Mr. Obama: Taxing the Rich Won't Increase Revenues

by Michael Barone

Did Barack Obama take Tax 1 in law school? I did, and I remember the first day of classes, when mild mannered Professor Boris Bittker asked a simple question, "What is income?"

I was pretty confident I could come up with a quick answer, and so were a lot of other students. By the end of the hour, after Professor Bittker had politely punched huge holes in every student's definition, it was pretty clear that none of us could. Income is a slippery concept -- especially slippery when you're trying to tax it.

Which leads me to think that Obama may have avoided Tax 1. Or perhaps he dozed off in class. For in his April 13 speech at George Washington University, the speech to which Standard & Poor's responded by reducing the government's credit rating to "negative," he seemed to think he could get all the money we need to balance the budget from higher taxes on the rich.

That's wrong as a matter of simple arithmetic, as is clear from a chart reproduced on the Wall Street Journal editorial page showing the total amounts of taxable income of each group.

The chart showed that if the government had simply confiscated every dollar from those reporting more than $1 million taxable income in 2008, it would not have gotten the $1.3 trillion needed to close the current federal budget deficit.


What the chart doesn't show, however, is even more important. And that is that when you reduce income tax rates, high earners have more taxable income. When you raise them, they have less.

High earners don't sit around waiting to have their money confiscated any more than chickens sit around and let you pluck out all their feathers. They pursue other options.

This is most obvious when you think about capital gains. The federal government doesn't try to tax capital gains -- the increase in values of your stocks or your house -- every year (Professor Bittker had us in knots explaining how it might do this). You pay capital gains on a stock or house only in the year you sell it.

What happens if the capital gains tax goes up from 15 percent to 50 percent? People stop selling stocks and hold onto their houses if they possibly can. And when cap gains rates go down? They're more willing to sell, pay the lower tax and invest in something else.

That's why the government's total revenues from capital gains have tended to rise when the capital gains tax rate is lowered. And why increases in the capital gains tax rate never raises the amount of revenues static models estimate it will.

You get the same effect, to a lesser extent, when you change tax rates on ordinary income. People working for minimum wage don't have many options about how they'll be paid. High earners tend to have more options.

If you go back to the 1970s, when the top rates were 50 percent on salary income and 70 percent on investment income, you'll find that a lot of high earners were getting company cars, company payment of country club dues and big expense accounts.

The reason: They didn't have to declare those things as income and pay taxes on them. But when rates went down, there was no demand for company-paid perks any more.

You would find also, if you spent time with those 1970s high earners, that they spent a lot of time and psychic energy in finding tax shelters -- investments that thanks to the intricacies of tax law reduced the amount of taxable income.

After the Ronald Reagan tax cuts, we saw a vast increase in high earners' taxable income. One reason, I suspect, was that they spent less time seeking tax shelters and more time figuring out how to make profitable investments.

There's a reason federal tax revenues since World War II have hovered around 18 or 19 percent of gross domestic product, regardless of tax rates. The reason is that higher rates tend to result in less taxable income. You figure out why in Tax 1.

But perhaps Barack Obama understands this. In 2008, he told ABC's Charlie Gibson that he wanted to raise capital gains rates even if the government got less revenue because of "fairness." Evidently he likes taking people's money away. What he doesn't explain is why this makes anyone better off.

---

Mr. Barone is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and the principal co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, published by National Journal every two years.

Chicago Gangland Politics Come to Washington

Dear Fellow Conservative,

The liberal media sold the American people on Barack Obama as a philosopher king, who would be a philosopher President: intellectual, endowed with extraordinary talents, and even, in the words of Newsweek’s Evan Thomas, “sort of God.”

But as weary Americans now know after two years of the Obama presidency, the real Obama is far from the almost mythical figure that the president’s media fan club still idolizes. Obama didn’t come to Washington from Mount Olympus. He came from the corrupt, dirty politics of Chicago.

