Breitbart Refusal

Breitbart Refusal

Advertisements

4 Comments

  1. azgo
    Posted January 16, 2010 at 11:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hey, I saw your comment at East Valley Tribune regarding Az. Rep. Judy Burges and her presidential eligibility bill. She is not the only one to sponsor this bill. Forty Arizona lawmakers are sponsoring or cosponsoring the bill.
    http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=HB2441
    (click “Show Sponsors”)

    This will bring forth the first state government official in the history of the U.S. to review and approve candidates for President and Vice President of the United States as prescribed by law to be placed on the state general election ballot.

    “ARTICLE I

    BILL OF RIGHTS

    POLITICAL POWER”

    ” RIGHT TO PRIVACY

    Section 6. The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest. The legislature shall take affirmative steps to implement this right. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]”
    – THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

    “…without the showing of a compelling state interest.”
    “… a direct and tangible interest in the record.”
    ————–
    Since the Constitution of Hawaii is tied to the U.S. Constitution, I believe it is “We the People”.
    ————–
    “PREAMBLE …

    FEDERAL CONSTITUTION ADOPTED

    The Constitution of the United States of America is adopted on behalf of the people of the State of Hawaii.”
    – THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

    What do you think?

  2. Posted January 16, 2010 at 11:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I believe there is absolutely a compelling state interest in knowing whether a presidential candidate is eligible to even be president. And Hawaii believes it too, because “Public Health REgulations”, Chapter 8b, 2.5(A)(1)(f) says a certified copy of a certificate may be issued to

    “…(f) A government agency acting on behalf of the registrant to process a financial claim, beneft, award, or other compensation or to transact official business involving the registrant or his affairs.”

    An elections officer completes a transaction on behalf of the candidate when placing him/her on the ballot. They are clearly a “government agency acting on behalf of the registrant”, and placing the name on the ballot is clearly an official business transaction involving the registrant.

    The Hawaii Ombudsman just yesterday tried to say that since the rules say a certificate “may” be issued rather than “shall” be issued, the DOH can refuse to issue it. But Hawaii’s Open Records Law (UIPA) says that if a document MAY be released it MUST be released.

    Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18(b) also allows a government official to receive official verification of facts claimed by someone applying for benefits or employment with the government. This would clearly authorize federal officials to get a verification of Obama’s birthplace and parents (both of which are central to the “natural born citizen” requirement for presidential eligibility).

    I don’t know if Hawaii could actually verify any of the content on Obama’s birth certificate, though, because Obama’s amendment of the record nullifies it as legal evidence. I don’t know if Hawaii has anything that would allow them to make any claim about the accuracy of what is on Obama’s documents.

    In any event, Hawaii considers it common-sense knowledge that there is a vested government interest in a person’s vital records when official government transactions are at stake. Fukino knew that and so she hid the Administrative Rules as long as possible, in order to keep anybody else from knowing that Hawaii has officially agreed all along with concerned citizens saying there is a legitimate interest in Obama’s records.

    So yes. Bravo, Arizona!! Let’s see you pass this!! Hopefully we can get a similar bill passed in every state, including my own Nebraska.

    As long as a state agency is authorized to ask for the birth certificate, Hawaii officials have no legal basis to refuse and are in fact bound by UIPA to issue the certificate.

  3. Posted January 17, 2010 at 12:33 am | Permalink | Reply

    A little more on UIPA.

    In the OIP Handbook on UIPA at http://hawaii.gov/oip/UIPA%20Manual%205aug08.pdf , page 14, it says:

    Agencies MUST (ed – emphasis mine) also disclose:

    (1) Any record for which the requester has
    obtained the prior written consent of all
    individuals to whom the record refers;

    (2) Records expressly authorized by federal
    or state law to be disclosed to the person
    requesting access;

    Notice that #2 says that if disclosure is authorized by state law it is REQUIRED. Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18(a) gives DOH Administrative Rules the legal authority to authorize disclosures. And the current Administrative Rules (“Public Health Regulations, Chapter 8b) authorize the release of a certified copy of certificates to government agencies transacting official business on behalf of the person named on the certificate.

    The booklet goes on to explain that if a requested record isn’t specifically REQUIRED to be released it still has to be released unless one of the five exceptions to disclosure applies.

    Since disclosure of a certified copy of a birth certificate to a government agency transacting official business is authorized (allowed) by the rules, UIPA makes the disclosure mandatory. The five exceptions don’t apply to it.

    Any other disclosure similarly authorized (such as non-certified abbreviated copies of birth, death, and marriage certificates, which are authorized to be released to anybody who asks for them) is REQUIRED to be disclosed.

    The Administrative Rules allow the Director of the Department of Health to decide whether to release MORE information than is already authorized, but whatever is already authorized by the rules is REQUIRED to be released, according to UIPA.

  4. pb
    Posted January 31, 2010 at 5:12 am | Permalink | Reply

    i am writing a book and would very much like to use your research in it… can you email me please? also keep my request private please.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: