BREAKING NEWS: Arizona House Government Committee Votes 5 to 1 Tonight to Approve a Presidential Eligibility Bill as Part of Renewed Effort in AZ to Get Into Law Measures to Vet the "natural born Citizen" Status and Require Birth Certificate Documents and Constitutional Eligibility of All Presidential and Vice-Presidential in 2012 and All Future Elections.Posted by: CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
I just received a phone call from a person attending the AZ House Government Committee meeting tonight. They voted 5 to 1 on Senate Bill 1157 to move it out of committee to a full AZ House vote. The equivalent Senate Committee tomorrow morning will vote on a similar House initiated bill to get, if passed by that committee, a full Senate vote. Such a bill would protect Article II, Section 1 of our U.S. Constitution and the Citizens of Arizona from usurpation of that clause in our U.S. Constitution. Congress has failed to act on protecting the Presidential Eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1. So the states must do this to protect the Constitution and our Constitutional Republic. We are a nation of laws and the Constitution is the fundamental law of the land. We the People acting through our several states will not allow usurpation and ignoring of our constitution. If the requisite bill is passed by both chambers in AZ it would then move to the Governor for signing into law. More information will be forth coming and we will post it in the comments for this thread as we learn it.
Posted by:
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Time to pound those Arizona Senators in the morning!
ReplyDeleteMario,
ReplyDeleteWhat Senators can be contact in the morning that are part of the Senate committee.
This is excellent news!
ReplyDeleteDoes the new bill contain any interstate compact language?
Hopefully this gets done in Arizona and all other states as Spookydude George Soros's ultimate goal for 2020 is to rewrite America's Constitution!!!
ReplyDeleteHopefully the Senate in Arizona will approve this bill and then all other states will follow suit; because have you heard that Spookydude George Soros's ultimate goal is to rewrite America's Constitution!!!
ReplyDeleteYes but how does it define natural born. There were drafts that said it was ONE US Citizen parent. If that's true it hurts more than helps.
ReplyDeleteif this is the same one that was derived from the IRLI submitted information to the states...the one that omitted "of parents" to allow for any child born in the USA, regardless of who his/her parents were or what their citizenship was...to be a "natural born citizen"? (details here : http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/obamas_puddles.html )
ReplyDeletethe original author (Patrick J. Charles) has submitted this to the states and the Supreme Court...and has been noticed that this omission occured...yet he has failed to take corrective action...to demonstrate that his intentions are honorable...
Mario, can you help me out here? I have been reading 1577 and I do not see the language relating to presidential election like that which is in 2177. What am I missing?
ReplyDeleteWe the People and the U.S. Constitution were victorious in the AZ House Committee yesterday. Call these AZ Senators as soon as possible this a.m. and Tell Them to Vote Yes in Their Committee on the Presidential Eligibility Vetting Bill/Amendment. The committee vote will take place in a few hours.
ReplyDeleteAZ Senate Gov Reform Committee, HB 2177, and yes on HB 1157
602 area code
Frank Antenori, Chairman R fantenori@azleg.gov 926-5683
Andy Biggs, Vice-Chairman R abiggs@azleg.gov 926-4371
Steve Gallardo D sgallardo@azleg.gov 926-5830
Kyrsten Sinema D ksinema@azleg.gov 926-5058
Ron Gould R rgould@azleg.gov 926-4138
Steve Smith R stevesmith@azleg.gov 926-5685
Lori Klein R lklein@azleg.gov 926-5284
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Some news coverage of yesterday's committee vote which includes a sample of part of the language. As soon as I get a link to the language voted on by the Senate committee today and a link for same, I will post that too. The final language is still a work in process but it is much improved over the prior bill which included wrong information from that immigration group which was also responsible for the wrong quote in that SCOTUS Amicus Brief. The AZ Senators now know they were not given correct information last year on what an NBC is and means. They were provided with copies of much of the writings by Atty Mario Apuzzo and myself which they then vetted and thus the renewed efforts to get a Presidential Constitutional Eligibility vetting law on the books and enforce for the next and future elections, since Congress in a cowardly way has refused to act to protect the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1. We the People through the several states created the Constitution and We the People acting through the several states will protect it if the cowards in Congress in Wash DC will not. They will soon learn who the true sovereigns are in this country, We the People with our God given unalienable rights.
ReplyDeletehttp://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/arizona_revives_birther_bill_for_now.php
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
Need some help here. After Google Arizona SB 1157, it appears to be some kind of environmental legislation. Is this the correct bill number? Anybody have a link to the actual bill for eligibility?
