We Will See: Does the Law Exist in Hawaii?

Update: I received this just now

  —– Original Message —– From: Office of the Ombudsman To: Nellie (redacted) Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 3:40 PM Subject: RE: Request for Assistance – Copies of Original VR-1 Pages

Dear Ms. (redacted):

 We have received your email below.  

 I have assigned your case to Alfred Itamura, a staff member of my office.  Mr. Itamura will be contacting you to obtain further information, if necessary, or to inform you of the findings of our investigation.

 Thank you for writing to us.

 Sincerely yours,

/s/ ROBIN K. MATSUNAGA

Ombudsman, State of Hawaii

                                   We Will See: Does the Law Exist in Hawaii?
Here is the letter I sent this morning, requesting an investigation into the HDOH’s destruction of permanent records. We will see whether anybody in Hawaii is even PRETENDING to care about the law. The letter contains my e-mail history with the OIP.

 
 

—– Original Message —–

From:
Nellie (redacted)

To:
oip@hawaii.gov

Cc:
complaints@ombudsman.hawaii.gov ; governor.lingle@hawaii.gov ; LtGov@hawaii.gov ; hawaiiag@hawaii.gov

Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:15 AM

Subject: Fw: Request for Assistance – Copies of Original VR-1 Pages

Dear Ms. Joesting & Ombudsman’s Office,

 
 

The HDOH has now twice said that they cannot disclose the records I requested because the original birth index pages don’t exist. These are documents (separate from the birth certificates themselves) which were submitted to the comptroller in 1980 with instructions to be retained permanently as originals and/or microfilm copies. The comptroller signed the request form. It has now been well over 10 business days since I asked the HDOH to provide the record of their having destroyed these records, since there was no request to dispose of these records as of the beginning of the year, which was when I received the copy of the DOH retention schedule. They have also said there is no index of foreign births – a document submitted to the comptroller and specified for permanent retention in 1982.

 
 

Either the HDOH is lying about these records not existing, or they have illegally destroyed them, or they have legally destroyed them within the past 5 months but refuse to release the documentation for that destruction.

 
 

The complete exchange with the HDOH can be found at my blog at https://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/hdoh-has-destroyed-original-permanent-records/ . That article also links to the retention schedule and to a post containing my complete exchanges with archivist Susan Shaner, who agrees that the HDOH should have these records.

 
 

The HDOH’s answers strongly suggest that they have illegally destroyed permanent records – a serious offense that should result in disciplinary action including termination of employment for those involved. When will this investigation begin and by whom, and will the people involved be put on administrative leave until the investigation is complete?

 
 

I look forward to your prompt attention to this serious matter.

Nellie

 
 

cc: complaints@ombudsman.hawaii.gov

       governor.lingle@hawaii.gov

       ltgov@hawaii.gov

       hawaiiag@hawaii.gov

 
 

 
 

—– Original Message —–

From:

To:
oip@hawaii.gov

Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 5:06 PM

Subject: Re: Request for Assistance – Copies of Original VR-1 Pages

Ms Joesting,

 
 

The HDOH has not answered this request for over 10 business days. I have no reason to believe they are working on it. This is why I checked the box on the OIP Request Form saying that it has been 10 business days and I have not received an answer. I assumed that the choice to check that box is only there because a lack of a timely response is reason for the OIP to be involved.

 
 

I have requests to the HDOH which they have been stalling on for 4 1/2 months. Is that behavior acceptable to the OIP? What good is a 10-day deadline if it never has to be followed? Must I babysit them to force them to respond to everything I send – waiting 10 days for for them to say they didn’t receive my request, ten days to say they don’t know what I’m talking about,ten days to say the record doesn’t exist, ten days to say the record exists but we don’t have to show it to you, ten days to say they already answered my request, and on and on forever?  That has been my experience with the HDOH on multiple occasions. I realize that I’m venting here, but I am at the point where I’m ready to charge lawyer’s rates for the time I spend babysitting them since they can’t be trusted to answer in timely fashion on their own. lol.

 
 

In what the HDOH treated as a separate request (since they left out the last 3 e-mails I included here, even though the last request had been in their office for over 10 business days) they responded that the records I requested don’t exist. From what I understand, the conversion to electronic records was done around 1977. In 1980 a retention order was submitted for the paper indices which were used before the records became computerized. The order said that the indices were to be retained permanently and could be stored as microfilm security and search copies. Those records existed in 1980 and were specifically required to be kept as paper copies and/or microfilms. Either way, those records are required to still exist. How can the HDOH say they don’t exist? OIP rules require that if they don’t have administrative control over those records they are required to tell me who does – not just say they don’t exist. Does the HDOH have administrative control over those microfilms, or does the archive?

