Mr. Lee,
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'm particulary interested in knowing what documentation the candidate is required to provide to you so that you can make a determination regarding their eligibility under the provisions of the Constitution.
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
Showing posts with label State. Show all posts
Showing posts with label State. Show all posts
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 GOP Legal Counsel
This has become something of a legal question, so I thought I would approach the legal counsel of both state party organizations. Here's the letter I sent to Mr. Call, legal counsel for the Colorado GOP:
------------
Mr. Call,
In a communication from the Colorado Secretary of State's office they state:
"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."
At this time, I am seeking an official response from the Colorado Republican Party (CRP) regarding what process and procedures were in place during the 2008 general election that ensured that the CRP met their legal responsibility as outlined by the Secretary of State's office. Specifically, the information I'm looking for is:
1) What individual, individuals, group, or groups is/are/were responsible for checking the Republican Party's presidential candidate's qualifications for office (including both party and Constitutional eligibility requirements)?
2) When does the verification process take place, and in 2008, when was the determination made that Sen. John McCain was eligible to hold the office of President, and that the party could certify his name to the Secretary of State as an eligible candidate?
3) What evidence was provided by Mr. McCain to the state party that caused that determination to be made?
I thank you for your assistance in this matter, and look forward to your timely response.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Mr. Call,
In a communication from the Colorado Secretary of State's office they state:
"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."
At this time, I am seeking an official response from the Colorado Republican Party (CRP) regarding what process and procedures were in place during the 2008 general election that ensured that the CRP met their legal responsibility as outlined by the Secretary of State's office. Specifically, the information I'm looking for is:
1) What individual, individuals, group, or groups is/are/were responsible for checking the Republican Party's presidential candidate's qualifications for office (including both party and Constitutional eligibility requirements)?
2) When does the verification process take place, and in 2008, when was the determination made that Sen. John McCain was eligible to hold the office of President, and that the party could certify his name to the Secretary of State as an eligible candidate?
3) What evidence was provided by Mr. McCain to the state party that caused that determination to be made?
I thank you for your assistance in this matter, and look forward to your timely response.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
My State Representative
Now that one or two other state Rep's have proposed legislation regarding the eligibility of presidential candidates, I thought I would approach my representative and see if he would be willing to author a bill as well. Here is my request:
------------
Rep. Rice,
My name is Justin Riggs. I am a member of your district, and recently, I submitted a ballot initiative proposal that would require all presidential candidates to provide evidence of their eligibility for office before being placed upon the state ballot. Looking at the requirements to get the initiative placed on the ballot, however, I realize that it will be difficult for me to achieve this feat. I was wondering if you might be willing to represent me (and other concerned citizens of your district) by authoring a bill with language similiar to that of my proposed ballot initiative.
I appreciate your consideration of this request, and eagerly await your response...
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Rep. Rice,
My name is Justin Riggs. I am a member of your district, and recently, I submitted a ballot initiative proposal that would require all presidential candidates to provide evidence of their eligibility for office before being placed upon the state ballot. Looking at the requirements to get the initiative placed on the ballot, however, I realize that it will be difficult for me to achieve this feat. I was wondering if you might be willing to represent me (and other concerned citizens of your district) by authoring a bill with language similiar to that of my proposed ballot initiative.
I appreciate your consideration of this request, and eagerly await your response...
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Wisconsin
Some of the laws are difficult for me to interpret, and I've struck out a few times now. I figured I'd ask before making a document request this time - and it was a good thing I did.
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
Are presidential candidates required to file a declaration of candidacy under the provisions of s. 8.21 of the Wisconsin Statutes and Annotations?
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Hi Justin,
In Wisconsin, matters having to do with elections and voters are handled by the Elections Division of the Government Accountability Board (not the Office of the Secretary of State). My best suggestion is to contact the Elections Division directly http://elections.state.wi.us/
Sincerely,
Susan Churchill
------------
Thanks, Susan - I appreciate your quick reply. Have a great day!
Justin
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
Are presidential candidates required to file a declaration of candidacy under the provisions of s. 8.21 of the Wisconsin Statutes and Annotations?
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Hi Justin,
In Wisconsin, matters having to do with elections and voters are handled by the Elections Division of the Government Accountability Board (not the Office of the Secretary of State). My best suggestion is to contact the Elections Division directly http://elections.state.wi.us/
Sincerely,
Susan Churchill
------------
Thanks, Susan - I appreciate your quick reply. Have a great day!