ReplyDeleteThat was the Senate Bill number I was given on the phone last night. I was told that the constitutional eligibility NBC vetting language is being added as a "striker" (an amendment) to other bills -- one bill in the House and one bill in the Senate is being amended with the same "striker" language. Striker is a term the legislators use to add or delete language from a bill in process, as I understand it. As soon as I get the final language for the STRIKER online somewhere I will post it. But I want to wait until the Senate committee acts today.
ReplyDeleteCDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
When I look up the following bills on the Arizona Legislature Website, http://www.azleg.gov/, I do not get any eligibility bills. This is what I get:
ReplyDeleteSB1157 Wastewater and garbage charges.
SB2177 No documents
HB1157 No documents
HB2177 Schools
Needless to say, I am confused.
Problem solved. I did a generic search using the phrase "natural born citizen."
ReplyDeleteApparently the Arizona legislature web site has not been updated to reference the latest bills directly.
Thank you Charles, now I get it. Someone posted the wrong bill #. I'll also keep an eye out for updates.
ReplyDeleteSD is done for the year, so now we go to work to continue to educate our spiness legislators to submit proper legislation next fall in hopes that we have a chance od getting something passed the next legislative session.
Thanks to you & Mario for all the great extended research available for use.
Leo Donofrio at naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com is writing that the Arizona bill includes language defining "natural born citizen" as one born to just one citizen parent and this language is being adopted by other states in the compact to pass similar legislation. Anybody know if this is in the current version? If so, that's not good folks.
ReplyDeleteBREAKING NEWS: Arizona Proof-of-Eligibility Legislation Update: HB2177 Presidential Certification Passes Arizona Senate Government Reform Committee... | @ Birther Report: Obama Release Your Records
ReplyDeletehttp://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/03/arizona-proof-of-eligibility.html
A Catalog of Evidence - Concerned Americans Have Good Reason to Doubt that Putative President Obama Was Born in Hawaii | by Atty Mario Apuzzo
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-concerned-americans.html
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org
####
P.S. Please note that there are TWO bill numbers involved with this effort ... one in the AZ House with an HB prefix and one in the AZ Senate with a SB prefix. So before people say the person who called me last night and gave me the wrong bill number, check for both bill numbers in AZ. Also the language for the newly amended bill with the STRIKER language on NBC eligibility proof is not on the AZ website yet, to my knowledge. It likely will be put up today now that both committees, house and senate have approved the new language as STRIKERS to both bills currently in process in both chambers.
Yikes, by the link to obamareleaseyourrecords they took out language related to parents birth - that would have been REALLY good. If it was in and is now out, these folks must be following Georgia's lead to wimp out on this.
ReplyDeleteChief Skunk,
ReplyDeleteThe other Arizona interstate compact proposal was much worst than allowing a "natural born Citizen" to be born to just one U.S. citizen parent. It actually allowed a "natural born Citizen" to be born to two aliens.
The new Arizona legislation (HB 2177) does not contain such language. In fact, it does not define a "natural born Citizen." That does not mean that Arizona will not enforce the "natural born Citizen" clause. At a minimum, Arizona wants to see, among other things, a valid long-form birth certificate. As to the definition of a "natural born Citizen," that will come later.
Puzo1-hope you are right. The Georgia bill was a really good one. Too bad they folded - I think it included evidence of parents' citizenship which would be a death nil for BHO. I'm sure that he will sue anyway, but the more qualifying requirements (e.g., parents' info) the better as far as I'm concerned. I think some of these legislators think just being born in U.S. means NBC.
ReplyDeleteTo Chief Skunk:
ReplyDeleteIf Leo Donofrio wrote that piece in his blog you mentioned recently, he is not up to date on the latest revised language in this revitalized effort to get a constitutional eligibility vetting process for the office of President on the books prior to the 2012 election cycle. That erroneous language about only one parent having to be a Citizen is gone. By the end of the day or tomorrow we should have access on the AZ gov site to the new language. I am getting it in bits and pieces from my AZ sources so I don't want to post something about what it says until it is officially posted on the AZ gov website. But this new language will have teeth in it such as granting all Citizens of AZ the right to challenge the validity of any and all eligibility documentation submitted to the Secretary of State by a Presidential candidate. Everyone needs to be a bit patient at this point. This AZ renewed initiative is a real breakthrough in getting a law passed in at least one state that will require Obama to produce real paper documents, certified copies of original long form birth certificates, etc., not internet images of alleged short forms.
CDR Kerchner
www.protectourliberty.org
Puzo1moderator-Hope you are right. Leo's post is dated March 18 and focuses on an amicus brief filed with the US Supreme Court by the Immigration Reform Law Institute – aka IRLI – for the Flores-Villar case where IRLI misquotes Rep. Bingham (Leo believes deliberately) as it relates to defining NBC. In this post he then talks about the AZ bill and their definition of NBC.