 
 

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

 
 

Thank you.

Nellie

—– Original Message —–

From:
oip@hawaii.gov

To:
Nellie

Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:04 PM

Subject: Re: Request for Assistance – Copies of Original VR-1 Pages


Ms. (redacted),

 
Because your matter is still being worked on by the Department of Health it is too early to be addressed by our office.

 
Thank you for your inquiry.  

 
Sincerely,
Linden Joesting
Staff Attorney

 
Office of Information Practices
State of Hawaii
No. 1 Capitol District Building
250 S. Hotel St., Suite 107
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Tel.: 808-586-1400
Fax: 808-586-1412
E-mail: oip@hawaii.gov
Web site: http://www.hawaii.gov/oip
 
 

 

 

“Nellie”(redacted)

04/29/2010 04:37 AM

To

<oip@hawaii.gov>

cc

“Okubo, Janice S.” <janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov>, <chiyome.fukino@doh.hawaii.gov>, “hdohinfo” <hdohinfo@doh.hawaii.gov>

Subject

Request for Assistance – Copies of Original VR-1 Pages
 
 

   

 

 
Dear esteemed worker at the OIP: 
 
Enclosed is a request for assistance. In this e-mail I detail the complete history of communications with the HDOH on this matter. Because there have been problems in the past with multiple e-mails not being received by the OIP, I request a “read” receipt or an e-mail acknowledging your receipt of this request. If I don’t hear back by mid-day (Hawaii time) I will re-send the request.

 
 
Feb 3 – almost 3 months ago – I sent this request:

 
 

 

 

 



From: Nellie (redacted)
Sent:
Wednesday, February 03, 2010 2:31 PM
To:
Okubo, Janice S.
Subject:
UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 
 
2-3-10

 
 
Aloha.

 
 
Pursuant to UIPA, I request an electronic copy of the microfilm for the birth and death indexes (VR-1, VDR-1, & VDR-6, & VDR-10) for 1961. The records retention schedule says that these must retained permanently.

 
 
Thank you.

 
Nellie

 
__________________________________________________________

 
 
Sixteen days later the HDOH sent this:

 
 
—– Original Message —–
From:
hdohinfo

To:
(redacted)

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 6:00 PM

 
Subject: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 
 
Aloha Ms.(redacted):

 
 

 
We are unfamiliar with what you mean by VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6 and VDR-10. Could you please clarify your request?

 
 

 
Thank you.

 
 

 
Hawaii Department of Health

 
Public Information Office staff

 
 
Send mail to:
State Department of Health

 
Office of Health Status Monitoring

 
Issuance/Vital Statistics Section/UIPA Request

 
Honolulu, HI 97801

 
hdohinfo@doh.hawaii.gov

 
 _______________________________________________________________

 
 

 

I responded with this:

 
 
From: Nellie (redacted)
Sent:
Thursday, April 08, 2010 5:08 AM
To:
hdohinfo
Subject:
Re: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 
 
Aloha!

 
 
VR-1 Birth index (p 21 on retention schedule)

 
VDR-1 Delayed BC Index (p. 22 on retention schedule)

 
VDR-6  COHB Index (p 23 on retention schedule)

 
VDR-10 Index to certificates of foreign birth (p 19 on retention schedule)

 
 
I’ve enclosed the retention schedules so you can see what I’m talking about. There should be either original copies or microfilms. Since these are from 1961 they would not be computerized. I’m asking for electronic copies of the original or microfilmed records, including everything that was authorized for public release before UIPA was passed in 1988 (name, birth date, and certificate number – which were public since at least 1977; see p. 11 of OIP Opinion Letter 90-23 ) since UIPA was not intended to close any previously-authorized disclosures (see  Opinion Letter 90-04 (page 6 ) .  Any other information may be redacted if its disclosure was not authorized before 1988 and an exemption to disclosure applies)

 
 
I just noticed that VDR-10 begins in 1981 so there would not be any records for 1961. My apologies for that mistake.

 
 
Thanks!

 
Nellie

 
 
___________________________________________________________________________

 

Having received no response I reminded the HDOH that I was waiting and narrowed down my request:

 
 
—– Original Message —–
From:
Nellie (redacted)

To:
hdohinfo

Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 9:58 PM

 
Subject: Fw: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 

 
Aloha! 
 

