible to vote in the primary election in which he or she seeks to be a candidate and possesses the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his or her political party.
My question is this: who is responsible for ensuring that each candidate is "legally qualified to hold the office for which he or she is a candidate"?
For example, the Democratic Party's "Delegate Selection Rules For the 2008 Democratic National Convention" states that:
Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
I want to make sure my question is clear, so let's take Barack Obama as an example. According to the Alabama Code, Obama's name should have appeared on the primary ballot only if:
a) he was legally qualified to hold the office for which he was a candidate (President)
b) he was eligible to vote in the primary election in which he sought to be a candidate
c) he possessed the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his political party, which were:
i) he had to be registered to vote
ii) he had to have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President
and Vice President
iii) he had to have "demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair"
iv) he had to demonstrate that he would participate in the Convention in good faith
AND
v) he had to meet the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution, and
vi) meet the requirements set forth by any law of the United States
That's a lot of requirements; yet, according to your law, his name couldn't have been printed upon the ballot unless he was legally qualified to hold the office AND possessed the qualifications set out by his own party. Somebody had to check his credentials before placing him on the ballot. Who was it? Or, more generally speaking, who checks the credentials of all candidates placed upon the primary ballot in Alabama, and ensures that Section 17-13-6 of the Alabama Code is enforced?
I want to thank you in advance for your time. I am certain that you are very busy, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my request. I will be faxing you a copy of this request as well, and ask that you respond by 5 pm, Friday December 5th. If that will not be possible, please email me with an approximate date by which I can anticipate your response.
I thank you again, and wish you a happy holiday season.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
NOTE: The original letter was sent before it was intended to be. The following is the second email sent to Ms. Brown.
------------
Ms. Brown,
I apologize for the multiple messages. I'm not sure how my other message got sent. My tired fingers must have pressed a button they weren't supposed to!
As I was saying, Section 17-13-6 of the Alabama Code reads:
Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.
The name of no candidate shall be printed upon any official ballot used at any primary election unless such person is legally qualified to hold the office for which he or she is a candidate and unless he or she is eligible to vote in the primary election in which he or she seeks to be a candidate and possesses the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his or her political party.
My question is this: who is responsible for ensuring that each candidate is "legally qualified to hold the office for which he or she is a candidate"?
For example, the Democratic Party's "Delegate Selection Rules For the 2008 Democratic National Convention" states that:
Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last
election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate
in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
I want to make sure my question is clear, so let's take Barack Obama as an example. According to the Alabama Code, Obama's name should have appeared on the primary ballot only if:
a) he was legally qualified to hold the office for which he was a candidate (President)
b) he was eligible to vote in the primary election in which he sought to be a candidate
c) he possessed the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his political party, which were:
i) he had to be registered to vote
ii) he had to have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President
and Vice President
iii) he had to have "demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the
Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair"
iv) he had to demonstrate that he would participate in the Convention in good faith
AND
v) he had to meet the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution, and
vi) meet the requirements set forth by any law of the United States
That's a lot of requirements; yet, according to your law, his name couldn't have been printed upon the ballot unless he was legally qualified to hold the office AND possessed the qualifications set out by his own party. Somebody had to check his credentials before placing him on the ballot. Who was it? Or, more generally speaking, who checks the credentials of all candidates placed upon the primary ballot in Alabama, and ensures that Section 17-13-6 of the Alabama Code is enforced?
I want to thank you in advance for your time. I am certain that you are very busy, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my request. I will be faxing you a copy of this request as well, and ask that you respond by 5 pm, Friday December 5th. If that will not be possible, please email me with an approximate date by which I can anticipate your response.
I thank you again, and wish you a happy holiday season.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Don't mess with Texas...
Texas has some very interesting language in their Election Code. I wanted to check in with their Elections Division and see if I was interpreting the law correctly. Here's what I wrote:
------------
As a 'civics project', I am trying to identify who has the legal responsibility to certify Presidential candidates as eligible. I was hoping you could help me interpret a couple sections of Chapter 192 in the Election Code.
At http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/EL/content/htm/el.011.00.000192.00.htm, in subchapter B, it states:
"A political party is entitled to have the names of its nominees for president and vice-president of the United States placed on the ballot in a presidential general election if:(1) the nominees possess the qualifications for those offices prescribed by federal law;"
My first question is this: Who has the legal responsibility to ensure that the nominee "possesses the qualifications" for office? Is it the party? The Secretary of State? Somebody else?
Second, the Election Code goes on to say:
"§ 192.033. CERTIFICATION OF CANDIDATES FOR PLACEMENT ON BALLOT. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (c), the secretary of state shall certify in writing for placement on the general election ballot the names of the candidates for president and vice-president who are entitled to have their names placed on the ballot."How does the secretary of state know if the candidate is entitled to have his/her name placed on the ballot? Does he make sure the candidate meets the qualifications for office him/herself? Does he take the party's word for it?
I appreciate your help in this matter. It's fascinating to see how different states handle this very important matter. I look forward to receiving your response in the near future.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
------------
As a 'civics project', I am trying to identify who has the legal responsibility to certify Presidential candidates as eligible. I was hoping you could help me interpret a couple sections of Chapter 192 in the Election Code.
At http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/EL/content/htm/el.011.00.000192.00.htm, in subchapter B, it states:
"A political party is entitled to have the names of its nominees for president and vice-president of the United States placed on the ballot in a presidential general election if:(1) the nominees possess the qualifications for those offices prescribed by federal law;"
My first question is this: Who has the legal responsibility to ensure that the nominee "possesses the qualifications" for office? Is it the party? The Secretary of State? Somebody else?
Second, the Election Code goes on to say:
"§ 192.033. CERTIFICATION OF CANDIDATES FOR PLACEMENT ON BALLOT. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (c), the secretary of state shall certify in writing for placement on the general election ballot the names of the candidates for president and vice-president who are entitled to have their names placed on the ballot."How does the secretary of state know if the candidate is entitled to have his/her name placed on the ballot? Does he make sure the candidate meets the qualifications for office him/herself? Does he take the party's word for it?
I appreciate your help in this matter. It's fascinating to see how different states handle this very important matter. I look forward to receiving your response in the near future.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Texas Democrats
I seem to be focusing on Democrats at this point. Because they won the election, and because there is some controversy surrounding Barack Obama's qualifications, I'm particularly interested in how the Democrats certified their candidate. Today, I contacted the Chairman of the Texas State Democratic Party, Boyd Richie. Here is a copy of the letter I sent him:
Chairman Richie,
According to your website, http://www.txdemocrats.org/the_party/article_vii_national_delegate_selection_rules
"The oath on the application of a presidential candidate shall be:
"I, ______________ of __________________, __________ County/Parish, _____________, being a candidate for the Office of President of the United States, swear that I will support and defend the constitution and laws of the United States. I further swear that I will fully support the Democratic nominee for President whoever that shall be.""
At this time, I am formally requesting that an electronic copy of that document referred to on your site as "The oath on the application of a presidential candidate" from each of the party's Presidential candidates for the 2008 election. I request that these documents be emailed to to this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) within the next 48 hours. If an electronic copy is not available, I request that a paper copy be mailed to:
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant Street
Littleton, CO 80121
The postmark should read no later than December 3, 2008.
Should my request be denied for any reason, I request that you explain, in detail, why the request was denied. If there is a formal process that must take place in order for these documents to be released, please provide me with the necessary information so that I can make an appropriate request.
I appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and wish you a happy holiday season.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
As always, I'll update the post when I hear back from him.
Chairman Richie,
According to your website, http://www.txdemocrats.org/the_party/article_vii_national_delegate_selection_rules
"The oath on the application of a presidential candidate shall be:
"I, ______________ of __________________, __________ County/Parish, _____________, being a candidate for the Office of President of the United States, swear that I will support and defend the constitution and laws of the United States. I further swear that I will fully support the Democratic nominee for President whoever that shall be.""
At this time, I am formally requesting that an electronic copy of that document referred to on your site as "The oath on the application of a presidential candidate" from each of the party's Presidential candidates for the 2008 election. I request that these documents be emailed to to this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) within the next 48 hours. If an electronic copy is not available, I request that a paper copy be mailed to:
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant Street
Littleton, CO 80121
The postmark should read no later than December 3, 2008.
Should my request be denied for any reason, I request that you explain, in detail, why the request was denied. If there is a formal process that must take place in order for these documents to be released, please provide me with the necessary information so that I can make an appropriate request.
I appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and wish you a happy holiday season.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
As always, I'll update the post when I hear back from him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)