In Gangster Government: Barack Obama and the New Washington Thugocracy, my friend David Freddoso, author of the New York Times bestseller The Case Against Barack Obama, exposes the real truth of Obama’s background in Chicago’s gangland politics — and takes you inside a White House that approaches Chicago levels of skullduggery and corruption.

Laying bare the backdoor deals, threats, and pay-to-play schemes Obama uses to push his policies on unsuspecting voters, Gangster Government proves that Obama is more concerned with protecting his friends and punishing his enemies than doing right by the American public.

See this exclusive video exposing Obama’s dirty politics.

Sincerely,

Thomas S. Winter
Editor in Chief, Human Events

Judge threatens jail in homeschool case

LAW OF THE LAND

Details now emerging about battle over names, addresses of students

---

By Bob Unruh

A judge who was demanding – for his own use – the names and addresses of all the homeschool students and their parents in his Mississippi judicial district threatened school officials with jail if they didn't give him what he wanted.

The reports of the threat from Judge Joe Dale Walker, of the state's 13th Chancery district court, come from one of the attendance officers involved in the case in which Walker demanded the student data.

"He threatened us," said one of the school officials later served with an order the judge wrote and signed for himself.

The WND reported a week ago when Walker was ordered by the state Supreme Court to explain his demands.

Have you considered homeschooling? For a very limited time, get 19 FREE gifts when you subscribe to "The Old Schoolhouse" magazine!

His order for details about homeschoolers has been suspended until April 18 at least, when his explanation is due to the high court.

(Story continues below)

Walker declined to respond to multiple messages left by WND seeking comment on the situation.

The state Supreme Court got involved when lawyers with the Home School Legal Defense Association, which fights for the rights of homeschooling worldwide, was informed of the situation by some of its members in Mississippi, and petitioned the high court on an emergency basis.

Here is the judge's order:

Walker had called a meeting with the school attendance officers and told them to provide the students' names and addresses. They hesitated, as under federal law such information is confidential, and the judge said he had researched the issue and it was safe for them to give him the information, according to one of the attendance officers who spoke with WND today.

However, the state education department told them not to provide the information, and the judge, upset with the results, threatened that he would go write his own court order and then they would have to comply, the attendance officer said.

"The judge wanted information. We tried to explain we didn't think we could give it to him," the officer, whose identity is being withheld by WND. "He wanted it. He threatened us, said if he gave us a court order and we did not fulfill, we would be in contempt and would be arrested."

When WND reported on the case, it was noted that the information is being sought by the judge himself, as there is no underlying case, motion or dispute that could have prompted the request. There was no case number on the order and there were no other documents in the court file.

A blogger in the region, however, detailed how it appeared that Walker was trying to determine "which families are legitimately homeschooling and which are using the homeschool statute to circumvent compulsory attendance laws."

A WND source who is familiar with the details of the dispute confirmed that appeared to be accurate.

Blogger Natalie West Winningham said the judge apparently wants to prosecute the parents of juveniles who show up in his youth court and who "appear not to be receiving legitimate homeschool instruction as well as to flush out other 'fake homeschoolers.'"

"Perhaps Judge Walker either doesn't know or doesn't care that interviewing, profiling, visiting or otherwise needlessly interfering with homeschool families for the sole purpose of comparing them against an arbitrary, legally non-existent and unenforceable standard with the intent of potentially charging the 'failing' parents with a crime is not legal," she wrote.

"Clearly, the judge is not concerned only with the youths who appear in his court. Otherwise, why would the court order seek to secure ALL of the names and addresses of homeschoolers…"

Further, she questioned what use would be made of the information.

"If I were a vigilante judge who got my hands on a datatbase of homeschoolers' names and addresses, perhaps I would cross-reference it with past criminal records, DHS cases, driving records, credit histories, tax information, etc. And if I thought I could get away with it, maybe I'd send someone to your home to interview you and hope that you don't know your legal rights.

"I'm not saying that Judge Walker would do those things. But there are many possibilities and none of them is pleasant," she wrote.

Spokeswoman Beverly Kraft of the state court system told WND earlier that the issue as it was presented to the state Supreme Court was a "confidential" case about which no documents, no information and no explanation was available.

The judge's order noted that the "cause" for the order "came on for hearing on the court's own motion," but the HSLDA said apparently no hearing ever was held.

The HSLDA suggested the order is highly unusual and could provide a "chilling" effect on not only homeschoolers but any group whose members' names may at some point be demanded by a judge.

An attorney for the group, James Mason, told WND that in the years he has worked with homeschool issues, he never before has seen such an order.

"It's a very chilling prospect," he said. "The plain fact is if judges start behaving this way – [targeted could be] people who attend churches or synagogues [or other groups]."

"That would have a chilling effect on freedom of association, and the exercise of other freedoms," he said.

A judge in a similar order could demand the names of patriot organizations, tea party groups, Democrat groups, GOP groups or even labor, teacher or parent groups.

HSLDA said that after attendance officers at the schools got the order, they notified homeschoolers, enclosing a copy of the judge's order.

"The letters cited the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and asked the families to notify the attendance officer by April 8, 2011, if they intended to initiate legal action to prevent release of the protected information sought by Judge Walker," HSLDA said.

The notice from the HSLDA to its members said the judge also wanted the addresses of all homeschoolers in Smith, Lawrence, Covington, Simpson and Jefferson Davis counties.

Walker's order listed no parties but only said "RE: HOMESCHOOL."

"We believe that Judge Walker's order is an inappropriate use of judicial power," said Michael Farris, chairman of HSLDA.

The state's court website says chancery courts "have jurisdiction over disputes in matters involving equity; domestic matters including adoptions, custody disputes and divorces; guardianships; sanity hearings; wills; and challenges to constitutionality of state laws. Land records are filed in Chancery Court."

The chancery courts also are given jurisdiction in juvenile matters in counties that have no county court.

Read more: Judge threatens jail in homeschool case http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=286097#ixzz1JKDDVNLj

Game-changer: The next eligibility shoe to drop

BORN IN THE USA?

Jerome Corsi's 'Where's the Birth Certificate?' book breaking sales records

---

© 2011 WorldNetDaily

WASHINGTON – First there was Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie's famous pledge to find Barack Obama's birth certificate and make it public to shut up the so-called "birthers."

That raised national interest in the controversy – especially when he failed to produce it.

Then came Donald Trump out of the blue, asking questions WND's newsroom team has been asking for the last two-and-a-half years.

That raised the national debate to furious new heights.

And now another shoe is ready to drop with a very loud thud that promises to raise the level and intensity of the national controversy beyond anything the public has seen before.

It is the released of "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to Be President" by two-time No. 1 New York Times best-selling author Jerome Corsi – a book that is, more than a month prior to release, setting records for advance sales.

"Potentially, I believe this book is the political endgame for Barack Obama," says Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND and WND Books, the publisher of the title. "I don't see how he can be re-elected with hard questions and new evidence of his ineligibility raised by the book. It's a game-changer – and the news media blackout on this issue has now turned into a media feeding frenzy to cover their negligent rear ends."

Between now and May 17 when the book officially debuts, WND Books has produced television ad spots promoting "Where's the Birth Certificate?"

Farah hopes the commercials, which are going viral on the Internet, will raise even more interest in the book and spur those frustrated about Obama's unwillingness to document his eligibility for office to make financial contributions to air the spots on television in May.

In addition, a national billboard campaign running for the last two years – asking "Where’s the birth certificate?" – will be transformed into promotion of the book.

There are other innovative marketing efforts surrounding the book planned for the Kentucky Derby and the Indianapolis 500.