Justin
Hawaii
I love Hawaii - the are such a warm, loving people. Even the Lieutenant Governor's office is nice.
------------
DOCUMENT REQUEST - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant St. Littleton, CO 80121
303-781-1998
December 12, 2008
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR James R. "Duke" Aiona, Jr.
State of Hawaii
ELECTIONS DIVISION
Phone: 808 586-0255
Fax: 808 586-0231
email: ltgov@hawaii.gov
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of the candidate nomination papers (as referred to in §12-7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes) for all major-party presidential candidates on the November 4, 2008 General Election ballot. 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 scan of the document is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, December 10th. 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 document. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Aloha Mr. Riggs, The Office of Elections is no longer under within the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. By copy of this correspondence, I am requesting that the Office of Elections review your matter and take any action that they deem to be necessary and appropriate. Mahalo for writing to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. Office of the Lieutenant GovernorState Capitol - Fifth FloorHonolulu, Hawai`i 96813(808) 586-0255www.hawaii.gov/ltgov
Justin Riggs
------------
DOCUMENT REQUEST - *TIME SENSITIVE*
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant St. Littleton, CO 80121
303-781-1998
December 12, 2008
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR James R. "Duke" Aiona, Jr.
State of Hawaii
ELECTIONS DIVISION
Phone: 808 586-0255
Fax: 808 586-0231
email: ltgov@hawaii.gov
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of the candidate nomination papers (as referred to in §12-7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes) for all major-party presidential candidates on the November 4, 2008 General Election ballot. 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 scan of the document is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, December 10th. 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 document. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Aloha Mr. Riggs, The Office of Elections is no longer under within the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. By copy of this correspondence, I am requesting that the Office of Elections review your matter and take any action that they deem to be necessary and appropriate. Mahalo for writing to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. Office of the Lieutenant GovernorState Capitol - Fifth FloorHonolulu, Hawai`i 96813(808) 586-0255www.hawaii.gov/ltgov
Justin Riggs
More Questions for South Carolina
Mr. Whitmire,
Sorry for taking more of your time, but after our last correspondence, I remembered something, and wanted to get some extra clarification from you.
The law that I quoted in my original message to you (SECTION 7-13-40 ) was incorrect - the law I wanted to ask about actually came to me from somebody who had received a letter directly from Garry Baum - I've attached that document for you to review. As the question asked of him directly related to the qualifications of presidential candidates, it would appear he believes that Section 7-13-350 is the statute that applies to presidential candidates.
A few more questions, based on this new information:
1) The attached letter, and your correspondence, emphasize that it is the party's responsibility to verify the qualifications of their candidates. Does this mean the state party organization, or the national party organization (or both)?
2) If "political parties must verify the qualifications of those candidates prior to certification to the authority charged by law with preparing the ballot" then who is responsible for enforcing this requirement? I'm just not sure I understand the process here. The language of the statute seems clear (to me, a non-lawyer type): The candidate's qualifications have to be verified before the political party certifies the candidate to the authority in charge of preparing the ballot. So who ensures this process takes place? There has to be somebody, right? Otherwise, the party could choose NOT to verify the qualifications of their candidates, STILL certify the name of the candidate to the authority, and the law would not be followed. So who makes sure the party does their legally mandated job - and what evidence is provided by the party to that authority that shows that the party met the requirements of the law?
3) As I mentioned before, the SC Democratic Party has confirmed to me that the ONLY thing they did to verify Mr. Obama's qualifications was require him to submit a filing statement which states in part: "I certify that I am qualified to serve as President of the United States". Would this be considered sufficient evidence that he IS qualified, because as a citizen, that concerns me. It seems like asking a criminal, "are you innocent", and then letting him go if he signs a piece of paper that states, "I certify that I am innocent." My question, then, is this: Would a signed statement from the candidate to the political party be considered sufficient evidence to PROVE that the candidate was eligible?
I sincerely thank you for your time. I am sure that you are busy, and I recognize that it takes time out of your day to answer these questions. Please know that I am indeed grateful for your time and effort.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
Sorry for taking more of your time, but after our last correspondence, I remembered something, and wanted to get some extra clarification from you.
The law that I quoted in my original message to you (SECTION 7-13-40 ) was incorrect - the law I wanted to ask about actually came to me from somebody who had received a letter directly from Garry Baum - I've attached that document for you to review. As the question asked of him directly related to the qualifications of presidential candidates, it would appear he believes that Section 7-13-350 is the statute that applies to presidential candidates.
