My anonymous source in Tennessee heard back from Lamar Alexander's office earlier this week. A staff member was kind enough to forward his/her request for information on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, so hopefully we'll have more to report in the not too distant future.
Please note: I have digitally altered this document by removing all information that could identify my source, or the staff member working for Senator Alexander. Everything else remains intact.
Lamar Alexander FBI Contacted
Here was our original letter to the Senator's office:
1st Response to Senator Alexander
Showing posts with label eligibility. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eligibility. Show all posts
Follow-up with Joseph Sandler, Chief Legal Counsel for the Democratic National Committee
This correspondence had an email, with a document attached to it. First the email:
------------
Mr. Sandler,
I've been told that you're office is the correct one to forward this correspondence to. Please find attached some questions regarding the potential release of documents to the public from the DNC. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Dear Mr. Sandler,
Please allow me to thank you for your prompt and courteous reply to my records request. While I disagree with your assessment of the situation, I respect your judgment, and will proceed with my inquiry through the proper channels.
I thank you for the information regarding the various State Party's Delegate Selection Plans for the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Please know that many of those documents have been reviewed by myself and other concerned citizens. We have also contacted a large number of Secretaries of State, who have unanimously told us that it is the legal responsibility of the political party to ensure that the candidates they put forth for election are legally qualified to serve in the office they are seeking; hence our decision to contact you.
I hope you won't consider it impertinent of me to ask you to clear up some confusion on my part. To the best of my knowledge, each of the State Party's Delegate Selection Plans must comply with the policies, procedures, and rules that are put forth in the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention that was adopted by the Democratic National Committee on August 19th of last year. In that document, under heading 12 (Presidential Preference), rule K, it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
This document leads me to believe that there are policies and procedures that have been established by the party in which a candidate is determined to be legally qualified to hold office. As far as I am able to determine, each of these necessary qualification could be established by the presentation of documentary evidence. I am hopeful that the party will be willing to share this information with the public because in the Delegate Selection Rules it also states, under the heading An Open Party: “The Democratic Party in each state should publicize fully and in such a manner as to assure notice to all interested parties a full description of the legal and practical procedures for selection of Democratic Party officers and representatives on all levels”. I have made this request of my state party, and was rebuffed – perhaps the national party organization is willing to receive a “full description of the legal and practical procedures” for the selection of the Democratic Party's presidential nominee for the office of President of the United States of America. Is there any circumstance under which the Democratic National Party would be willing to share this information with the public? Is there any circumstance under which the party would be willing to share with the public the evidence that was considered in making the determination that Mr. Obama was legally eligible to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution and the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention?
Finally, please know that I come to you in a spirit of cooperation and, hopefully, coordinated effort. I am anything but a litigious person, and am willing to exhaust any and all necessary efforts to bring this information to light before considering the option of petitioning the judicial branch of our governmental system. I wish you the very best, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Mr. Sandler,
I've been told that you're office is the correct one to forward this correspondence to. Please find attached some questions regarding the potential release of documents to the public from the DNC. Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Dear Mr. Sandler,
Please allow me to thank you for your prompt and courteous reply to my records request. While I disagree with your assessment of the situation, I respect your judgment, and will proceed with my inquiry through the proper channels.
I thank you for the information regarding the various State Party's Delegate Selection Plans for the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Please know that many of those documents have been reviewed by myself and other concerned citizens. We have also contacted a large number of Secretaries of State, who have unanimously told us that it is the legal responsibility of the political party to ensure that the candidates they put forth for election are legally qualified to serve in the office they are seeking; hence our decision to contact you.
I hope you won't consider it impertinent of me to ask you to clear up some confusion on my part. To the best of my knowledge, each of the State Party's Delegate Selection Plans must comply with the policies, procedures, and rules that are put forth in the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention that was adopted by the Democratic National Committee on August 19th of last year. In that document, under heading 12 (Presidential Preference), rule K, it states:
1. Based on the right of the Democratic Party to freely assemble and to determine the criteria for its candidates, it is determined that all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall:
a. be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President and Vice President; and
b. have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate in the Convention in good faith.