"If you agree with me that this charade by Obama has gone on much too long, I urge you to get behind our efforts in any way you can," says Farah. "Help spread these videos across the Internet, using your Facebook pages, emails and other social networking tools. Make a donation of at least $25 to the TV ad campaign and you will receive a first-edition, autographed copy of the book before anyone else – that's cheaper than placing an advance order because free shipping is included."

Farah concludes, "Watch the videos. Watch the calendar. And watch the Obama re-election campaign squirm."

Jerome Corsi will not do any media on this book until release date May 17. Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah can contact him by email.

Read more: Game-changer: The next eligibility shoe to drop http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=285473#ixzz1JEokEBjd

States advance eligibility laws

BORN IN THE USA?

Find out status of 13 legislatures' demands for presidential candidates' documentation

---

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

Obama on the campaign trail

Lawmakers in two states quickly are advancing proposals that could be used to require future presidential candidates to document – with birth certificates or other forms of proof – their eligibility under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that they are at least 35, have lived 14 years in the U.S. and are a "natural born Citizen."

There are plans pending in other states, too, but they are not as advanced as the proposals in Oklahoma and Arizona, where sponsors say they are trying to deal with a gap in the U.S. elections process that was uncovered by the 2008 election, but their plans are not directed at Barack Obama.

But there is a developing convergence that could be.

Members of the legislature in Arizona, who came close to adopting a demand for eligibility proof from presidential candidates in 2010, are meeting tomorrow with Donald Trump, who repeatedly and publicly has expressed his growing alarm that perhaps – or even probably – Obama is an ineligible, or "illegal" president."

Lawmakers in Arizona confirmed their plans to meet with Trump at his invitation, and Rep. Carl Seel, whose bill is one of those pending in the state legislature, said he was surprised and pleased to be invited to a meeting.

Trump, who has been expressing his concerns about the absence of proof of Obama's eligibility for weeks, said on the "Today" show this morning there are "real doubts" about whether Obama was born in the U.S.

Be the first to get the new eligibility book signed by Jerome Corsi and help get TV commercials on the air to bust this issue wide open!

His comments have placed the issue squarely in the middle of the 2012 presidential election race, and, meanwhile, his poll numbers – he's considering a bid for the GOP nomination – have soared to the point he's now trailing only Mitt Romney in some polls.

While Obama's campaign in 2008 posted online a short-form "Certification of Live Birth," those documents have been made available in the state of Hawaii to families who are willing to state that a birth occurred, in the state, whether it did or not.

The New York Times has contended that Hawaii has "confirmed" that the online document is authentic, however no state official has publicly verified it is Obama's Certification of Live Birth.

In Oklahoma, the bill already has been approved by the state Senate and is pending on the floor of the state House, having been approved in committee. In Arizona, there are two proposals on parallel courses through the House and Senate, with a final vote pending in the state Senate and the plan approved in committee in the House.

Some half a dozen other states still have proposals that remain alive, although they may be languishing under the thumb of a committee chief dedicated to not pursuing the documentation that Obama is legitimately president.

WND has reported on the state-level efforts to ensure that candidates for the Oval Office meet the requirements established in the U.S. Constitution.

At least 13 states saw such plans introduced this year, although several already have fallen by the wayside. In New Hampshire, Montana, Iowa, Maine and Tennessee committee actions have left the proposals without hope this year.

Other states that have reviewed plans, besides Oklahoma and Arizona, are Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska and Texas.

The states:

Arizona

The plans are running on parallel tracks in the state House and Senate. In the Senate, it's up for a final reading, while in the House, it's on the floor in the committee of the whole.

This state is the one many thought would be a game-changer, since its lawmakers came very close to approving a verification requirement for eligibility in the last legislative session. The proposal actually died by a pocket veto under political pressure.

One original proposal was from state Rep. Judy Burges and arrived with 16 members of the state Senate as co-sponsors. It needs only 16 votes in the Senate to pass.

In the House, there are 25 co-sponsors, with the need for only 31 votes for passage.