A few more questions, based on this new information:
1) The attached letter, and your correspondence, emphasize that it is the party's responsibility to verify the qualifications of their candidates. Does this mean the state party organization, or the national party organization (or both)?
2) If "political parties must verify the qualifications of those candidates prior to certification to the authority charged by law with preparing the ballot" then who is responsible for enforcing this requirement? I'm just not sure I understand the process here. The language of the statute seems clear (to me, a non-lawyer type): The candidate's qualifications have to be verified before the political party certifies the candidate to the authority in charge of preparing the ballot. So who ensures this process takes place? There has to be somebody, right? Otherwise, the party could choose NOT to verify the qualifications of their candidates, STILL certify the name of the candidate to the authority, and the law would not be followed. So who makes sure the party does their legally mandated job - and what evidence is provided by the party to that authority that shows that the party met the requirements of the law?
3) As I mentioned before, the SC Democratic Party has confirmed to me that the ONLY thing they did to verify Mr. Obama's qualifications was require him to submit a filing statement which states in part: "I certify that I am qualified to serve as President of the United States". Would this be considered sufficient evidence that he IS qualified, because as a citizen, that concerns me. It seems like asking a criminal, "are you innocent", and then letting him go if he signs a piece of paper that states, "I certify that I am innocent." My question, then, is this: Would a signed statement from the candidate to the political party be considered sufficient evidence to PROVE that the candidate was eligible?
I sincerely thank you for your time. I am sure that you are busy, and I recognize that it takes time out of your day to answer these questions. Please know that I am indeed grateful for your time and effort.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
A Concerned Oregon Citizen
Yesterday, I received an email from "A Concerned Oregon Citizen". She shared with me a correspondence she had had with the Elections Division and Secretary of State of her state. I wanted to share a little bit of what she sent me:
------------
I visited the Oregon Elections Division this afternoon and spoke with Margie Franz, one of the election compliance specialists. Margie is responsible for verifying Federal candidacy qualifications and she is also responsible for coordinating the Oregon Electoral College vote on December 15th. I asked her if federal candidate qualifications are verified at the state level prior to a candidate being place on the ballot. The Oregon Elections Division does ensure that Congressional candidates do meet the necessary requisites as defined in Article I, as well as voter his/her registration, residency, and party affiliation.
When I asked her about Presidential candidates, she said the Oregon Elections Division does not validate his/her qualifications per Article II. She stated this is the responsibility of the FEC. The only Oregon requirement is the Presidential candidate has to submit a Declaration of Candidacy filing which includes a signed statement or affidavit that they will meet the Article II qualifications if elected. I sampled several Candidacy Declaration filing forms for other states and they all have this in common. In other words, Oregon (and in all likelihood other states), does not assume any responsibility for verifying Presidential candidate qualifications at any time before, during, or after the election.
I have visited the FEC, NARA, DNC, RNC websites and I cannot find anything that would suggest that Presidential candidate qualifications as defined in Article II are verified. I do however find it hard to believe that a candidate can make it all the way to the general election without being properly vetted for even the most basic requirements.
------------
It's wonderful to see people doing great work on this topic, and I post this here in hopes that if you are wondering whether or not you can do it, you will feel motivated to get out there and make a difference! And if you do find anything in your state, please email me at juriggs@yahoo.com, and I'll include your information in my library (much of which shows up at http://www.therightsideoflife.com).
------------
I visited the Oregon Elections Division this afternoon and spoke with Margie Franz, one of the election compliance specialists. Margie is responsible for verifying Federal candidacy qualifications and she is also responsible for coordinating the Oregon Electoral College vote on December 15th. I asked her if federal candidate qualifications are verified at the state level prior to a candidate being place on the ballot. The Oregon Elections Division does ensure that Congressional candidates do meet the necessary requisites as defined in Article I, as well as voter his/her registration, residency, and party affiliation.
When I asked her about Presidential candidates, she said the Oregon Elections Division does not validate his/her qualifications per Article II. She stated this is the responsibility of the FEC. The only Oregon requirement is the Presidential candidate has to submit a Declaration of Candidacy filing which includes a signed statement or affidavit that they will meet the Article II qualifications if elected. I sampled several Candidacy Declaration filing forms for other states and they all have this in common. In other words, Oregon (and in all likelihood other states), does not assume any responsibility for verifying Presidential candidate qualifications at any time before, during, or after the election.