ReplyDeleteTo Chief Skunk,
ReplyDeleteYou are relatively new here with that ID, to my knowledge.
Stop jumping to assumptions and conclusions about what is and what is not in the revitalized bill until the full "striker" language is available. I have been told there is language in the bill requiring the candidate to provide information on the U.S. Citizenship status of his/her parents.
So let's be a little patient here and wait until we see the full "striker" language as passed by both committees in their respective chambers and referred to the full bodies for consideration before with assume this is wrong and that is wrong. By later today or tomorrow the final language coming out of the committees today and yesterday should be available.
Let's not get into "the sky is falling" mode here. Let's be patient. I have been working with my contacts in AZ on this for many months to educate the legislators out there. They know they were lied to last year by various sources and people. They know about the deceptive CRS Memo which we revealed to the world right here on Mario's blog. It may not be perfect language to our mindset. But it will be enormous progress and require Obama to produce real certified paper documents to prove he is a Natural Born Citizen. And any Citizen of AZ will be legally allowed to challenge that proffered proof. That is a major step up from internet images and the cowardly Congress doing nothing.
So be patient folks and wait for the language to be released on the AZ gov site.
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
All,
ReplyDeleteHere is the new Presidential Constitutional Eligibility language in the works in AZ.
http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/1r/proposed/s.2177144.doc.htm&Session_ID=102
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
puzo1moderator-Thanks. You offer sage advice and of course you're right that if this passes and becomes law it will be a huge leap forward. I conclude nothing. Just making observations - and admittedly worrying a bit since what happened in Georgia. They had a good bill and folded like a house of cards. Just makes one wonder what influences are in play that make what looked like a sure thing turn into garbage almost overnight. I hope that AZ bill is passed and signed into law - but - I am not a pessimist - I am an optimist with experience.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work.
All,
ReplyDeleteHere is the link to the video of the one AZ Gov. committee.
http://azleg.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=2
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
Here is the language for both bodies of the AZ Legislature striker/amendments/bills; http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=%2Flegtext%2F50leg%2F1r%2Fproposed%2Fs%2E2177144%2Edoc%2Ehtm
ReplyDeleteSec. 2. Title 16, chapter 4, article 6, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 16-507.01, to read:
START_STATUTE16-507.01. Presidential candidates; affidavit of qualifications; enforcement
A. The national political party committee for a candidate for president for a party that is entitled to continued representation on the ballot shall provide to the secretary of state written notice of that political party's nomination of its candidates for president and vice‑president. Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate's citizenship and age and shall append to the affidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate's age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States.
B. The affidavit prescribed in subsection A shall include references to and attachment of all of the following, which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury:
1. A certified copy of the presidential candidate's long form birth certificate that includes at least the date and place of birth, the names of the candidate's mother and father, including information sufficient to determine the citizenship of both parents, the names of the hospital and the attending physician, if applicable, and signatures of any witnesses in attendance.
2. A sworn statement or form that identifies the presidential candidate's places of residence in the United States for the preceding fourteen years.
C. If both the presidential candidate and the national political party committee for that candidate fail to submit and swear to the documents prescribed in this section, the secretary of state shall not place that presidential candidate's name on the ballot in this state. If the candidate and national political party committee for that committee submit and swear to the documents prescribed in this section, but the secretary of state believes that the preponderance of the evidence shows that the candidate does not meet the citizenship, age and residency requirements, the secretary of state shall not place that presidential candidate's name on the ballot in this state.
D. A member of the house of representatives, a member of the senate or any other citizen of this state has standing to initiate an action to enforce this section."
Bravo Zulu to AZ for the much improved language compared to last year. Especially the part about allowing all Citizens of AZ the standing to challenge the veracity of any documentation submitted pursuant to this law to the AZ Secretary of State.
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
"If ... the Secretary of State believes that the preponderance of the evidence shows that the candidate does not meet the citizenship, age and residency requirements, the Secretary of State shall not shall not place that Presidential candidate's name on the ballot"
ReplyDeleteThat's a strange way of wording it. The evidence should not have to prove that the candidate is ineligible to keep their name off of the ballot. Insufficient evidence that the candidate is eligible should keep their name off. The candidate should have to prove that they are eligible, not the other way around.
I think this bill has a loophole that can be exploited by a SOS that is sympathetic to the candidate or is afraid to deny a major party candidate a place on the ballot. This bill has no teeth. If BO does not supply his long-form BC, the SOS still can't keep him off the ballot, because the evidence does not "prove" that he is ineligible. Lack of a BC is not evidence.
