Main Menu

New Hampshire Birther Bill nixed

The Concord Monitor reports that the State House Election Law Committee roundly rejected (14-3) a bill that would have required candidates for President to submit their birth certificates.

The bill (HB 1164) was sponsored by two of the Republican lawmakers that unsuccessfully tried to keep Obama off the NH primary ballot last year. Sponsor DeLumus explained that the bill was not against Obama because it wouldn’t take effect until 2013. Even after removing “long form” language in favor of a “certified copy of a birth certificate” the Committee wasn’t buying.

Print Friendly

, , , ,

25 Responses to New Hampshire Birther Bill nixed

  1. avatar
    G February 16, 2012 at 12:40 am #

    Doc – Just found out from Patrick at BadFiction that TWO other states appear to also be attempting simiar Birther Bills this cycle: MO & KS.

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/2012/02/dispatches-from-birtherstan-14-15-february-2012.html

  2. avatar
    gorefan February 16, 2012 at 12:43 am #

    G: MO & KS.

    The Missouri bill would not take effect until 2016.

  3. avatar
    G February 16, 2012 at 12:52 am #

    Not necessarily. Remember, these are not actual “Bills” at this point, just possible proposals in the works.

    From the citations at Bad Fiction on this particular bill:

    The bill’s sponsor Rep. Lyle Rowland, R-Cedarcreek, said his measure responds to “controversy” about the current president.

    People testifying in support of the bill, however, believed the legislation should be used to target the current president.

    “Why do we have to wait four years? Why not start now?” said Hector Maldonado, who run for U.S. Senate in 2010.

    Mitch Hubbard, a former candidate for Missouri Secretary of State, said it was very important to resolve the question of a president’s citizenship sooner rather than later.

    “Our soldiers need to know there is no question he is the commander of chief,” Hubbard said.

    No one testified during the public hearing Tuesday in opposition to Rowland’s bill. The committee took no formal action on Rowland’s bill and gave no timetable for future action on the measure.

    http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/02/15/missouri-lawmaker-says-show-me-your-papers/

    So, while some pushing this are trying to use 2016 as an excuse to say that it is not a “Birther Bill”, other proponents seem fairly adamant that it needs to be applied immediately and directed at Obama… (after all, we all know that is most of the true purpose and intention of these types of bills in the first place…)

    gorefan: The Missouri bill would not take effect until 2016.

  4. avatar
    dch February 16, 2012 at 8:14 am #

    Hawaii DoH COLB will suffice. I hope this gets passed so we can watch the Birther-Meltdown when the COLB gets submitted and accepted by the state. They should just pass it for the entertainment value of having the legal concept of Prima Faice become the new Vatal – it will be a whole new PayPal gold rush to mine.

  5. avatar
    donna February 16, 2012 at 9:32 am #

    as of 1999, az no longer issues long for birth certificates

    at the time, arguing with a birther from wisc, i called wisc – they stopped issuing long forms when they did away with photo copy machines

    other states TOO no longer issue long forms

    on the bottom of the hi bc it states this is to be used in any court proceeding

    and i don’t see ANY state birther bill requiring MORE than even the state dept requires would pass muster

  6. avatar
    Tarrant February 16, 2012 at 10:02 am #

    While I think the concept of birther bills is detestable and the birthers will lose interest once Obama is no longer running for office, there’s a small part of me that wants one to get passed just to see their shouts of triumph and joy upon passing – “The Usurper is finally vanquished! He’ll be forced to show what he doesn’t have! We can prove its a forgery!” – and then their cries of anguish when each and every state that has such a requirement accepts the CoLB no questions asked.

  7. avatar
    justlw February 16, 2012 at 10:38 am #

    A story, and then some questions:

    Somewhere in the black mining hills of Dakota there lived a couple named Nancy and Dan. To say they were somewhat reclusive would be an understatement; they lived off their land, never left it, and were blissfully ignorant of things like utilities and property taxes and such. No one chose to bother them, perhaps because Dan’s reputation at that one hoedown preceded him.

    Eventually they have a son, whom they name “Rocky” after an old acquaintance of theirs, sentimentalists that they are. Rocky doesn’t ever leave the family farm, but does pick up some book learnin’ from an old set of encyclopedias and a couple of “Straight Dope” books.

    When Rocky is 35, Dan and Nancy die together in a strange but ultimately innocent event involving a brown paper bag and a pickle. Rocky then gets it into his head to light into town and run for president. (I imagine him approaching a clerk at a window that says “RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT” above it, rendered in Algerian font, of course.)

    Poor Rocky has no BC, no SSN, no drivers license, no identification of any sort, through no fault of his own. Dan and Nancy are no longer even around to vouch for the date and place of his birth.

    So — is he breaking any laws? Dan and Nancy might have; what are the requirements for registering birth? Are they uniform across the 50 states? I know an SSN is required for income tax purposes, but they had no income.