 
I haven’t heard back from you on this and realize that these would be very large records. I’ll narrow this down, for now, to copies of the original VR-1 pages from 1961 containing birth index data for Michael T Asing, Nathan C Asing, Rocky W Asing, Norman Asing, Barack H Obama II, and Tomiyo Sunahara, as well as the 3 pages before and 3 pages after each of those pages.

 
 

 
As I mentioned earlier, the name, birth date and certificate number were actually required for public disclosure before UIPA was passed in 1988 and so they were grandfathered in as discloseable. Any other information may be redacted if necessary to protect confidential information.

 
 

 
I prefer to receive these as electronic scans via e-mail.

 
 

 
Thank you.

 
Nellie

 
 
______________________________________________________________________________

 
 
The HDOH response was totally unrelated to my request and neither fulfilled nor denied my request:

 

 
Aloha Ms. (redacted): 

 
—– Original Message —–
From:
hdohinfo

To:
Nellie (redacted)
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 6:38 PM
Subject: RE: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 

 
Please visit our site http://hawaii.gov.health/vital-records/obama.html to review conditions under which vital records may be requested.

 
 

 
 

 
Hawaii Department of Health

 
Public Information Office staff

 
 
Send mail to:
State Department of Health

 
Office of Health Status Monitoring

 
Issuance/Vital Statistics Section/UIPA Request

 
Honolulu, HI 97801

 
hdohinfo@doh.hawaii.gov

 
 

 
___________________________________________________________________

 
I responded:

 
 

 

 

—– Original Message —–
From:
Nellie (redacted)

To:
hdohinfo

Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:13 PM

 
Subject: Re: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 

 
I have not requested vital records. I have requested to see a government record of index data. In an e-mail yesterday I further clarified the particular records I am asking to see. I said: 
>>>>>

 
Aloha!

 
 

 
I haven’t heard back from you on this and realize that these would be very large records. I’ll narrow this down, for now, to copies of the original VR-1 pages from 1961 containing birth index data for Michael T Asing, Nathan C Asing, Rocky W Asing, Norman Asing, Barack H Obama II, and Tomiyo Sunahara, as well as the 3 pages before and 3 pages after each of those pages.

 
 

 
As I mentioned earlier, the name, birth date and certificate number were actually required for public disclosure before UIPA was passed in 1988 and so they were grandfathered in as discloseable. Any other information may be redacted if necessary to protect confidential information.

 
 

 
I prefer to receive these as electronic scans via e-mail.

 
 

 
Thank you.

 
Nellie

 
 

 
______________________________________________________________________________

 
 

 
After a week of waiting and receiving no response at all I sent this:

 

 
It is past the time for you to have sent the requested records I asked for. When will you be sending these public records to me? 

 
—– Original Message —–
From:
Nellie (redacted)
To:
hdohinfo

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 4:36 PM
Subject: Fw: UIPA Request – VR-1, VDR-1, VDR-6, VDR-10

 
Thanks.

 
Nellie

 
__________________________________________________________________________

 
 
Having received no response, I am appealing to the OIP to uphold UIPA, which requires the disclosure of these government records. The retention schedule requires these records to be kept in original form and/or as microfilm copies. These names are from a page of the computerized birth index list for 1960-64 and/or birth announcements from the 2 Hawaii newspapers. The records exist. They are required to be disclosed, with non-discloseable information redacted. To this date, the only index pages released are computerized pages, which are not on the retention schedule at all. Index data is required to be released so the information on this record is not only discloseable but REQUIRED to be available to the public.

 
 
The official OIP request for assistance is attached.

 
 
Thank you.

 
Nellie

 
 
 

 

 

Advertisements

26 Comments

  1. charlene
    Posted May 25, 2010 at 4:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Great work! Keep on , you are getting there! Blessings.

    • Posted May 25, 2010 at 5:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks. I feel sort of like Frodo Baggins – small and tired but surrounded by friends who will carry me if need be.

  2. MissTickly
    Posted May 26, 2010 at 12:02 am | Permalink | Reply

    You ARE getting there! You’ve come so far. These are simple questions, I am sending positive thoughts your way that you get answers…

    Here’s a good old fashioned (((HUG)))) for you, too!=OP

    • Renee
      Posted June 9, 2010 at 6:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

      MT, How are you ? Waving ! Hope you are doing well. Missed you.

  3. Posted May 26, 2010 at 4:39 am | Permalink | Reply

    This is a totalitarian oligarchy, represented by a Maoist usurper.

    “All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.” – Mao

    “How many divisions does the Pope have?!” – Stalin

    “[Antiochus Epiphanes IV, the king of the North, the Seleucids of Syria] shall honor a god of fortresses [or forces];” – Daniel 11:38

  4. Posted May 26, 2010 at 5:26 am | Permalink | Reply

    Ha! I love the Hobbits. They never quit no matter the insurmountable odds. They did for the shire. Nellie, there is a reason that the DoH will not release the original index data from the GENERAL INDEX OF BIRTH, 1960-1964, and have created an brand new, shiny, laser-printed version. The brand new version contains only the child’s last name, first name, sex, DOB. Not a thing more.

    • Posted May 26, 2010 at 3:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Exactly. And it’s very easy to insert a false record into a computer list.

  5. ksdb
    Posted May 28, 2010 at 9:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

    That looks encouraging about the investigation, although this might quickly turn into a CYA. Hang in there!

    • Posted May 28, 2010 at 9:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’ve had less than terrific results with Mr Itamura. I asked for an investigation into 8 specific, listed instances of potential illegal or criminal behavior on the part of the HDOH and OIP. He ignored everything except the LEAST ethically or criminally-significant issue: the HDOH’s refusal to disclose a non-certified abbreviated birth certificate, which he concluded was a “reasonable” response, even though for an inaccurate reason, because I could always appeal the accuracy of their claims to the OIP. Which I did, and the OIP said they let the HDOH decide what the laws mean. The whole thing is just a big racket, as far as I can tell.

      Mr. Itamura knows that the OIP and HDOH are guilty of misprision of felony and is refusing to report it to the legal authorities – hiding behind the excuse (which I was directly given by the Ombudsman’s Office) that they don’t HAVE to report criminal behavior unless THEY are the people who uncover it. Seems to me that misprision doesn’t exactly follow that guideline. If you know that a felony has been committed and fail to report it you are guilty of misprision of felony.

      I’m glad they are at least pretending to investigate this, but I don’t hold out high hopes for their “investigation”.

      • Posted May 28, 2010 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

        Unethical or criminal behavior, not “illegal or criminal”.

      • SapphireSunday
        Posted June 10, 2010 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

        Mr. Itamura may find that his belief about your request for a non-certified abbreviated BC being “reasonable” may come back to bite him. I bet he’s already hearing from the powers that be, if he told you that it’s reasonable for them to produce such a document for you.

        I doubt seriously that they WANT to produce ANY document, especially a non-certified COLB. Why? Because their statutes state that a COLB MUST specify changes or late filing information.

        Does anyone imagine that whatever would come out of their database (if they follow their own rules) will EXACTLY match that FactCheck COLB?

        If it doesn’t exactly match, somebody’s in deep doo doo.

        If it does exactly match but later on somebody determines that something on it is fraudulent or if something that should be there isn’t there, such as late filing or an amendment notification, then the DoH is in deep doo doo.

        They’re dancing as fast as they can to protect their own behinds (if they can even do so at this point) AND/OR to help Obama with whatever it is that he’s trying to hide.

        Believe me, he’s hiding SOMETHING. Nobody spends millions to avoid showing publicly a document that he claims to have and which his minions claim will prove that he WAS born in Hawaii and that he IS eligible for the presidency.

      • Posted June 10, 2010 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

        Just a quick correction. I probably didn’t make it clear that what Mr. Itamura said was reasonable was the HDOH’s refusal to give me a non-certified abbreviated BC. He said that because the rule says they “MAY” issue it, they don’t HAVE to. But the rules also say that they “MAY” issue anything. Using the same principle, the HDOH would be “reasonable” to refuse to issue anything from their office.

        And, as Mr. Itamura knows, anything that is not forbidden from release is required to be released according to UIPA. So the HDOH refusal is actually forbidden by UIPA. Itamura knew that. But just like the 8 major points about legal or ethical breaches, he chose to ignore it.

        I totally agree with the sentiments you’ve expressed. They are in a bind and they know it. Their only option is to bury their heads in the sand and hope we go away. Stall for time. That’s what they’ve been doing for some time now. I would think they’d have learned that we’re not going away.