Am I wrong?
In reference to H.B. 2177, consider these statements made by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema:
ReplyDelete"The law of the land is very clear. The question we’ve been facing ... is whether we want to reset the definition of natural-born citizen,” said Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema. “I would submit we did (decide) that last week.”
Sinema, of Phoenix, said as many as eight prior American presidents wouldn’t have been eligible for that office because they had one or more noncitizen parents."
Read the full story in the Washington Post at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/arizona-lawmakers-see-tie-between-birther-bill-and-issue-of-who-is-a-us-citizen-at-birth/2011/03/23/ABIQ6AKB_story.html
Would somebody find out from Senator Sinema just who these 8 Presidents might be because I can only think of two, Chester Arthur (prior) and Barack Obama (currently the putative President).
Mario,
ReplyDeleteWhat this Obot sneak and AZ Dem Senator is doing (and she a lawyer too and should know better) is saying that the Presidents who had foreign born mothers make their children not eligible if AZ passes this new law. She conveniently forgets repeatedly and as a lawyer she knows full well that these foreign born women who immigrated to the USA and married a U.S. Citizen man in the USA automatically gained naturalized Citizen status in the U.S. under the marriage fusion of Citizenship concept in the law in effect back then. She was told about this today in the committee hearings by a person addressing the committee and he even cited your and my writings on the prior presidents citizenship status. She then back off in pushing that point cause she was called on her convenient omission of key facts in her statements to the committee leaving out that these foreign born mother's of several U.S. presidents were indeed Citizens of the U.S. when the future president was born via gaining their citizenship upon marriage to a U.S. Citizen man. But the sneaky Obot senator and lawyer then just goes out and speaks to the press and tells the same lie and obfuscation all over again. They are doing this on purpose. They want to confuse the issue and keep the truth secret to protect Obama at any cost, including lying to the press and members of their own Senate committee.
For those who want to know the names of some of the Presidents she pointed to as examples in various other misleading statements along that vein, read Mario's analysist of the 44 prior Presidents NBC status.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/02/citizenship-status-of-our-44-presidents.html
And my list on that subject too:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/02/list-of-us-presidents-eligibility-under.html
Copies of these were given to the Senate committee members in background and via statements from patriots attending the hearing, but the Obot Dem lawyer Senator Krysten Sinema chooses to ignore it and put out disinformation statements to the press. She's also good chatting buddies with the Obot lawyers at TheFogBow.com and the Obot radio show Reality Check, calling in there repeatedly for commenting and advice.
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
I haven't posted here before, but have visited many times.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the work that you do for America. I am a retired USAF member and appriciate the information that you provide.
Sorry, the links in my previous post didn't work so well. Here's a better post (I hope):
ReplyDeleteHB 2177 Amendment (Frank Antenori)
http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/1r/proposed/s.2177144.doc.htm&Session_ID=102
SB 1157 Amendment (Judy Burgess)
http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/1r/adopted/h.1157-se-gov.doc.htm&Session_ID=102
Birdy,
ReplyDeleteSecond link (adopted) doesn't work. Both the AZ Senate and House sites list legislation by bill # and the numbers here (1157 and 2177) do not match up with this subject.
The amendment to HB 2177 is now shown as adopted. So both SB 1157 and HB 2177 amendments have been adopted. What's next?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/1r/adopted/s.2177gr.doc.htm&Session_ID=102
The pertinent part.
ReplyDelete1 of 2
"16-507.01. Presidential candidates; affidavit of qualifications; enforcement
A. The national political party committee for a candidate for president for a party that is entitled to continued representation on the ballot shall provide to the secretary of state written notice of that political party's nomination of its candidates for president and vice‑president. Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate's citizenship and age and shall append to the affidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate's age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States.
B. The affidavit prescribed in subsection A shall include references to and attachment of all of the following, which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury:
Part 2 of 2
ReplyDelete"1. A certified copy of the presidential candidate's long form birth certificate that includes at least the date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and the attending physician, if applicable, and signatures of any witnesses in attendance.
2. A sworn statement or form that identifies the presidential candidate's places of residence in the United States for the preceding fourteen years.
C. If both the presidential candidate and the national political party committee for that candidate fail to submit and swear to the documents prescribed in this section, the secretary of state shall not place that presidential candidate's name on the ballot in this state. If the candidate and national political party committee for that committee submit and swear to the documents prescribed in this section, but the secretary of state believes that the preponderance of the evidence shows that the candidate does not meet the citizenship, age and residency requirements, the secretary of state shall not place that presidential candidate's name on the ballot in this state.
