Your morning jolt: House speaker suggests ‘birther’ bill has a limited future
House Speaker David Ralston, in a late Thursday interview, said he would not stop committee-level debate of a bill to require President Barack Obama to provide proof of his American birth in order to get on the ballot next year.
But Ralston, who has developed a strong relationship with Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, suggested that HB 401 stood little chance of making it to the floor for passage, despite carrying the signatures of 93 Republican lawmakers.
House Speaker David Ralston. Jason Getz, jgetz@ajc.com
“I’m not promoting the bill or squelching discussion. We’ll have a discussion, and then we’ll see what happens,” Ralston said. “First of all, I believe President Obama is the duly elected president of the United States. I’ve never followed the ‘birther’ school of thought.”
The measure was introduced Monday, and has its first hearing today in a House subcommittee. The bill could require all candidates for president to provide certified copies of their “first original long-form birth certificate.”
Documentation as provided by the state of Hawaii, which has insisted time and time again that Obama was born there, “would not suffice,” said state Rep. Mark Hatfield, R-Waycross, the bill’s author.
The bill comes as the Georgia Ports Authority continues to push the White House for hundreds of millions in federal dollars to dredge the Port of Savannah – the state’s most important infrastructure project. The bill also flies in the face of an alliance that the House speaker has built with the mayor of Atlanta on another crucial issue – transportation funding.
Moreover, passage of the HOPE scholarship bill on Tuesday was accomplished with the cooperation of House Democratic Leader Stacy Abrams of Atlanta, who has her own ties to Obama.
All that said, the signatures of 93 Republicans on the bill – in a 180-member House – requires Ralston to perform a high-wire act on this issue.
“I am elected by a large and diverse caucus. And the issues that matter to them span a considerable range,” Ralston said. “What I’ve tried to be about, is allowing the committee process to have discussions about issues that are important to members.”
Another measure being heard today, the speaker noted, was a proposed constitutional amendment to permit horse-racing in Georgia.
Asked whether HB 401 could hurt the state’s effort to obtain federal funding for its all-important port, Ralston said:
”I would hope that having the discussion would not. I would hope that there would be respect for a diversity of opinion and a free exchange of ideas. I would hope that everybody in this process is big enough to understand that in the legislative process, a big part of what this is about is having ideas vetted and debated.
“I’m kind of proud of the relationships we have. Mayor Reed and I have formed a kind of alliance that I think is healthy for the entire state. I think we share some goals that I think are good for Georgia – such as the port and its future.
“I think all of those are much larger than this discussion.”
In case you missed it, go back and read the emphasis Ralston placed on the word “discussion.”
Asked whether his relationship with Reed would survive a floor vote on a bill that questions the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency, Ralston said this:
”I think our alliance is very strong. And I would not do anything to damage that alliance.”
So no House floor vote? Replied Ralston:
”I’m saying that we’ve got a lot of big issues that need to come to the floor. That’s different than saying that debating this bill in subcommittee or at the committee level – that’s two different things.
“At some point we’re going to have to sit down and prioritize how we’re going to spend our energy. The priorities are the budget, the reservoir bill, making sure the HOPE scholarship bill gets all the way through the process. We’ve got the tax reform council.”
At the request of many of you’ve I’ve uploaded a scan of the many signatures on HB 401. Stopping this bill may be harder than it sounds. Originally, we wrote here that, among the 22 Republicans who have not signed onto the bill was John Meadows, chairman of the House Rules Committee, which determines which bills move – and don’t move.
But Hatfield pointed us to Meadows’ signature. “Top of the second row, back page.”
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
249 comments Add your comment
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
1:55 pm
And it pisses us off when our employees waste time on Facebook, playing Angry Birds, or passing legislation that is meaningless on company time.
Goober.
Last Man Standing
March 2nd, 2011
1:56 pm
Chilidog:
“you are not allowed to make up your own requirments in addition to the constituional requirments.”
Hells bells, we are talking about a Constitutional requirement. Obama, as well as all candidates are subject to the same requirements. Maybe you feel that Obama is “entitled” to skirt the requirements since he is that holiest of colors – blacl?
Last Man Standing
March 2nd, 2011
1:57 pm
“blacl” should read “black”.