2. It is further determined that these requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth by the United States Constitution and any law of the United States.
This document leads me to believe that there are policies and procedures that have been established by the party in which a candidate is determined to be legally qualified to hold office. As far as I am able to determine, each of these necessary qualification could be established by the presentation of documentary evidence. I am hopeful that the party will be willing to share this information with the public because in the Delegate Selection Rules it also states, under the heading An Open Party: “The Democratic Party in each state should publicize fully and in such a manner as to assure notice to all interested parties a full description of the legal and practical procedures for selection of Democratic Party officers and representatives on all levels”. I have made this request of my state party, and was rebuffed – perhaps the national party organization is willing to receive a “full description of the legal and practical procedures” for the selection of the Democratic Party's presidential nominee for the office of President of the United States of America. Is there any circumstance under which the Democratic National Party would be willing to share this information with the public? Is there any circumstance under which the party would be willing to share with the public the evidence that was considered in making the determination that Mr. Obama was legally eligible to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution and the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention?
Finally, please know that I come to you in a spirit of cooperation and, hopefully, coordinated effort. I am anything but a litigious person, and am willing to exhaust any and all necessary efforts to bring this information to light before considering the option of petitioning the judicial branch of our governmental system. I wish you the very best, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Blake Hall, RNC General Counsel
Since I'm interested in how all presidential candidates get certified as eligible, I contacted the RNC's General Counsel. The letter I sent him is substantively the same as the one I sent to the DNC.
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal info)
January 5, 2009
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
Blake Hall
Republican National Committee
310 First Street
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8500
info@gop.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of John McCain to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the RNC is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 22nd. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal info)
January 5, 2009
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
Blake Hall
Republican National Committee
310 First Street
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8500
info@gop.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of John McCain to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the RNC is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 22nd. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
District of Columbia - Office of the Secretary
A short message to confirm whether or not the laws are the same in D.C. as they are in all the other states:
------------
I am conducting some research in which I have been contacting the various Secretaries of State across the country, asking them who is responsible in their state for ensuring that presidential candidates are eligible to run for office. Would you please provide me with a brief description of the policy of the D.C. Office of the Secretary on this matter. I sincerely appreciate it. Thank you again for your time, and I hope you are enjoying a wonderful New Year.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
I am conducting some research in which I have been contacting the various Secretaries of State across the country, asking them who is responsible in their state for ensuring that presidential candidates are eligible to run for office. Would you please provide me with a brief description of the policy of the D.C. Office of the Secretary on this matter. I sincerely appreciate it. Thank you again for your time, and I hope you are enjoying a wonderful New Year.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
A Hand Delivered Letter to Nancy Pelosi?
I received an interesting letter from an an unnamed source today. This person wrote:
------------
If you want to draft a letter to NP (Nancy Pelosi) regarding the differences in the HI DNC Certification, I have someone who will hand-deliver this to NP in D.C.
------------
Obviously, I jumped at the offer. Here's the letter I wrote:
------------
January 2nd, 2009
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Washington, D.C. Office
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
202.225.4965
Congresswoman Pelosi,
First, please allow me the opportunity to wish you a Happy New Year, and express my gratitude for the chance to present this letter to you. I know that you are an extremely busy woman, and I will seek to be as brief and to the point as possible.
On the 22nd of December last year, I received a document from the Hawaii Office of Elections that included an Official Certification of Nomination from the Democratic Party that bears your signature on it. On that document, it states in part that: “the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States (referring to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively) are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” I was interested in this document because it was different from all the other Certifications of Nomination which I have received, which simply state that the candidates had been nominated at the convention. I am assuming that this difference is a result of Section 11-113 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which stipulates that the political party of a candidate must provide a statement that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
As I'm sure you know, there has been some concern on the part of the citizens of this country that Mr. Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President; and, as of yet, no evidence has been made available to the public that would allow for a determination of eligibility to be made. Because you signed your name to this document, I have been asked by other concerned citizens to make a request that you provide us access to and copies of any documents that you used when making a determination of eligibility regarding Mr. Obama's qualifications to serve as President of the United States of America.