D. A member of the house of representatives, a member of the senate or any other citizen of this state has standing to initiate an action to enforce this section."
Amend title to conform'
'NATURAL BORN' HAS BEEN SNUCK INTO THIS ARIZONA STATE COMPACT, VIRTUALLY SAYING THAT 14TH AMENDMENT BORN CITIZEN IS A NATURAL BORN.
ReplyDeleteIT SHOULD SAY 'NATIVE'
Quote:
'Notwithstanding any state or federal law to the contrary, each party state shall make a distinction in the birth certificates, certifications of live birth or other birth records issued in the party states, between a person born in the party state who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and a person who is not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States citizen.'
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1r/bills/sb1308s.htm
It's also found in this AZ Senate Bill.
ReplyDeleteQuote:
"A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States citizen."
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1r/bills/sb1308s.htm
If it were to be successfully argued that 'subject to the jurisdiction' means an alien is such, then we have a problem where it will be construed that any anchor baby will be eligible for office of POTUS.
Referring to the above 'definition' that has been stated in the proposed compact and bill.
ReplyDeleteSomething must be done to STOP an ILLEGAL 'definition' slipping under the radar.
Any way how?
"The Boston Globe: “native born” does not equal “natural born” for Presidential eligibility.
ReplyDeleteRecently, one of my readers uncovered this crucially relevant article published in the Boston Globe on November 9, 1896 by Percy A. Bridgham, aka “The People’s Lawyer“. (Mr. Bridgham’s book, One Thousand Legal Questions Answered by the “People’s Lawyer” of the Boston Daily Globe, can be found in the Harvard Law School library.)
The People’s Lawyer, upon answering a reader’s question regarding the Constitution’s natural born citizen clause, stated:
“The fact that the Constitution says “natural” instead of native shows to my mind that the distinction was thought of and probably discussed. A natural born citizen would be one who by nature, that is by inheritance, so to speak, was a citizen, as distinguished from one who was by nativity or locality of birth a citizen. A child born to Irish parents in Ireland cannot become a citizen except by naturalization, while his brother born in the United States is a native born citizen; the former is neither naturally nor by nativity a citizen, the latter is not naturally, but natively a citizen.”
It’s important to note that, while this article was written two years before the controversial decision in Wong Kim Ark, Bridgham adopts a similar conclusion as Justice Gray did in that case by stating that children born of aliens on US soil are citizens. But Bridgham also states that while these children are “native born” citizens, they are not “natural born” citizens and therefore cannot be President.
Bridgham further states:
“A comparison of the meanings of native and natural as given by Webster bears me out in my opinion of the intent of the constitution. The very definition of natural is “fixed or determined by nature,”…I do not find that our courts have ever passed upon the meaning of the word natural in connection with citizenship, so we must take its ordinary meaning.”
End of quote from ....
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/the-boston-globe-%E2%80%9Cnative-born%E2%80%9D-does-not-equal-%E2%80%9Cnatural-born%E2%80%9D-for-presidential-eligibility/
MichaelN-Not getting how 1308 would effect amended 2177?? It's a good question. 2177 requires info on parents' citizenship, which seems irrlevant in 1308. You are correct that this brings anchor babies into NBC status.
ReplyDeleteChief Skunk said...
ReplyDeleteMichaelN-Not getting how 1308 would effect amended 2177?? It's a good question. 2177 requires info on parents' citizenship, which seems irrlevant in 1308. You are correct that this brings anchor babies into NBC status.
--------------------------
I have been informed that 1308 did not pass, although I don't know this to be true, so I will investigate further.
SB1308
ReplyDeleteSPONSORS: GOULD P GRAY P PEARCE R P
BIGGS C BUNDGAARD C KLEIN C
MELVIN C MURPHY C SHOOTER C
SMITH C HARPER C
TITLE: interstate compact; birth certificates.
SENATE FIRST READ: 01/31/11
SENATE SECOND READ: 02/01/11
COMMITTEES: ASSIGNED COMMITTEES ACTION
01/31/11 JUD 02/08/11 W/D
Vote Detail 02/08/11 APPROP 02/23/11 (8-5-0-0) DPA
01/31/11 RULES 03/08/11 PFC
MAJORITY CAUCUS: 03/15/11 Y
MINORITY CAUCUS: 03/15/11 Y
COW ACTION 1: DATE ACTION AYES NAYS NV EXC
03/17/11 DPA 0 0 0 0
AMENDMENTS
APPROP (ref Bill) adopted
Jackson flr amend (ref Bill) (sub APPROP) failed
THIRD READ: DATE AYES NAYS NV EXC EMER AMEND RFE 2/3 VOTE RESULT
Vote Detail 03/17/11 12 18 0 0 Y FAILED
http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=SB1308&Session_ID=102
Found this in the Arizona Bill 2177.
ReplyDelete[capitalized]
It needs to be corrected.
"Background
Article II, Section I of the Constitution of the United States, states that in order to be eligible for the Office of President of the United States, the individual must be a natural born citizen, OR A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES, be thirty-five years of age and have been a resident within the United States for fourteen years."
THIS IS INCORRECT!
Here's what has been omitted from the "Background"
'at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution'
Needs to be corrected URGENTLY, before it's too late
ReplyDeleteThis need to be corrected/changed. [SEE (b) ii below]
What’s the use ‘ to determine the citizenship of both parents’ ?
So they ‘determine’ the parents are Chinese?
What good is that?
This whole Bill will be useless!
It should say, something like.
'ii. the names of the candidates mother and father, including information to determine ENSURE the United States citizenship of both parents, pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution.
Quote the Bill as it stands:
Provisions
1. Requires any person submitting a nomination paper for the purposes of being a candidate in a primary or nonpartisan election after December 31, 2012 to include in the affidavit, reference to and attachment of all documents necessary to show that the person will be qualified at the time of the election to hold the office the person seeks.
2. Prohibits the filing officer to accept the nomination paper of a candidate if the person does not provide the affidavit and attachments required in this for proving eligibility to hold office.
3. Requires a national political party committee for a presidential candidate for a party that is entitled to continued representation on the ballot to provide to the Secretary of State, written notice of that political party’s nomination of its candidates for president and vice-president.
4. Requires a national political party committee to submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate’s citizenship and age and is required to attach this affidavit to the affidavit documents that prove the candidate’s age, citizenship and if the candidate has been a U.S. resident for fourteen years.
5. Requires the affidavit of the presidential candidate include references to and attachment of the following, which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury:
a) a sworn statement or form that identifies the presidential candidate’s places of residence in the U.S. for the preceding fourteen years; and
b) a certified birth certificate that includes:
i. the date and place of birth,
ii. the names of the candidates mother and father, including information to determine the citizenship of both parents,
iii. the names of the hospital and the attending physician, and
iv. signatures of any witnesses in attendance if applicable.
6. Prohibits the Secretary of State from placing a presidential candidate’s name on the ballot in this state if the candidate or the national political party committee fails to submit and swear to the documents listed in this section.
7. Prohibits the Secretary of State from placing a presidential candidate’s name on the ballot in this state if the Secretary of State believes that the proof of the documents submitted and sworn to do not meet the citizenship, age and residency requirements.
8. Permits a member of the House of Representatives, a member of the Senate or any other citizen of this state to initiate an action to enforce this section.
9. Makes conforming changes.
10. Becomes effective after December 31, 2012.
Re: my last post above.
ReplyDeleteSeems like it has already been corrected, sorry to cause any alarm.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1r/adopted/s.2177gr.doc.htm
Michael,
ReplyDeletePlease provide hot hyperlinks to the bills in the AZ government website which you are saying have wrong language in them within your comment posts so people can go there and read exactly what you are referring to in the context of the bill you are speaking about. There are three sets of language in process in a stand alone bill, and as amendments to two other bills. So you need to quote the bill/law number when you send/post concerns about the language and give us a link to the Gov website to read it all in context. Thank you.
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
Blog moderator
Michael's link as a hot link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1r/adopted/s.2177gr.doc.htm
I still have a problem with the Arizona State Compact.
ReplyDeleteArticle I & Article III
Quote:
"A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States citizen."
Read it here:
http://www.azleg.gov/search/oop/qfullhit.asp?CiWebHitsFile=/legtext/50leg/1r/bills/sb1308s.htm&CiRestriction=1308
If this is the latest and the greatest, then we have a serious problem.
Michael,
ReplyDeleteThe AZ Senators have been advised on the problem with use of "natural born" in that bill which determines who is a "Citizen of the United States" at birth in conformance to the 14th Amendment. It was pointed out to them that the words "natural born" are not even in the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment makes Citizens at Birth, not natural born Citizens at birth. Read my essay on that point and pass it along in any of your communications with the AZ Senators in regards to SB1308 which is attempting to address the anchor baby citizenship problem in the USA via starting a compact by the several states and then submitting it to Congress.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/11/of-trees-and-plants-and-basic-logic_05.html
I suggest you write to the bill sponsors in the AZ Senate yourself to pass along your concerns as well. The more the merrier and the more likely it will get fixed.