I have visited the FEC, NARA, DNC, RNC websites and I cannot find anything that would suggest that Presidential candidate qualifications as defined in Article II are verified. I do however find it hard to believe that a candidate can make it all the way to the general election without being properly vetted for even the most basic requirements.
------------
It's wonderful to see people doing great work on this topic, and I post this here in hopes that if you are wondering whether or not you can do it, you will feel motivated to get out there and make a difference! And if you do find anything in your state, please email me at juriggs@yahoo.com, and I'll include your information in my library (much of which shows up at http://www.therightsideoflife.com).
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
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
Proposed Ballot Initiative
I feel that I've done enough research to see that there's a glaring weakness in our current system for making sure Presidential candidates are qualified to hold office: there are no checks or balances. Accordingly, I've decided to submit a proposed ballot initiative to the Secretary of State's office. Here is the text to the proposal I submitted:
Submission of Proposal for Review and Comment
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant St.
Littleton, CO 80121
juriggs@yahoo.com
(redacted)
(redacted for privacy)
Statement of Intent:
An email communication from the office of the Secretary of the State of Colorado states:
“Dear Concerned Voter: 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....
In sum, please direct any inquiries regarding the qualifications of candidates to the respective parties....
Thank you for contacting the Secretary of State's office.”
Placing the responsibility for certifying a Presidential candidate upon the party that nominated the candidate seems to create an inherent conflict of interest. While the purpose of this initiative is not to wrestle away the party’s legal responsibility, it is to provide a check and a balance upon the party by requiring the designated election official of the State of Colorado to also verify the eligibility of Presidential candidates before placing them on the ballot. The following ballot initiative is therefore proposed.
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:
Section 501 of Title 1, Article 4, Colorado Revised Statutes, is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUBSECTION to read:
(1.5) No person except an eligible elector is eligible to be a designee or candidate for the office of President of the United States of America unless that person fully meets the qualifications of that office as stated in the Constitution of the United States of America on or before the date the term of that office begins. The designated election official shall not certify the name of any designee or candidate who fails to swear or affirm under oath that he or she fully meets the qualifications of the office by signing an Affidavit of Eligibility, and who is unable to provide proof that he or she meets any requirements of the office relating to citizenship status, age, or residency. Documents accepted as prima facie evidence of compliance with this section shall be determined by the designated official, and shall include but not be limited to: original birth records, official passports, and relevant background check forms. Fascimiles of all documents submitted by designees or candidates shall be published by the office of the Secretary of the State and made available for public review no less than 90 days prior to the general election.
------------
Step 2 is a Review and Comment Meeting. I'll let you know what I hear back.
Submission of Proposal for Review and Comment
Justin W. Riggs
5255 S. Grant St.
Littleton, CO 80121
juriggs@yahoo.com
(redacted)
(redacted for privacy)
Statement of Intent:
An email communication from the office of the Secretary of the State of Colorado states:
“Dear Concerned Voter: 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....
In sum, please direct any inquiries regarding the qualifications of candidates to the respective parties....
Thank you for contacting the Secretary of State's office.”
Placing the responsibility for certifying a Presidential candidate upon the party that nominated the candidate seems to create an inherent conflict of interest. While the purpose of this initiative is not to wrestle away the party’s legal responsibility, it is to provide a check and a balance upon the party by requiring the designated election official of the State of Colorado to also verify the eligibility of Presidential candidates before placing them on the ballot. The following ballot initiative is therefore proposed.
Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:
Section 501 of Title 1, Article 4, Colorado Revised Statutes, is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUBSECTION to read:
(1.5) No person except an eligible elector is eligible to be a designee or candidate for the office of President of the United States of America unless that person fully meets the qualifications of that office as stated in the Constitution of the United States of America on or before the date the term of that office begins. The designated election official shall not certify the name of any designee or candidate who fails to swear or affirm under oath that he or she fully meets the qualifications of the office by signing an Affidavit of Eligibility, and who is unable to provide proof that he or she meets any requirements of the office relating to citizenship status, age, or residency. Documents accepted as prima facie evidence of compliance with this section shall be determined by the designated official, and shall include but not be limited to: original birth records, official passports, and relevant background check forms. Fascimiles of all documents submitted by designees or candidates shall be published by the office of the Secretary of the State and made available for public review no less than 90 days prior to the general election.
------------
Step 2 is a Review and Comment Meeting. I'll let you know what I hear back.
South Carolina
We may have already covered this, but for completeness sake...