Again, I thank you for your time, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
If I hear anything, I'll post it right away...
------------
If you want to draft a letter to NP (Nancy Pelosi) regarding the differences in the HI DNC Certification, I have someone who will hand-deliver this to NP in D.C.
------------
Obviously, I jumped at the offer. Here's the letter I wrote:
------------
January 2nd, 2009
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Washington, D.C. Office
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
202.225.4965
Congresswoman Pelosi,
First, please allow me the opportunity to wish you a Happy New Year, and express my gratitude for the chance to present this letter to you. I know that you are an extremely busy woman, and I will seek to be as brief and to the point as possible.
On the 22nd of December last year, I received a document from the Hawaii Office of Elections that included an Official Certification of Nomination from the Democratic Party that bears your signature on it. On that document, it states in part that: “the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States (referring to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively) are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” I was interested in this document because it was different from all the other Certifications of Nomination which I have received, which simply state that the candidates had been nominated at the convention. I am assuming that this difference is a result of Section 11-113 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which stipulates that the political party of a candidate must provide a statement that the candidate is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
As I'm sure you know, there has been some concern on the part of the citizens of this country that Mr. Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President; and, as of yet, no evidence has been made available to the public that would allow for a determination of eligibility to be made. Because you signed your name to this document, I have been asked by other concerned citizens to make a request that you provide us access to and copies of any documents that you used when making a determination of eligibility regarding Mr. Obama's qualifications to serve as President of the United States of America.
Again, I thank you for your time, and eagerly await your response.
Sincerely Yours,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
If I hear anything, I'll post it right away...
Response From the Democratic National Committee Regarding Document Request
Thanks to many new friends from the Plains Radio Network, I received a response to my document request today (note: the request came through others, not directly to my request). It looks like the request has been forwarded on to the legal department for review. Here's a sampling of the emails that were sent by the DNC to various petitioners (I've redacted the names of all senders for the privacy of those involved).
------------
Your request has been forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
and then:
Already received several duplicate copies. Forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
in response to a question about what department the correspondence was sent to, the DNC replied:
Legal.
------------
So we've made progress. We should hear back relatively soon, I would hope. I'll post something here as soon as there's news fit to print...
------------
Your request has been forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
and then:
Already received several duplicate copies. Forwarded to the appropriate department.
------------
in response to a question about what department the correspondence was sent to, the DNC replied:
Legal.
------------
So we've made progress. We should hear back relatively soon, I would hope. I'll post something here as soon as there's news fit to print...
Request for Documents From Democratic National Party...
Although they aren't officially a public, governmental agency, I thought I would make a document request under the state open records act, and see what response I got. There is precedent for a private, non-profit organization being compelled to release information of this nature, so I would encourage anyone and everyone interested in this topic to send a similar request to the DNC:
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal information)
December 31, 2008
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Alice Travis Germond
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8000
germonda@dnc.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Democratic Party's 2008 Delegate Selection Plan in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the DNC Services Corporation is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 7th. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Justin W. Riggs
(my personal information)
December 31, 2008
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Alice Travis Germond
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: 202-863-8000
germonda@dnc.org
RECORDS REQUEST
Dear Records Request Officer:
Pursuant to the state open records act, I request access to and copies of any and all documents used to determine the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America and the Democratic Party's 2008 Delegate Selection Plan in the 2008 primaries and general election. While the DNC Services Corporation is a private, non-profit organization, several courts have held that such organizations fall under the jurisdiction of their respective state open records acts, particularly when they are performing a government function or are functionally a government agency (see Gannon and Nichols v. The Board of Regents of the State of Iowa and Kimberly Kay Allen v. John Day for examples of these types of rulings). I therefore request that this request be granted in all due haste.
Because this request is for public, non-commercial use, I request that any fee be waived. If a fee is required, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with the amount, at which time I will decide to pursue or cancel my request.
If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I would also remind you that the act stipulates that you respond to this request in a timely fashion. I request that the document be mailed either electronically (a readable scan of the documents is sufficient) or through the postal service, no later than noon, January 7th. If this is not possible, please contact me at this email address (juriggs@yahoo.com) with a time and a date by which I can expect to receive the documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner
John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi signed the Hawaii Certification of Nominations. I wrote them through their Congressional offices.
------------
On the 4th of September, 2008, Mr. Boehner signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that John McCain met the Constitutional requirements for holding the office of President. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Mr. Boehner was presented with that allowed him to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 28th of August, 2008, Ms. Pelosi signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that Barack Obama was legally qualified to hold the office of President under the provisions of the Constitution. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Ms. Pelosi was presented with that allowed her to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 4th of September, 2008, Mr. Boehner signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that John McCain met the Constitutional requirements for holding the office of President. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Mr. Boehner was presented with that allowed him to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
------------
On the 28th of August, 2008, Ms. Pelosi signed a document that was submitted to Hawaiian government officials stating that Barack Obama was legally qualified to hold the office of President under the provisions of the Constitution. I am doing a research project on this topic, and was wondering what evidence Ms. Pelosi was presented with that allowed her to make this determination of eligibility.
Thanks for your help!
Willes K. Lee, Chairman of the Hawaii Republic State Party
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
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
Jean Inman, Secretary of the Republican National Committee
Ms. Inman,
Hi! My name is Justin Riggs, and I'm writing you from Denver, Colorado. 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 the Republican Party determines that their candidate meets this criteria.
Also, it is my understanding that your office is responsible for retaining all official materials for the party, as well as sending them to the National Archives for preservation. I've been to the National Archives website, and found it quite difficult to navigate! I was wondering if you might be able to point me in the right direction in terms of where I might find the documents you've sent to the archives that are related to the 2008 presidential election.
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. 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 the Republican Party determines that their candidate meets this criteria.
Also, it is my understanding that your office is responsible for retaining all official materials for the party, as well as sending them to the National Archives for preservation. I've been to the National Archives website, and found it quite difficult to navigate! I was wondering if you might be able to point me in the right direction in terms of where I might find the documents you've sent to the archives that are related to the 2008 presidential election.
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
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
A Surprise From the Liberterian Party...
I haven't had any luck getting the two major parties to respond to my calls and emails, so today I decided to try the minor parties. One, the Libertarian Party, responded almost immediately to my request for information. What they told me boldly highlighted the problem with our current system. First, the correspondence:
------------
Dear Sir/Madam, According to my Secretary of State's office, it is the responsibility of the party to ensure that its candidates are qualified to hold the office for which they run. I'm doing a research project on how different parties go about fulfilling this obligation. Specifically, I was wondering:
1) How did your organization ensure that Mr. (redacted - I first got the candidate's name wrong) was eligible to hold the office of President, should he have been elected?
2) When did the qualification process take place, and was there a particular date when he was "declared" to be eligible?
3) What evidence was your candidate required to present to the party in order to prove that he is Constitutionally eligible to hold office? I thank you for your time, and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
The response:
There was no question as to Congressman Barr’s eligibility, so we went on good faith that he was Constitutionally qualified.
------------
If you'll remember, the Colorado Secretary of State's office explicitly stated that the legal responsibility for ensuring that a candidate is qualified falls to the candidate's party; yet here we have a concrete example of a party who performed no check on their candidate, proceeding on "good faith" because "there was no question" about their candidate's eligibility. I don' t think I need to point out the more obvious problems with this scenario. In fact, I don't know that I need to say anything at all - the problems are so glaringly obvious that they speak for themselves.
------------
Dear Sir/Madam, According to my Secretary of State's office, it is the responsibility of the party to ensure that its candidates are qualified to hold the office for which they run. I'm doing a research project on how different parties go about fulfilling this obligation. Specifically, I was wondering:
1) How did your organization ensure that Mr. (redacted - I first got the candidate's name wrong) was eligible to hold the office of President, should he have been elected?
2) When did the qualification process take place, and was there a particular date when he was "declared" to be eligible?