Polo
March 2nd, 2011
1:58 pm
Atlanta…Imagine if we could buy alcohol on Sunday
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TOM_UuQzc0
Red
March 2nd, 2011
1:59 pm
“non-issues that don’t matter” – seeing half the nonsense Liberals rant and rave about, I know this is a bold faced lie. Sarah Palin is not even in office but yet every leftist blog, talk show, etc. does nothing but whine and rant about her. For someone who “don’t matter” she surely gets a lot of attention. And Bourne, for this topic that doesn’t matter, why are you so wound up about it? You sure are spending a lot of time thinking of a name to call people over and over. It’s amazing how much time you are wasting on here for something that clearly does not matter.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
1:59 pm
Yes I know what a strawman argument is and this is one. You don’t like the President and you feel frustrated. And since there is nothing you can do about it you concoct all this bulls**t that has no meaning and rail against it as if it has some significance.
And that is as substantive as I’m going to get on this. I’d rather just point out that you are a Goober. More fun and just as accurate.
Look, here’s my keys. “jingle jingle”
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:00 pm
@red: “how is this making up an additional requirement?”
======================
Red, please point out the language in the U.S. Constitution that requires that the president be born in a hospital to an attending physician. Please point out the constitutional eligibility requirements that are satisfied by knowing the birthplace of the candidate’s parents, and who the witnesses to the birth are. Please explain how requiring the submission of baptismal records does not violate Article VI of the constitution (no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.)
Please explain what part of the U.S. Constitution specifically forbids “Dual Citizenship” and explain why this prohibition did not apply to Thomas Jefferson. Also, please explain why the Georgia requirement for no “dual Citizenship” does not cede our national sovereignty to a foreign country.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:01 pm
It didn’t take me any time to come up with Goober. In fact I stole it from you.
And calling you a Goober is fun and since I’m out sick today I’ve nothing else to do, kind of like the idiots under the Dome promoting this.
jingle jingle Goober
td
March 2nd, 2011
2:02 pm
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
1:31 pm
@ td “I have said it before and I will say it again. What is the big deal? All Obama has to do is to do is to supply the documentation as required by the state of Georgia.”
====================
The documentation required by the state of Georgia sets unconstituional eligibilty standards
The state can set up any criteria it wants to select Presidential electors. Do you agree that the state of Georgia has the right to keep the Constitutional party, Green Party and Communist party electors off the ballot in Georgia? They do so how can they legally do it under your interpretation of Federalism? Do you agree that the state has the right to not let any convicted felons vote? They do so how do they get away with it?
I submit to you that the state of Georgia or any other state can pass a law that says the legislature will vote for the electors of the parties and it would pass constitutional muster.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:08 pm
To expand on an earlier point. HB401 requires that any candidate file an affidavit that they were never a “dual citizen.”
Now the United States does not have the power to grant dual citizenship. It only has the power to grant U.S. citizenship.
The only way to get dual citizenship is for a foreign country to grant it. Therefore, by denying eligibility to those who may currently or historically have held dual citizenship is to put the authority to determine the eligibility, not in the hands of the United States, but under the control of a foreign nation. In effect, the dual citizenship part of HB401 cedes the Sovereign authority of the United States to determine for herself who she deems eligible for office.
To put this another way. If a foreign nation, Abania, for instance, were to pas a law stating that all right handed people in North America were automatically Albanian citizens, then under HB401, only left handed persons could run for president.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:12 pm
You know, you Goobers take such umbrage at me calling you Goobers, but you feel very comfortable calling me a Liberal based on nothing more than the fact that I disagree with you and think this whole thing is meaningless. I’ve made no political comments here that reveal my political leanings at all. Just my conviction that you all are a bunch of Goobers.
jingle jingle
td
March 2nd, 2011
2:16 pm
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:12 pm
Let us see if you have the intellectual capacity to answer the questions and have any comments that I made to another poster or are you just a name calling intellectual child?
The state can set up any criteria it wants to select Presidential electors. Do you agree that the state of Georgia has the right to keep the Constitutional party, Green Party and Communist party electors off the ballot in Georgia? They do so how can they legally do it under your interpretation of Federalism? Do you agree that the state has the right to not let any convicted felons vote? They do so how do they get away with it?
I submit to you that the state of Georgia or any other state can pass a law that says the legislature will vote for the electors of the parties and it would pass constitutional muster.
Shame of GA
March 2nd, 2011
2:19 pm
I guess my comment got caught up in the filter. Hmmm
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:19 pm
@last man Standing: “Hells bells, we are talking about a Constitutional requirement. Obama, as well as all candidates are subject to the same requirements.”
=============================
Those constituional requiremnts are thus, the president has to have been born a U.S. citizen, be over the age of 35, and have been a resident of the United States for the past 14 years.