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
MichaelN,
ReplyDeleteI covered at length the many problems with SB3108 (interstate compact) in my February 24, 2011, post entitled, "Arizona’s Proposed Interstate Birth Certificate Compact Law As Now Written Is Both Unconstitutional and Contrary to the Best Interests of the United States," accessed on this blog at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/02/arizonas-proposed-interstate-birth.html
Michael, et al:
ReplyDeleteHere is the AZ Legislators Membership Roster with their contact information and email addresses and phone numbers so you can find on that list the sponsors of the various bills of concern and write to them directly and then report back to us want they tell you. We are doing likewise here at our end. We need help. And numbers count. The more people contacting these AZ Senators with your concerns, the more likely things will be addressed. Be polite, respectful, and succinct.
http://www.azleg.gov/memberroster.asp
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
www.protectourliberty.org
URGENT ACTION. - Save the Constitution
ReplyDeleteHere is a link with all the contact emails etc to the Arizona senate & house members. Please pass it on to those patriots who may be keen to express their concerns, time is of the essence.
http://www.azleg.gov/MemberRoster.asp
I have the list, as a word doc and also in a format so it can be easily copied and pasted straight into 'recipients' pane of an email program.
Post your email address here if you want to help and get pro-active & I will send you the list in any easy copy and paste format.
Or email me at guardian1@iprimus.com.au & I will send the list to you.
Refer to Mario Apuzzo's blog material/articles to put in your emails to the Arizona senate and house members
Can anyone describe the process for 2177 forward? Passed out of the Senate committee, then what? Has the house approved the same language. What has to happen from now forward to get this language enacted to law?
ReplyDeleteThanks all.
On January 5, 2011, Pennsylvania State Representative and State Legislators for Legal Immigration (SLLI) founder Daryl Metcalfe (R-Butler County), state lawmakers and Constitutional scholars from across the nation convened in Washington D.C. at a press conference to unveil historic legislation addressing the misapplication of the 14th Amendment.
ReplyDelete"Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce, a national leader on the issue of birthright citizenship was unable to attend the press conference due to state business, stated that, 'The law is clear, the history is clear, the 14th Amendment is clear; natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens, for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country,' said Pearce."
Source: http://statelegislatorsforlegalimmigration.com/NewsItem.aspx?NewsID=10195
Re. SB1308 bill which addressed the Anchor Baby issue.
ReplyDelete18 March 2011 -- Arizona Senate rejects 5 major immigration bills:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/03/17/20110317arizona-birthright-citizenship-bills-rejected.html
This article comments on the failures, i.e., the RINO McCain family business interests in AZ lobbying via the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce helped kill those bills:
http://seeingredaz.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/az-rinos-crumble-to-business-lobby-demands/
I was asked to post this from a contact in AZ.
ReplyDelete-----------------------
Please find listed below the list of individuals in the AZ House of Reps that are undecided as to whether they will be supporting the presidential eligibility bill recently voted out of committee ... and that probably need some encouragement to support our presidential candidate certification bills SB1157 and HB2177. Passage in the full AZ House is the critical next step. Please be polite and respectful when you write, call or email with comments and notes per below:
We are counting on your support to pass SB1157 and HB2177, i.e., the presidential candidate eligibility requirements bills. These bills requires all candidates to show proof that they meet the constitutional requirements to run for public office and are required to support and defend Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the presidential eligibility clause requiring that only "natural born Citizens" who are at least 35 years of age and have lived in the USA at least for 14 years are eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief of our Military. Currently no law exists requiring enforcement of that clause and passage of these AZ bills will correct that in AZ elections. Please insist that this law be passed and put into effect as soon as possible so that it is full force and effect for the upcoming 2012 election. We cannot allow another presidential election eligibility vetting loop hole exist for another election. The honor system of taking the word of the political parties is no longer working. We needs laws in place in each state to insure only people constitutionally eligible to serve are placed on the ballots in all future elections.
Contact as soon as possible and inform and discuss this with:
Speaker Kirk Adams
kadams@azleg.gov
602-926-5495
Kate Brophy McGee
kbrophymcgee@azleg.gov
602-926-4486
Heather Carter
hcarter@azleg.gov
602-926-5503
Steve Court
scourt@azleg.gov
602-926-4467
Russ Jones
rjones@azleg.gov
602-926-3002
Frank Pratt
fpratt@azleg.gov
602-926-5761
Bob Robson
brobson@azleg.gov
602-926-5549
Andy Tobin
atobin@azleg.gov
602-926-5172
Michelle Ugenti
mugenti@azleg.gov
602-926-4480
Ted Vogt
tvogt@azleg.gov
602-926-3235
Vic Williams
vwilliams@azleg.gov
602-926-5839
Amanda Reeves
areeves@azleg.gov
602-926-3014
------------------
zachjonesishome,
ReplyDeleteWhat is great is that, for example, Arizona H.B. 2177 and S.B. 1157 both have standing clauses. These clauses state: "A member of the House of Representatives, a member of the Senate or any other citizen of this state has standing to initiate an action to enforce this section."