    • MissTickly
      Posted May 29, 2010 at 5:07 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think this is a positive thing, too. Let’s just see what the investigation yields.

      If it doesn’t yield the original index records you requested, then the DOH is guilty of illegally destroying or withholding the records.

      It’s a win-win situation, IMO, IF you can get an investigator to settle this.

      (also…I have a couple of comments stuck in moderation…in case you didn’t realize that. Nothing critical if you just want to delete them…)

      • Posted May 29, 2010 at 11:59 am | Permalink

        All we can do is wait, so I guess that’s what we’ll do. This would be so much easier if I was a patient person.

        Thanks for letting me know your comments are stuck. Sometimes I read while I’m on the run and then I forget to go back and approve. Either that or I’m a ditz. lol. I’ll go get them. Let me know if I don’t get them all, OK? =)

    • SapphireSunday
      Posted June 15, 2010 at 8:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m sorry that I misunderstood what Itamura said about the non-certified COLB. Thanks so much for staying on their case. I hope there are still avenues to pursue.

  6. Posted June 6, 2010 at 1:36 am | Permalink | Reply

    Interesting case, Hawaii is still stricken by a lot of crime unfortunately.

  7. thinkwell
    Posted June 7, 2010 at 7:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    Bdz,

    Have you received (non news) updates about SP from me (last one today via your “alternate” email address)? The last one was in reply to a very delayed 5/25 email (weeks old before it just now arrived). Is your main email working now? If not, I will resend it to here as a blog comment that you can “clean up” or just not publish.

    • Posted June 7, 2010 at 1:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m getting e-mails on both e-mail addresses, but apparently somebody thinks your e-mail wasn’t the “right” e-mail for me to get, just as they apparently thought my e-mail to you wasn’t the “right” e-mail for you to get, because I haven’t heard from you since 6/3. Latest before that was 5/28.

      It kinda bugs me that my e-mails are being read. It does explain the behavior from the HDOH though. I have no doubts that they are being informed of what’s in my private e-mails. It would also explain why the Ho’ohiki folks (family court) have put me on “hold” for the last 26 business days (all they’re supposed to do is tell me how to submit the request. Actual processing time is 2-4 weeks after they have my money in their hands.) I have reason to believe that they are also reading my private mail at Free Republic, judging by someone’s computer being hit by a massive attack immediately after they agreed (in private mail at Free Republic) to help me – and another helpful colleague who’s communicated with me via Freepmail having her business site monitored by a company hired by Homeland Security to spy on people.

      I communicate more efficiently in writing (if you can believe that. lol) I don’t know if there’s any way to write securely. Snail mail, maybe. I’m being sent e-mails that aren’t even addressed to me which are bypassing my own instructions to block the communications on 2 different levels. So whoever is doing this seems to be pretty much able to control what gets into my computer via the IP. Somebody with that kind of power could easily listen in on my phone calls also. Is Trak Phone any more secure than anything else?

      I hate this Big Brother crap. My 10-year-old daughter has been having nightmares, and she keeps asking me to assure her that nobody is hunting her down to kill her in her bed. I don’t talk to my kids much about the details of what I’m doing and I don’t talk with my younger kids at all about being watched or any of the obvious controls being used against me. Last night she said she had talked with her dad about any murders in our town – only 2 in recent memory, and both of them drug or immigration related. I told her that people who pretty much mind their own business and live by the rules don’t have too much to worry about. I’m just afraid she might have overheard me talking with my husband, who is very aware that my work puts everybody in the household at risk.

      They’re not going to initimidate me. If they’re gonna kill me or anybody in my family for what I’m doing right now, we’d probably be better off dead anyway. Actually, I know we’d be better off dead; we’re ready to go any time. One of the reasons for going public on a lot of this information is so it would be useless for them to try to kill me; too many other people have the information anyway. It’s not going to be stopped just by stopping me. Seems like right now they gain more by listening in. That way they can alter records as necessary (which I believe they’ve already done at least once), and knowing what I’m up to insures that they don’t accidentally release something that’s significant to my work but wouldn’t arouse suspicion if they weren’t already listening in on me. Lately, though, they seem more intent on STOPPING me – possibly because they can’t control what information OTHER (non-governmental) people can give me. Fortunately, the research is getting to the point where the contacts I can make will be in person. The only way they could stop that would be very, very extreme, and I’ve already told people who are aware of my work and know me in person that if I experience a bad “accident” they need to come out with the story of what I’ve been working on and force an investigation.