HB 401 is tacking on a bunch of additional requirments that are not in the constituion.
Shame of GA
March 2nd, 2011
2:23 pm
Racism at its best. With 2012 coming, thugs and tea peep don’t want President Obama on the ticket. They feel they can’t beat him, so there’s this all out effort to discredit him.
White folk sure are evil people. I bet even God is ashamed.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:24 pm
td,
I am a name calling intellectual child.
Either that or I refuse to validate your argument on this meaningless nonsense with any response other than to reaffirm my conviction that anyone who buys into this and attempts to rationalize and justify a position on this lunacy is a Goober.
And under my personal syllogism you are said Goober.
jingle jingle
Red
March 2nd, 2011
2:24 pm
Chili – please go and read the bill. Your assumptions stated above are way off. Religious test? Baptismal records are merely one of many items. This is not a religious test. Go back and do more research on what “religious test” means.
As for Jefferson with dual citizenship – do you have proof of this? As a historian I’ve read the theories but have only seen where the “sources” of this info were political rivals during his time posting this in newspapers to discredit him.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:26 pm
Oops. Left Last Man Standing off the list of citizens of Goobertown. Sorry Man, don’t want you to feel left out.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:29 pm
“I’ve read the theories but have only seen where the “sources” of this info were political rivals during his time posting this in newspapers to discredit him.”
Jeez. I’m not even going to comment on how relatable that is to this whole meaningless crap. Way to go Red. Do you even read what you are writing?
td
March 2nd, 2011
2:31 pm
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:24 pm
td,
I am a name calling intellectual child.
Either that or I refuse to validate your argument on this meaningless nonsense with any response other than to reaffirm my conviction that anyone who buys into this and attempts to rationalize and justify a position on this lunacy is a Goober.
And under my personal syllogism you are said Goober.
jingle jingle
Thank you for proving my point. Your comments are irrelevant from this point forward. It is to bad we can not invoke a literacy test for you and cancel your unintelligent vote away.
Be good and I will pray that God gives you some additional intelligence.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:32 pm
@red: “Religious test? Baptismal records are merely one of many items.”
==========================
Red, if a candidate is from a state that issues digtal foms, like Hawaii, missouri, indiana, etc, then HB 401 REQUIRED baptisma records to be submited
===========
If the foregoing described certified exact copy of the candidate’s first original long-form birth certificate is not attached and the candidate’s affidavit indicates that a first original long-form birth certificate for the candidate does not exist, the candidate shall attach certified exact copies of other original documentation, INCLUDING, but not limited to, the candidate’s birth records, adoption records, BAPTISM RECORDS, Social Security records, medical records, school and college records, military records, and passport records showing, either individually or collectively, that the candidate meets the natural born citizenship, age, and residency requirements prescribed by Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution
===========
Requirng the submission of baptism records completely violates the U.S Constitution.
Last Man Standing
March 2nd, 2011
2:32 pm
Bourne Penetration:
Thanks, and I here by dub you “Smoke Pooper” – a name more befitting you.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
2:33 pm
@ Nikita: How does holding Obama to the same standards that you and I have to meet when we submit a birth certificate (and that OBAMA VOTED FOR in 2005) create “political unrest”?? States have a legal right to regulate their own elections process. Requiring proper and verifiable identification from a presidential candidate is no cause for unrest.
td
March 2nd, 2011
2:35 pm
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:32 pm
Why do you not comment on my questions? Will repost them for you.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
1:31 pm
@ td “I have said it before and I will say it again. What is the big deal? All Obama has to do is to do is to supply the documentation as required by the state of Georgia.”
====================
The documentation required by the state of Georgia sets unconstituional eligibilty standards
The state can set up any criteria it wants to select Presidential electors. Do you agree that the state of Georgia has the right to keep the Constitutional party, Green Party and Communist party electors off the ballot in Georgia? They do so how can they legally do it under your interpretation of Federalism? Do you agree that the state has the right to not let any convicted felons vote? They do so how do they get away with it?
I submit to you that the state of Georgia or any other state can pass a law that says the legislature will vote for the electors of the parties and it would pass constitutional muster.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:35 pm
Red, please point out the language in the U.S. Constitution that requires that the president be born in a hospital to an attending physician. Please point out the constitutional eligibility requirements that are satisfied by knowing the birthplace of the candidate’s parents, and who the witnesses to the birth are. Please explain how requiring the submission of baptismal records does not violate Article VI of the constitution (no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.)
Please explain what part of the U.S. Constitution specifically forbids “Dual Citizenship” and explain why this prohibition did not apply to Thomas Jefferson. Also, please explain why the Georgia requirement for no “dual Citizenship” does not cede our national sovereignty to a foreign country.
Last Man Standing
March 2nd, 2011
2:35 pm
Obama has spent a ton of money HIDING many of his records.
Hmmmm . . .
JustMe
March 2nd, 2011
2:37 pm
They feel they can’t beat him, so there’s this all out effort to discredit him.
The thing is that there is no way Obama would ever win Georgia – we have too many right wing fringe lunatics in this state for that to ever happen (for him to win that is). So really the whole idea of passing this bill in Georgia is just truly a supreme waste of time.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
2:40 pm
I like Smoke Pooper. I like it a lot. Thanks man.
And I’m proud that an intellectual giant such as td as made me irrelevant. Now if he (or she I suppose) had the capacity to see the irony in the statement of my irrelevancy when he (or she I suppose) has spent the better part of a day arguing an irrelevant, silly, meaningless position. And as I have stated, if refusing to argue over the color of the shades in the Waffle House means I lack intelligence then I am proud to trumpet my stupidity.
Your house is on fire td, but look over here, it’s a shiny new quarter.
Hee hee.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
2:46 pm
@ chilidog: Do you want to sue the State Department for violating the Constitution?? This is what’s on a DS-11 passport form:
“If no birth record exists: Submit a registrar’s notice to that effect. Also, submit a combination of the following evidence: an early baptismal or circumcision certificate, hospital birth record, early census, school, medical, or family Bible records, or newspapers or insurance files.”
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/79955.pdf
Shame of GA
March 2nd, 2011
2:49 pm
Just GA, yes, a waste of time, but look how it’s spreading to so many states. It’s part of a concerted effort and strategy. Instructions to the bought and paid for governors by the powers that bought them.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:49 pm
td, the state can not deny registered parties and qualified candidates from being on the ballot in the general election. they do restrict the primaries to the biggest parties, however.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:50 pm
ksdb, a passport is not the same as running for office.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:51 pm
@last man Standing: “Obama has spent a ton of money HIDING many of his records.”
==============================
Prove it.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
2:54 pm
@ chilidog; You said “Requirng the submission of baptism records completely violates the U.S Constitution.” Why would it be okay for the state department to require such a submission but not your state elections board?? Your claim doesn’t any sense.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
2:55 pm
Ksdb, did you read your quote?
===========
Also, submit a COMBINATION of the following evidence: an early baptismal or circumcision certificate, hospital birth record, early census, school, medical, or family Bible records, or newspapers or insurance files.”
==========
in other words, the state department does not require baptismal records, but the will accept them as evidence.
HB 401 REQUIRES baptismal records.
The bill was written by a bunch of morons.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
2:57 pm
@ childdog: You said, “td, the state can not deny registered parties and qualified candidates from being on the ballot in the general election.” The key word is “qualified.” The submission of a legal birth certificate (or secondary identification records) is what your state would use to determine whether a candidate is qualified or not. Currently states only use a self-sworn affadavit. Requiring proper identification does not create an unreasonable burden. It’s time to quit making excuses.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:01 pm
@ksdb “The submission of a legal birth certificate (or secondary identification records) is what your state would use to determine whether a candidate is qualified or not.”
===============================
So, you are saying that all Obama needs to do is to presents a legal birth certificate?
The state issued COLB form is a legal birth certificate.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:03 pm
To repeat an earlier point. HB401 requires that any candidate file an affidavit that they were never a “dual citizen.”
Now the United States does not have the power to grant dual citizenship. It only has the power to grant U.S. citizenship.
The only way to get dual citizenship is for a foreign country to grant it. Therefore, by denying eligibility to those who may currently or historically have held dual citizenship is to put the authority to determine the eligibility, not in the hands of the United States, but under the control of a foreign nation. In effect, the dual citizenship part of HB401 cedes the Sovereign authority of the United States to determine for herself who she deems eligible for office.
To put this another way. If a foreign nation, Abania, for instance, were to pas a law stating that all right handed people in North America were automatically Albanian citizens, then under HB401, only left handed persons could run for president.
HB401 was writen by idiots.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
3:03 pm
@ Chilidog: The bill doesn’t require a baptism record. It’s simply one of several items on a list of secondary records that can be submitted in the absence of legal birth certificate. Notice the part about “military records.” Do you presume that to mean that they’ll only accept presidential candidates who have served in the military?? You’re letting your faitherism for Obama cloud your reading skills.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
3:05 pm
childdog: A COLB is only a legal birth certificate if it contains enough elements to show that it is certified. Obama’s jpg, by contrast, is not a legal birth certificate.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:07 pm
ksdb: “childdog: A COLB is only a legal birth certificate if it contains enough elements to show that it is certified”
=========================
The photographs taken by the fact check team clearly show the certification stamp, signature and date.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:08 pm
ksdb: “The bill doesn’t require a baptism record. It’s simply one of several items on a list of secondary records that can be submitted in the absence of legal birth certificate. Notice the part about “military records.” Do you presume that to mean that they’ll only accept presidential candidates who have served in the military??”
=============================
Actually, as the bill is written, yes.
It’s a poorly written bill with both fundamental and superficial defects.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
3:14 pm
@ chilldog: The factlack dot org photos with the certification stamps do not show enough of the document to establish whether it is on Obama’s alleged COLB or somebody else’s COLB. It’s good slight of hand, but far from being legally conclusive. The issuing agency never confirmed that these photos are genuine nor did they confirm that Obama’s COLB is genuine or legal.
Mojacket
March 2nd, 2011
3:21 pm
Who cares? His mother is a citizen. Thus he is a citizen. As soon as people get the ‘long form birth certificate’ they so crave to see, they are going to be asking for DNA matching. And then it is going to be ‘well, they doctored the results.’ Face it people, the conspiracy to make him a US citizen would have had to start in 1961 and unless you really believe that movie ‘The Adjustment Bureau’, this is a huge waste of time.
And I’ve yet to see John McCain’s birth certificate, and I know he was born in a foreign country, just in a section under US control.
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:24 pm
If the foregoing described certified exact copy of the candidate’s first original long-form birth certificate is not attached and the candidate’s affidavit indicates that a first original long-form birth certificate for the candidate does not exist, the candidate shall attach certified exact copies of other original documentation, INCLUDING, but not limited to, the candidate’s birth records, adoption records, BAPTISM RECORDS, Social Security records, medical records, school and college records, military records, and passport records showing, either individually or collectively, that the candidate meets the natural born citizenship, age, and residency requirements prescribed by Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution
=============================
There are no options in the above, if you are from a state that is in the modern digital age, and issues short format birth certificates, then HB401 REQUIRES that you submit the above information. There is no wording that makes any of that optional. for instance, if instead of the word “Including” the bill used the words: “FOR EXAMPLE” then the required items would be optional.
In any case, the state of Georgia can not require anything other than a certified birth certificate. They can not dictate the format or the information required on that certified birth certificate other than the minimum set forth under federal law. Which is what the COLB provides.
Furthermore, the state of Georgia can not require an affidavit regarding dual citizenship as such is not a qualification requirement under the U.S. constitution.
This is nothing more than a legacy of the same racist hatred that existed behind the infamous Literacy Tests of the 50’s and 60’s.
Later losers
Chilidog
March 2nd, 2011
3:25 pm
ksdb: chilldog: The factlack dot org photos with the certification stamps do not show enough of the document to establish whether it is on Obama’s alleged COLB or somebody else’s COLB.
================
oh, good grief.
you are beyond help.
Me
March 2nd, 2011
3:30 pm
It seems a violation of the constitution for a state to create requirements for federal office seekers
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
3:41 pm
@ “Me” The natural born citizenship requirement is in the United States Constitution. The eligibility bill is only creating a procedure for enforcing this requirement. The federal government does not hold nor administer elections, so it is within proper jurisdiction for your state to establish procedural rules for establishing the eligibility of candidates to appear on your state’s election ballots.
ksdb
March 2nd, 2011
3:46 pm
This needs to be repeated: Obama voted for a federal law in 2005 that requires your state to verify the validity of your birth certificate from the issuing agency when you use it to apply for a drivers license or ID card. The eligibility bill does nothing more than hold presidential candidates to the same standard that Obama voted for in 2005. The alarming part is that such a law doesn’t already exist and that presidential candidates have never been required to prove their eligibility for office before. Get behind your legislature and pass this bill.
Bourne Penetration
March 2nd, 2011
3:46 pm
Chilidog,
This is why I refused to join the debate and just went straight to calling a Goober a Goober.
Me,
I wouldn’t even start with these Goobers. No matter what is said they will have some half baked answer while refusing to see that….wait for it….NONE OF THIS MATTERS.
jingle jingle Goobers