------------
Section 7-11-20(2) of the South Carolina Code of Laws states in part that ..."Political parties must verify the qualifications of candidates prior to certifying to the State Election Commission the names of candidates to be placed on primary ballots. The written certification required by this section must contain a statement that each certified candidate meets, or will meet by the time of the general election, or as otherwise required by law, the qualifications in the United States Constitution, statutory law, and party rules to participate in the presidential preference primary for which he has filed. Political parties must not certify any candidate who does not or will not by the time of the general election meet the qualifications in the United States Constitution, statutory law, and party rules for the presidential preference primary for which the candidate desires to file, and such candidate's name must not be placed on a primary ballot."
Neither the South Carolina Secretary of State nor the State Election Commission has the authority to examine or investigate the qualifications of Presidential candidates.
Again, the South Carolina Code of Laws states that political parties are responsible for verifying that their candidates meet the qualifications for the office in which they seek.
Reneé S. Daggerhart
Media Relations Director
South Carolina Secretary of State's Office
(803) 734-0629 Office
(803) 734-1661 Fax
------------
Section 7-11-20(2) of the South Carolina Code of Laws states in part that ..."Political parties must verify the qualifications of candidates prior to certifying to the State Election Commission the names of candidates to be placed on primary ballots. The written certification required by this section must contain a statement that each certified candidate meets, or will meet by the time of the general election, or as otherwise required by law, the qualifications in the United States Constitution, statutory law, and party rules to participate in the presidential preference primary for which he has filed. Political parties must not certify any candidate who does not or will not by the time of the general election meet the qualifications in the United States Constitution, statutory law, and party rules for the presidential preference primary for which the candidate desires to file, and such candidate's name must not be placed on a primary ballot."
Neither the South Carolina Secretary of State nor the State Election Commission has the authority to examine or investigate the qualifications of Presidential candidates.
Again, the South Carolina Code of Laws states that political parties are responsible for verifying that their candidates meet the qualifications for the office in which they seek.
Reneé S. Daggerhart
Media Relations Director
South Carolina Secretary of State's Office
(803) 734-0629 Office
(803) 734-1661 Fax
Michigan (edited particularly heavily)
The Department of State (Department) acknowledges receipt of your e-mail message sent November 25, 2008, in which you made a request for public records pursuant to the Michigan Freedom of Information Act (FOIA or Act), 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 et seq. This notice is issued in response to your request, a copy of which is attached below and incorporated herein.
You requested...
Please be advised that your request is denied. In accordance with section 5(4)(b) of the FOIA, I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief that the Department does not possess public records matching the description you have provided, or existing under other names that are reasonably known to the Department. Please be advised that the Michigan Election Law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.1 et seq., requires the state central committee of each political party qualified to appear on the ballot to certify the names of its nominees for U.S. President and Vice-President to the Secretary of State under the signatures of the chairperson and secretary of the committee. MCL 168.686...
You requested...
Please be advised that your request is denied. In accordance with section 5(4)(b) of the FOIA, I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief that the Department does not possess public records matching the description you have provided, or existing under other names that are reasonably known to the Department. Please be advised that the Michigan Election Law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.1 et seq., requires the state central committee of each political party qualified to appear on the ballot to certify the names of its nominees for U.S. President and Vice-President to the Secretary of State under the signatures of the chairperson and secretary of the committee. MCL 168.686...
Montana
Thanks for your inquiry about Barack Obama's eligibility to be on Montana 's ballot as a candidate for President of the United States .
The filing functions of this office are ministerial -- in other words, we accept paperwork filed here in the manner prescribed by Montana law. Those laws for placing "presidential candidates" on the ballot work differently than you might expect. Technically, votes for President are cast for a slate of three delegates to the Electoral College, not for a candidate. However, those delegates are pledged to vote for a particular candidate, and the name of that candidate is listed on the ballot, rather than the names of the delegates. Every qualified political party in Montana has the right to submit the names of potential delegates to the Electoral College, and to have those delegates pledged to any individual as the candidate they would vote for President if they were elected to the Electoral College.
So Barack Obama would not have to provide a birth certificate or any other documentation to be on Montana 's ballot as a candidate for President. In fact, he would not even get a say in the matter. Once delegates of a qualified political party are nominated and pledged to him, he is on the ballot without regard to his personal acceptance or rejection of those votes.
The requirements of the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 (No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States) would be settled at the federal level.