3) What evidence was your candidate required to present to the party in order to prove that he is Constitutionally eligible to hold office? I thank you for your time, and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
The response:
There was no question as to Congressman Barr’s eligibility, so we went on good faith that he was Constitutionally qualified.
------------
If you'll remember, the Colorado Secretary of State's office explicitly stated that the legal responsibility for ensuring that a candidate is qualified falls to the candidate's party; yet here we have a concrete example of a party who performed no check on their candidate, proceeding on "good faith" because "there was no question" about their candidate's eligibility. I don' t think I need to point out the more obvious problems with this scenario. In fact, I don't know that I need to say anything at all - the problems are so glaringly obvious that they speak for themselves.
Hawaii Response
It seems I requested the wrong documents from Hawaii - a pattern that has emerged over these last few states. Luckily, Hawaiian officials were kind enough to write me a personalized letter pointing me in the right direction. As I have no way to post it here, I'll include what I consider to be the most pertinent information:
------------
HRS 11-113(Presidential Ballots) provides that a recognized political party will provide the Office of Elections with the following information prior to placing the names of its candidates for President and Vice President on the presidential ballot:
(1) the names and addresses of its candidates
(2) a statement by the political party that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution, and
(3) a statement that the candidates are duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party.
------------
I'll be requesting the document referred to in (2) tomorrow morning.
------------
HRS 11-113(Presidential Ballots) provides that a recognized political party will provide the Office of Elections with the following information prior to placing the names of its candidates for President and Vice President on the presidential ballot:
(1) the names and addresses of its candidates
(2) a statement by the political party that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution, and
(3) a statement that the candidates are duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party.
------------
I'll be requesting the document referred to in (2) tomorrow morning.
The Final Word From Ohio
Ms. Seskes,
I just wanted to take a moment and thank you for your assistance. I'm sorry I wasn't able to understand the Presidential Guide well enough to save you some time and effort.
Have a wonderful holiday season, and a happy 2009!
Justin
--- On Wed, 12/17/08, Seskes, Brandi wrote:
From: Seskes, BrandiSubject: FW: Public Records RequestTo: juriggs@yahoo.comDate: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 2:10 PM
Dear Mr. Riggs,
Attached is a copy of Form 1-A and 1-B filed by John McCain. Senator McCain was the only candidate to file under the matching funds method and submit either a Form 1-A or 1-B with this office.
Please let me know if you need anything further or if you have any trouble opening the attachments.
Sincerely,
Brandi
I just wanted to take a moment and thank you for your assistance. I'm sorry I wasn't able to understand the Presidential Guide well enough to save you some time and effort.
Have a wonderful holiday season, and a happy 2009!
Justin
--- On Wed, 12/17/08, Seskes, Brandi
From: Seskes, Brandi
Dear Mr. Riggs,
Attached is a copy of Form 1-A and 1-B filed by John McCain. Senator McCain was the only candidate to file under the matching funds method and submit either a Form 1-A or 1-B with this office.
Please let me know if you need anything further or if you have any trouble opening the attachments.
Sincerely,
Brandi
Virginia
I received a short response from the Virginia Secretary of State's office today. I'll need to follow up, as I'm not sure I understand the relevant statutes referenced in the email.
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
In the Code of Virginia, § 24.2-519 states that:
In order to qualify as a candidate at any primary, a person must be legally qualified to hold the office for which he is a candidate and be qualified to vote in the primary in which he seeks to be a candidate.
In order to meet the requirements of this statute, it is clear that somebody from the state of Virginia must check the legal qualifications of the person seeking to become a candidate. My question is: Who is this person? When does he/she/they check the qualifications of the candidates? What evidence is required from the candidates in order to make a determination that they are legally qualified to hold office?
My particular concern is specific to the 2008 Presidential primary. Both John McCain and Barack Obama were placed on the ballot, and as far as I can determine, no one checked to ensure that they were legally qualified to hold the office for which they were a candidate. If I am mistaken, could you please provide me with the following information: a) Who was legally responsible for making sure that the candidates were legally qualified to hold the office they were running for, and therefore eligible to qualify as a candidate on your primary ballot? b) When was the determination made that these candidates were eligible to be placed on the ballot? c) What documentary evidence was presented by the candidates to the state that proved that they were legally qualified to hold the office which they sought?
I thank you for your time and attention to these important questions, and respectfully request that you respond before 5:00 pm EST, Friday December 12th. If this will not be possible, please respond to this message with a time and a date that I might expect a response from this office.
Thank you again,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Please see Va. Code § 24.2-545 regarding the presidential primary. You can access election laws through our website under that heading at the top:
http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/
If you still have questions, you may call me this Thursday or next Monday.
Martha B. Brissette
Staff Attorney
Virginia State Board of Elections
200 N. 9th St. #925
Richmond, VA 23219
804.864.8925
Toll free 800. 552.9745
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
In the Code of Virginia, § 24.2-519 states that:
In order to qualify as a candidate at any primary, a person must be legally qualified to hold the office for which he is a candidate and be qualified to vote in the primary in which he seeks to be a candidate.
In order to meet the requirements of this statute, it is clear that somebody from the state of Virginia must check the legal qualifications of the person seeking to become a candidate. My question is: Who is this person? When does he/she/they check the qualifications of the candidates? What evidence is required from the candidates in order to make a determination that they are legally qualified to hold office?
My particular concern is specific to the 2008 Presidential primary. Both John McCain and Barack Obama were placed on the ballot, and as far as I can determine, no one checked to ensure that they were legally qualified to hold the office for which they were a candidate. If I am mistaken, could you please provide me with the following information: a) Who was legally responsible for making sure that the candidates were legally qualified to hold the office they were running for, and therefore eligible to qualify as a candidate on your primary ballot? b) When was the determination made that these candidates were eligible to be placed on the ballot? c) What documentary evidence was presented by the candidates to the state that proved that they were legally qualified to hold the office which they sought?
I thank you for your time and attention to these important questions, and respectfully request that you respond before 5:00 pm EST, Friday December 12th. If this will not be possible, please respond to this message with a time and a date that I might expect a response from this office.
Thank you again,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
Please see Va. Code § 24.2-545 regarding the presidential primary. You can access election laws through our website under that heading at the top:
http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/
If you still have questions, you may call me this Thursday or next Monday.
Martha B. Brissette
Staff Attorney
Virginia State Board of Elections
200 N. 9th St. #925
Richmond, VA 23219
804.864.8925
Toll free 800. 552.9745
Illinois - It's Our Responsibility
I had a very interesting and enlightening correspondence with Kay Walker from the Illinois Secretary of State's office this morning. The conversation ended with a phone call, in which I had something of an epiphany. Ms. Walker was explaining to me that it isn't the job of the SoS to verify candidate eligibility, but that it was his job to remove a candidate whose qualifications had been challenged and found lacking. All of a sudden I realized that the critical piece in the puzzle was the citizen who challenged the candidate's qualifications in the first place. It really isn't the job of the Secretary of State to check these qualifications. It's our job, as American citizens, to be wary of the candidates who seek to represent us, and, if we feel so inclined, to force them to provide their credentials. We as a people have perhaps become a bit complacent in exercising our rights and duties as citizens of this country.
Nearly every state I've researched has laws that allow a citizen to challenge the credentials of any candidate on the ballot. Instead of pointing our fingers at our leaders, perhaps we would be better served by educating ourselves on the avenues available to us in this fine democracy of ours.
For those interested, here is a copy of the written correspondence between Ms. Walker and I.
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
In reviewing the Illinois Election Code, I was unable to ascertain who is responsible for ensuring that the candidates for U.S. Senator are qualified to hold office. Could you please provide me with the following information:
1) Who is responsible for checking candidates for U.S. Senator qualifications.
2) When the qualification process takes place.
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate that allows a determination of eligibility to be made.
I thank you for your time and attention to this matter..