      Anyway, just giving others an idea of what we’re dealing with. The lawlessness isn’t just in Hawaii. In this interconnected world, the government interference can control every communication I have except in-person. Their reach extends to everywhere, and it’s only gonna get worse from here.

      A person can be paranoid but e-mails arriving several weeks late (or not at all) isn’t something you just conjure up in your imagination, and it’s happened to me at least 4 times now. At least the forums where messages go up instantly allow us to tell each other when we’ve communicated so we can recognize when there’s interference.

      I’d say go ahead and post here what you’ve got and I’ll treat it privately. That seems to be the most secure way we’ve got of making sure our communications get through. It’s a shame that Homeland Security has to grab such sweeping control over the communications industry so they can keep “terrorists” like you and me from threatening national security…

  8. ksdb
    Posted June 9, 2010 at 9:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Wanted to share something. We found a loophole in the law that should allow for a public hearing on Obama’s eligibility and inclusion on the ballots in Hawaii, if not for 2008 (since it’s too late), but definitely 2012 (although he may not run because he’s performing so poorly).

    HR§11-113 Presidential ballots

    “If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or group with a candidate on the presidential ballot, objects to the finding of eligibility or disqualification the person may, not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the finding, file a request in writing with the chief election officer for a hearing on the question.”

    The law only requires “A statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution;” but we see proof that it can be challenged. Plus, I think as a person who challenges this law on the basis of Obama’s nativity, any such party now qualifies as having a tangible and direct interest in Obama’s certified birth certificate.

  9. ksdb
    Posted June 9, 2010 at 9:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    You would only need one, like Allen Keyes, and we know he wouldn’t hesitate to go after Obama.

  10. ksdb
    Posted June 9, 2010 at 10:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Oh, and technically, it could be a Democrat who challenges too, like a Phil Berg. You don’t have to be a candidate to challenge. It says “any party.”

    • Posted June 9, 2010 at 11:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Might want to double check which phrases modify which. Is it

      “If the (applicant, or any other party, individual, or group) with a candidate on the presidential ballot…”?

      Or is it,

      “If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or (group with a candidate on the presidential ballot)…”?

      If somebody like Alan Keyes got on the ballot they’d qualify to contest the finding of eligibility according to either interpretation. Did Alan Keyes get on Hawaii’s ballot in 2008?

      This is a great find, ksdb! Excellent work! =)

      • ksdb
        Posted June 10, 2010 at 3:35 am | Permalink

        I’m curious beyond the who-can-file-an-objection question as to what basis the Hawaiian chief election officer would use in a hearing to determine whether a candidate is indeed eligible. The only legal requirement for a candidate is basically a sworn affadavit. If you demonstrated to the chief election officer that the Supreme Court, for example, said that the only sure definition of natural born citizen = born in the country to parents who are citizens, would the candidate then be removed from the ballot? Further, does a challenge create a burden for the candidate in question to produce legal documentation to support his sworn affadavit?? If such documentation undermined the affadavit, would the chief election officer disqualify the candidate??

        Getting back the phrases that modify: the statute says, “If the applicant, or any other party … with a candidate on the presidential ballot.” This is pretty vague. You don’t have to be a candidate, but it doesn’t define (at least not here) who such a party can be: a campaign manager, a volunteer, contributor, etc. I would think it would be pretty easy to find somebody to file an objection who fits within these broad legal parameters … my guess is that is by design, because there should be a right to object, especially when there is plenty of information available that calls a candidate’s eligiblity into question.

        The next thing is whether you can use this hearing to qualify under the language in HRS-338-18(b) or (g) to get copies of the original birth records or a verification (noncertified copy?). Ideally, whoever would file an objection would do so with assistance from a lawyer. If the chief elections officer failed to give a proper hearing, then you go to court to sue the elections office, at which time you definitely have a direct and tangible interest in obtaining the records.

  11. tdr
    Posted June 14, 2010 at 6:04 am | Permalink | Reply

    bdz,
    i have hade emails not delivered also. i think there must be some type of program that scans content. did you see the youtube vid of the guy that worked for AT&T that discussed the hardware being installed to monitor communications? this was back in the bush days. he was very concerned. i have to keep the faith that if we all keep talking they cant stop all of us and the weird thing is this effort is so scattered that they would have to completely shut down the internet in order to do it and guess what? that may be when all their buds like all these search engines that cooperate with him say no more. this administration will collapse from within.

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: