If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
CAN STATE LEGISLATURES ENFORCE IT?
by Paul Hollrah, ©2011
(Oct. 28, 2011) — As a two-time member of the Electoral College, I am aware that the vast majority of electors totally misunderstand their duties and responsibilities. Most are convinced that their only duty is to ratify the selections made at their party’s national nominating convention. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Writing in the Federalist Papers, in defense of the proposed Electoral College, Alexander Hamilton expressed an overriding concern of the times. He wrote: “These most deadly adversaries of republican government (cabal, intrigue, etc.) might actually have expected to make their approach from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own (a “Manchurian candidate?”) to the chief magistracy of the Union?”
The fears that Hamilton expressed were not given credence until late in the 20th century and early in the 21st century. In 1996, had Democratic electors known of the huge sums of money poured into the Clinton-Gore reelection campaign by the People’s Republic of China, would they have voted unanimously to reelect Bill Clinton and Al Gore? I suspect that many veterans of World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War would have had second thoughts.
In 2008, had Democratic electors been made fully aware that Barack Obama, born to an American mother and an African tribesman from Kenya, was not a “natural born” US citizen, ineligible to serve under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, would they have voted unanimously to send him to the Oval Office? I suspect not. The odds are that there are at least a few patriotic Democrats left who love the Constitution and who believe in the rule of law.
That being the case, I have taken steps to have Title 26, Section 10 of the Oklahoma Statutes, dealing with the oath taken by presidential electors, amended to specify precisely those things of which electors must assure themselves before casting their electoral votes. I am sending the text of my proposed amendments to all those on my mailing list in the hope that those who know members of their state legislature will implore them to take similar action. Together, we can launch a national movement that our children and grandchildren will one day thank us for.
Proposed Amendments to Title 26, Section 10, Oklahoma Statutes
As any former member of the U.S. Electoral College will attest, most electors see their duty as nothing more than “rubber stamping” the presidential and vice presidential candidates chosen by their respective political parties at their national convention. Inasmuch as most oaths codified in state law appear to require nothing more than that, it is easy to see how that impression might prevail.
However, any reading of those sections of the Federalist Papers dealing with the purpose of the Electoral College will show that electors have a far greater responsibility. It was the intention of the Founders that members of the Electoral College be vested with the responsibility to assure themselves of the citizenship, the qualifications, the capabilities, and the sound moral character of those whom they would choose to be President and Vice President of the United States.
Because presidential electors have not been properly schooled and instructed, the future of our republic is now endangered. Never in American history have the duties of electors been of greater importance. Accordingly, it is proposed that 26 O.S. 10-102 and 26 O.S. 10-109 be amended as follows (new language underlined):
Proposed Amendment to 26 O.S. 10-102. Oath for Presidential Electors
Every party nominee for Presidential Elector shall subscribe to an oath, stating that said nominee, if elected, will cast his or her ballot for the persons nominated for the offices of President and Vice President by the national convention of his or her party, and that said nominee, if elected, will cast his or her ballot only for candidates who are natural born citizens of the United States and who have at no time in their lives been citizens or dual citizens of any foreign nation, who will be at least thirty-five years of age on the date of inauguration, and who have been residents of the United States for at least fourteen years. Said oath shall be notarized by a notary public and filed with the Secretary of the State Election Board no fewer than ninety (90) days prior to the General Election. Failure of any party nominee to take and file said oath by said date shall automatically vacate his or her nomination and a substitute nominee shall be selected by the state central committee of the appropriate political party. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the State Election Board to notify the chairman of the state central committee of the failure of any nominee to file said oath.
Proposed Amendment to 26 O.S. 10-109. Penalty
Any Presidential Elector who violates his or her oath as a Presidential Elector shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5.000.00).
I wonder how many people realize that in 2008 neither of the major Parties nominated a eligible candidate to the office of President?
A natural born citizen is a person born in the country and BOTH parents are citizens of the country at the time time of the birth. Neither Mr Obama II or Senator McCain are natural born citizens. Natural born citizenship can be viewed as a tripod with one leg being place of birth, one being citizenship of the mother at birth and the third leg being citizenship of the father at birth.