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
It is up to a registered voter in the district to file an objection against a candidate that has filed a petitions. We accept all petitions that are filed with us. If you need more information on objections you can contact our legal department at 217/782-0608.
------------
Ms. Walker,
No, I'm not interested in filing an objection against a candidate - what I'm looking for is information regarding what paperwork a Senatorial candidate must file in order to be placed upon the ballot, and who determines whether or not the candidate is eligible to run for office in your state.
For example, when I asked this same type of question to the Oregon Secretary of State, their response was:
"The Secretary of State is the elections filing officer for U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator; statewide candidates, such as Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Attorney General, as well as statewide judicial, and for other state candidates for State Representative, State Senate, Circuit Court judges and District Attorney. For the Primary Election and General Election there is a listing of candidates on our website, www.sos.state.or.us -select Elections Division, then Candidates. For each of the candidates listed from U.S. Senator down through District Attorney, there would be in the original file a form the candidate signed and copies of the county verification paperwork that answers the voter registration and residency question for each candidate. For copies of these documents,we would need to follow our public records request process."
Is there a similar process in Illinois, whereby I might be able to make a document request under the state open records act, and obtain filing papers from Senatorial candidates?
I thank you in advance for your time, and for your prompt reply to my last message. It is much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
In Illinois a candidate has to file petitions, statement of candidacy, loyalty oath (optional) and a statement of economic interest (if applicable). Different offices take a different amount of signatures. For a U. S. Senator they need at least 5,000 signature and no more than 10,000. We do not count signatures when a candidate files. If a senate candidate files only 500 signatures and no one objects to his petitions he is on the ballot. If you need more information please call me. (number redacted)
Nearly every state I've researched has laws that allow a citizen to challenge the credentials of any candidate on the ballot. Instead of pointing our fingers at our leaders, perhaps we would be better served by educating ourselves on the avenues available to us in this fine democracy of ours.
For those interested, here is a copy of the written correspondence between Ms. Walker and I.
------------
Dear Sir/Madam,
In reviewing the Illinois Election Code, I was unable to ascertain who is responsible for ensuring that the candidates for U.S. Senator are qualified to hold office. Could you please provide me with the following information:
1) Who is responsible for checking candidates for U.S. Senator qualifications.
2) When the qualification process takes place.
3) What evidence is provided by the candidate that allows a determination of eligibility to be made.
I thank you for your time and attention to this matter..
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
It is up to a registered voter in the district to file an objection against a candidate that has filed a petitions. We accept all petitions that are filed with us. If you need more information on objections you can contact our legal department at 217/782-0608.
------------
Ms. Walker,
No, I'm not interested in filing an objection against a candidate - what I'm looking for is information regarding what paperwork a Senatorial candidate must file in order to be placed upon the ballot, and who determines whether or not the candidate is eligible to run for office in your state.
For example, when I asked this same type of question to the Oregon Secretary of State, their response was:
"The Secretary of State is the elections filing officer for U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator; statewide candidates, such as Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Attorney General, as well as statewide judicial, and for other state candidates for State Representative, State Senate, Circuit Court judges and District Attorney. For the Primary Election and General Election there is a listing of candidates on our website, www.sos.state.or.us -select Elections Division, then Candidates. For each of the candidates listed from U.S. Senator down through District Attorney, there would be in the original file a form the candidate signed and copies of the county verification paperwork that answers the voter registration and residency question for each candidate. For copies of these documents,we would need to follow our public records request process."
Is there a similar process in Illinois, whereby I might be able to make a document request under the state open records act, and obtain filing papers from Senatorial candidates?
I thank you in advance for your time, and for your prompt reply to my last message. It is much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Your Fellow Citizen,
Justin W. Riggs
------------
In Illinois a candidate has to file petitions, statement of candidacy, loyalty oath (optional) and a statement of economic interest (if applicable). Different offices take a different amount of signatures. For a U. S. Senator they need at least 5,000 signature and no more than 10,000. We do not count signatures when a candidate files. If a senate candidate files only 500 signatures and no one objects to his petitions he is on the ballot. If you need more information please call me. (number redacted)
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)