Shannon H. Stevens
Legislative Specialist
Elections Division
Office of the Montana Secretary of State
(406) 444-4732
The filing functions of this office are ministerial -- in other words, we accept paperwork filed here in the manner prescribed by Montana law. Those laws for placing "presidential candidates" on the ballot work differently than you might expect. Technically, votes for President are cast for a slate of three delegates to the Electoral College, not for a candidate. However, those delegates are pledged to vote for a particular candidate, and the name of that candidate is listed on the ballot, rather than the names of the delegates. Every qualified political party in Montana has the right to submit the names of potential delegates to the Electoral College, and to have those delegates pledged to any individual as the candidate they would vote for President if they were elected to the Electoral College.
So Barack Obama would not have to provide a birth certificate or any other documentation to be on Montana 's ballot as a candidate for President. In fact, he would not even get a say in the matter. Once delegates of a qualified political party are nominated and pledged to him, he is on the ballot without regard to his personal acceptance or rejection of those votes.
The requirements of the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 (No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States) would be settled at the federal level.
Shannon H. Stevens
Legislative Specialist
Elections Division
Office of the Montana Secretary of State
(406) 444-4732
Ohio
In Ohio, public records are governed by Ohio Revised Code §149.43, often referred to as the Public Records Act ("PRA"). The PRA does not require a response within any particular period of time. Instead, the PRA requires a public office to respond within a reasonable period of time, or, alternatively, to permit prompt in-person inspection of records.
Requestors under the PRA must be specific in the substance of their requests. Public offices in Ohio are under no obligation to provide information or to research its records to find any record containing selected information that is of interest to a requestor.
The PRA provides that a requestor has a duty to "identify the records * * * wanted with sufficient clarity." State ex rel. Dillery v. Icsman (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 312, 314. A request for public records "* * * must be specific and particularly describe what [records are] being sought." State ex rel. Zauderer v. Joseph (1989), 62 Ohio App. 3d 752, 756. Requests that do not meet these requirements are generally considered overly broad or improper.
Your first request, for an original birth certificate for President-Elect Obama, is sufficiently precise to allow us to identify the record you seek. However, you have not identified a record that this office maintains. As such, we cannot provide it to you.
Your second and third requests are overbroad. You have not identified any record with particularity so that we may identify the record you seek. You have simply asked this office to search its records to identify any document that may contain the information you seek. This office is not obligated by law to do so.
Finally, to the extent that you have left your request as an open-ended request for any and all records that may contain the information you seek (". . . including but not limited to . . .."), your request is overbroad and improper under Ohio law. Your request must identify with specificity and particularity the record(s) you seek.
If you can provide this office with a more specific request identifying the particular records you seek, we will be happy to advise whether we have such records in our custody, and if so, to provide a copy of those records to you.
If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sincerely,
Brandi Laser Seskes
Elections Counsel,
Office of Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner
------------
I think I might try to come up with a more specific request for them. We'll see if there's anything relevant that I can request.
Requestors under the PRA must be specific in the substance of their requests. Public offices in Ohio are under no obligation to provide information or to research its records to find any record containing selected information that is of interest to a requestor.
The PRA provides that a requestor has a duty to "identify the records * * * wanted with sufficient clarity." State ex rel. Dillery v. Icsman (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 312, 314. A request for public records "* * * must be specific and particularly describe what [records are] being sought." State ex rel. Zauderer v. Joseph (1989), 62 Ohio App. 3d 752, 756. Requests that do not meet these requirements are generally considered overly broad or improper.
Your first request, for an original birth certificate for President-Elect Obama, is sufficiently precise to allow us to identify the record you seek. However, you have not identified a record that this office maintains. As such, we cannot provide it to you.
Your second and third requests are overbroad. You have not identified any record with particularity so that we may identify the record you seek. You have simply asked this office to search its records to identify any document that may contain the information you seek. This office is not obligated by law to do so.
Finally, to the extent that you have left your request as an open-ended request for any and all records that may contain the information you seek (". . . including but not limited to . . .."), your request is overbroad and improper under Ohio law. Your request must identify with specificity and particularity the record(s) you seek.
If you can provide this office with a more specific request identifying the particular records you seek, we will be happy to advise whether we have such records in our custody, and if so, to provide a copy of those records to you.
If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sincerely,
Brandi Laser Seskes
Elections Counsel,
Office of Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner
------------
I think I might try to come up with a more specific request for them. We'll see if there's anything relevant that I can request.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)