The Founders and Framers included the "natural born Citizen" clause in the Constitution so that each and every citizen would be protected by having a person assume the great and singular civil and military powers of the President and Commander in Chief who has their and the nation's values and safety at heart.
As we see, unlike our judicial branch of government, Arizona legislators have rightfully recognized the right of a citizen to protect his or her life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property from a potentially illegal president sitting in the Office of President and Commander in Chief where he or she could wield enormous power over that individual which without a doubt causes that person an injury in fact on a daily basis.
If one of these laws passes, such a citizen will have standing to file a legal action in which he or she will be able to enforce the "natural born Citizen" clause by enforcing the state eligibility statute.
One of my messages to The Donald today ....
ReplyDelete--------------------------
The far left OBOT backing Obama catering media and press are attacking your mother's Scottish home country birth. That is not a valid issue -- she was a naturalized citizen when you were born. They are once again lying and putting out disinformation and half truths to the American electorate. All that is required per the founders and framers intent with the legal term of art "natural born Citizen" in the presidential eligibility clause in our Constitution is that the parents of the child be U.S. Citizens when born AND born in the USA. About 95% of American citizens meet that so it is not a restrictive small class. It is the group who make up the overwhelming vast majority of U.S. Citizens and it is from that group we are supposed to choose our Presidents. The parents can be foreign born as long as the parents were naturalized Citizens when the child is born in the USA. Since your foreign born Scottish mother married a U.S. Citizen in the USA she was automatically naturalized under U.S. law in the 1930s under the legal concept of Citizenship fusion by marriage. The wife automatically by marital fusion law gains the Citizenship of her husband. Thus when you were born in 1946 your were born to two Citizen parents in the USA and you are thus a fully qualified constitutional Article II, Section 1, "natural born Citizen" of the United States.
Now with Obama, Obama has a real problem in that area of the law. Obama's father was not a U.S. Citizen, was not even an immigrant to this country, and was not even a permanent resident. Obama's father was a foreign national (British Subject from the colony of Kenya) sojourning in the USA to attend college in Hawaii and impregnated Obama's mother as a teenager. They never lived together after the pregnancy occurred as man and wife. There was some pseudo marriage declared in his nativity story for which no marriage license has ever been found, and then Obama Sr. abandoned the teenage mother and went off to Harvard and then a few years late back to Kenya with a 2nd American wife in tow as well as rejoining another Kenya wife he left behind in Kenya.
Obama is not eligible to be President and Command of our military no matter where Obama was born since his father was not a U.S. Citizen but was a foreign national who gave Obama British Citizenship and Obama became a British Subject by birth, recognized under U.S., British law (British Nationality Act of 1948), natural law, and international law.
Obama's father was never a U.S. Citizen nor did he ever want to be one. Obama is not eligible for that reason alone although the press will not discuss this constitutional eligibility point either. They hide this point about Obama just like they hide the truth about the Obama birth certificate issue.
See my essays and articles and ads on this subject at:
http://www.protectourliberty.org
and the articles at my lawyers blog:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
So Mr. Trump ... counter attack the far left press on their false accusations saying you are not eligible to be President since your mother was foreign born. That is B.S. just like the racism charges as to why people are questioning Obama's eligibility ... and the far left media knows it and our playing every question about Obama down and dirty to scare away criticizers. It is the citizenship of the parents that counts when their children are born in the USA, not where the parents themselves were born.
Respectfully,
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA
http://www.protectourliberty.org
P.S. Send your messages to The Donald at:
http://shouldtrumprun.com/contact-us/
Also suggest that The Donald meet with Attorney Mario Apuzzo and I.
Justice Hugo Black in DUNCAN v LOUISIANA Indicates Obama Would Not Be Eligible
ReplyDeletenaturalborncitizen.wordpress.com ^ | 03/29/2011 | Leo Donofrio
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2696466/posts
Breaking News ... more news to follow
ReplyDeleteHB 2177 ELIGIBILITY BILL IS PASSED BY AZ STATE SENATE! 21 YES VOTES! (We were hoping for 18) BILL MOVES ON TO HOUSE VOTE NEXT WEEK!
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org