    How does Rocky get right with our bureaucracy? Gone are the days when Reagan could readily get his first BC in his 30s. Where can his paper trail commence?

    And I guess my point, if I actually have one, is: is there any way an eligibility law could be written in such a way to deny Rocky his bid for the presidency and still be Constitutional? It would seem to me he’s lived within the boundaries set out by our Constitution. How would he be prevented from running?

  8. avatar
    Majority Will February 16, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    justlw: When Rocky is 35, Dan and Nancy die together in a strange but ultimately innocent event involving a brown paper bag and a pickle.

    That sounds like a case for Nick Danger, Third Eye.

  9. avatar
    justlw February 16, 2012 at 10:48 am #

    Well, the whole birther story does seem to have more holes in it than Albert Hall.

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 16, 2012 at 11:00 am #

    If Rocky were under age 5, it would be legally straightforward. He would be considered a foundling, his birth could be registered, and upon his majority citizenship would be assured beyond question. There is a touching story of several foundling children and their quest for documentation in this article:

    http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0123-nugent.shtm

    In your hypothetical case of Rocky, assuming that no one alive could attest to his birth (and no family Bible or other evidence), about the only thing I can figure out is that Rocky appeal to a legislative solution of some sort. Without a birth certificate or a social-security card or a drivers license, it’s nigh impossible to get a job.

    justlw: How does Rocky get right with our bureaucracy? Gone are the days when Reagan could readily get his first BC in his 30s. Where can his paper trail commence?

  11. avatar
    y_p_w February 16, 2012 at 11:04 am #

    donna: as of 1999, az no longer issues long for birth certificates

    at the time, arguing with a birther from wisc, i called wisc – they stopped issuing long forms when they did away with photo copy machines

    other states TOO no longer issue long forms

    California still does, although it’s usually not a direct photocopy or anything that even resembles a manual placement on a photocopier.

    Nearly all offices that issue recent vital records use an image scan stored in a database. The ones I’ve gotten are typically pixelated like a FAX. The fine print can even be hard to read. I do remember getting a certified copy of my marriage certificate minutes after it was filed by a clerk. That one was clearly prepared on a photocopier, with every little bit of detail clear. I’ve ordered another copy as a backup, and that one was shrunken down and pixelated, with some of the fine print hard to read. I tried getting another copy recently, and they took my money then said there were issues with their computer system. They’re supposed to be able to pull up images from their database, trim to the portion that goes on the certificate, and adjust the size. However, they couldn’t do it and asked that I stick around while they called some out of state tech to bring it back up remotely or perhaps they might have to pull it up from their microfilm. I gave up because I had to get to work, and asked that they just mail it. I called back that day, and the clerk who I dealt with answered and said that the system came back online minutes after I left. I’m still waiting for it though. They county office doesn’t keep any of the originals. The state is the final custodian of the original. The state also has limited time periods where they’ll issue marriage certificates, and they say the wait time can be up to 6 months.

    The birth certificate one of Jon Huntsman, Jr. seems to be a bit sharper than I’ve seen in other documents. His was an older one, so there’s a chance that they might have pulled it up from a photographic archive. It doesn’t have a state file number, so I’m pretty sure it’s not directly copied from the original paper document, which would have that number.

    http://i.imgur.com/4wC4Z.jpg

  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 16, 2012 at 11:09 am #

    South Carolina doesn’t issue long forms.

    donna: other states TOO no longer issue long forms

  13. avatar
    The Magic M February 16, 2012 at 11:39 am #

    justlw: And I guess my point, if I actually have one, is: is there any way an eligibility law could be written in such a way to deny Rocky his bid for the presidency and still be Constitutional? It would seem to me he’s lived within the boundaries set out by our Constitution. How would he be prevented from running?

    I’m not sure. Some birfers say that running for President is a privilege, not a right. I’m not sure if I agree or disagree, but at least it’s debatable.

    I mean, if the provisions in the Constitution mean something, is requiring proof unconstitutional?

    Requiring proof beyond common sense or other constitutional provisions (such as Full Faith And Credit) might be, but saying “you have no proof you were even born here, or who your parents were” isn’t, IMO.

    The birfer idiocy is not that they say “if you have no proof you were even born here, or who your parents were, you can’t be President” but that they claim Obama has no such proof.

  14. avatar
    y_p_w February 16, 2012 at 11:53 am #

    justlw: So — is he breaking any laws? Dan and Nancy might have; what are the requirements for registering birth? Are they uniform across the 50 states? I know an SSN is required for income tax purposes, but they had no income.

    How does Rocky get right with our bureaucracy? Gone are the days when Reagan could readily get his first BC in his 30s. Where can his paper trail commence?

    Or Nixon.

    Honestly I think it might be possible to do that, but it would take a lot of doing and working under the table without an SSN.

    There were the two sisters who sued to SSA to get SSN cards. They had a final settlement where the State Dept issued them passport cards, which they were supposed to use within days to get their SSN cards. It was sort of a chicken and egg thing, since passports and passport card applications require an SSN these days, but they made an exception for these sisters. Before then, they sort of worked under the table and even posed as their mother to get jobs.

    http://www.wbko.com/home/headlines/Sisters_Settle_Suit_Over_Social_Security_Cards_134438723.html

  15. avatar
    y_p_w February 16, 2012 at 11:54 am #

    By the way, Nixon’s BC (filed when he was around 30) wasn’t signed by anyone other than Nixon himself. It took a court order.

  16. avatar
    y_p_w February 16, 2012 at 12:25 pm #

    justlw: Poor Rocky has no BC, no SSN, no drivers license, no identification of any sort, through no fault of his own. Dan and Nancy are no longer even around to vouch for the date and place of his birth.

    I mentioned Raechel and Stephanie Schultz. Their parents were actually around to testify to their birth. They apparently got late birth certificates via a court order with their parents attesting to their births. However, the Social Security Administration wouldn’t accept them as adequate proof of eligibility for SSN cards. Their sister got an SSN card as a teen, but apparently it took a couple of tries before they’d accept her late birth certificate.

  17. avatar
    donna February 16, 2012 at 12:34 pm #

    when trump came forward with HIS, he OMITTED showing his kids’ birth certificates from the 70s – ALL of the ny BCs i have seen from the 70s forward look just like mine from ri and obama’s

  18. avatar
    y_p_w February 16, 2012 at 1:38 pm #

    donna: when trump came forward with HIS, he OMITTED showing his kids’ birth certificates from the 70s – ALL of the ny BCs i have seen from the 70s forward look just like mine from ri and obama’s

    All his kids were born in NYC before electronic birth registration. They actually provide a free certified copy for every baby born, and for the longest time it was a “long form”. I believe every one of his kids can get a new certified “vault copy” although it takes maybe a couple of weeks to have it delivered. It’s probably easiest to order in person, but there’s a comment section on the application form.

    http://home2.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/vr/vr-process-time-info.shtml
    http://home2.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/vr/birth1.pdf

    Please allow an additional ten (10) business days for vault copies of NYC birth certificates, all copies of NYC death certificates, and any other record that requires searching.

  19. avatar
    Thomas Brown February 16, 2012 at 4:11 pm #

    Justlw

    ‘When Rocky is 35, Dan and Nancy die together in a strange but ultimately innocent event involving a brown paper bag and a pickle. Rocky then gets it into his head to light into town and run for president. (I imagine him approaching a clerk at a window that says “RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT” above it, rendered in Algerian font, of course.)’

    “President Rococo.” It’s got a ring to it.

  20. avatar
    Dan Ackroyd February 16, 2012 at 10:09 pm #

    In Kenya, the govt has SEALED Obama’s records. WTF does this mean? Could it possibly be true, as his grandmother said, that Obama was born IN KENYA.
    GET RID OF THIS CRIMINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. avatar
    G February 16, 2012 at 10:20 pm #

    Coming from someone using the moniker of a famous comedian, such a blatently crazy post has to be an intentional joke…

    Dan Ackroyd: In Kenya, the govt has SEALED Obama’s records. WTF does this mean? Could it possibly be true, as his grandmother said, that Obama was born IN KENYA.GET RID OF THIS CRIMINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  22. avatar
    Arthur February 16, 2012 at 10:42 pm #

    Dan Ackroyd: Could it possibly be true, as his grandmother said, that Obama was born IN KENYA.

    No, she didn’t say that, and no he wasn’t born in Kenya.

    Dan Ackroyd: GET RID OF THIS CRIMINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Getting rid of criminals starts at home; let’s begin by putting petty liars like you in the stocks.

  23. avatar
    Thomas Brown February 17, 2012 at 9:35 am #

    Dan Ackroyd:
    In Kenya, the govt has SEALED Obama’s records. WTF does this mean?Could it possibly be true, as his grandmother said, that Obama was born IN KENYA.
    GET RID OF THIS CRIMINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    There are no records of President Obama in Kenya. They could only be of his father, who had the same name.

    His grandmother said, in no uncertain terms, that he was born in Hawaii.

    People with the IQ of dryer lint shouldn’t be playing with computers. So go back to amusing yourself with your shoebox full of kiddie porn and old toenail clippings in your uncle’s basement.

  24. avatar
    donna February 27, 2012 at 1:42 pm #

    NH – Orly v Obama – Motion for reconsideration

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/nh-orly-v-obama-motion-for-reconsideration/

  25. avatar
    G February 27, 2012 at 3:36 pm #

    LOL! Oh, the folly of frivolity amongst the terminally delusional! Wow, Orly is really taking the concept of vexatious litigant to new heights…

    donna: NH – Orly v Obama – Motion for reconsiderationhttp://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/nh-orly-v-obama-motion-for-reconsideration/

99999 00000
?????????