The plan has seen several amendments aimed at both weakening and strengthening its provisions and the final version remains undefined.

Originally, the proposal was highly specific and directly addressed the questions that have been raised by Barack Obama's occupancy of the White House. It says:

Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate's citizenship and age and shall append to the affidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate's age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States.

The governor's office is occupied by Republican Jan Brewer, who has had no difficulty bringing direct challenges to Washington. In 2010, when lawmakers adopted provisions allowing state law-enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration law, she signed the law even though it prompted an immediate court challenge by the federal government.

Connecticut

Connecticut lawmakers launched a plan, but it has not advanced.

It was referred in January to the Joint Committee on Government Administration but there has been no further action on it yet.

It would require "that candidates for president and vice-president provide their original birth certificates in order to be placed on the ballot."

That is needed to make sure the candidate "is a natural born United States citizen, prior to certifying that the candidate is qualified to appear on the ballot."

Georgia

In Georgia, the proposal HB401 was up for first reading in February and a second reading in March, but there was no indication of further action.

State Rep. Mark Hatfield, R-Ga., planned to take the issue one step further with his proposed eligibility requirement – making it illegal for an elector to cast a ballot for an unapproved candidate.

The state's Presidential Eligibility Assurance Act would specify, "It is unlawful for any presidential elector from this state to cast his or her electoral college vote for a candidate who is not approved by the Secretary of State as having submitted adequate evidence of eligibility. Any person who violates this Code section shall upon conviction be guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature."

The bill also specifies the evidence needed and authorizes "any elector of this state" to challenge the qualifications that a candidate would offer as proof. It calls for a long-form birth certificate that includes details of the candidate's birth, or "the candidate's birth records, adoption records, baptism records, Social Security records, medical records, school and college records, military records, and passport records."

Computer-generated facsimiles won't do.

"The candidate shall not attach certified or other copies of nonoriginal documents or records," the law requires.

It also requires affirmations that the candidate never was a citizen of another country and never had dual or multiple citizenships.

Indiana

Lawmakers in Indiana took on their plan, and referred it to the Committee on Elections, where it apparently has remained.

It was Sen. Mike Delph who proposed SB114 to require candidates to provide a certified copy of their birth certificate and include an affirmation they meet the Constitution's requirements for the president.

It calls for the candidates "to certify that the candidate has the qualifications provided in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution" and accompany that certification with "a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate, including any other documentation necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications."

It also provides "that the election division may not certify the name of a nominee for president or vice president of the United States unless the election division has received a nominee's certification and documentation."

On his blog, commentator Gary Welsh observed that state law already requires the elections division to deny ballot access to unqualified candidates:

"However, it makes no provision for requiring candidates to furnish any evidence with their declaration of candidacy to indicate whether they are eligible to hold the office. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution requires a person to be a natural born citizen, at least 35 years of age and have resided within the United States for at least 14 years in order to be eligible to be president. Under Delph's legislation, no major party candidate will be eligible for the Indiana presidential primary unless they file a declaration of candidacy attesting that he or she meets the constitutional eligibility requirements and furnish the state election's division with a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and any other evidence the Commission may require to establish the candidate satisfies the constitutional eligibility requirements."

He cited the "unprecedented" 2008 election, in which "the candidates nominated by both major parties for president had questions raised by citizens about their eligibility, which resulted in dozens of lawsuits being filed across the country. Sen. John McCain's birth in Panama where his father was serving his country in the Navy led to lawsuits being filed against his candidacy, while questions about the birthplace of Barack Obama resulted in even more lawsuits being filed challenging his eligibility."

"Obama furnished to Factcheck.org what was purported to be a certified copy of his birth certificate [the online certification of live birth], although questions lingered about his natural born status because his father was not a U.S. citizen and persistent Internet rumors that he was actually born in Kenya and not Hawaii as he claimed."

But he said the issue was that neither candidate was "required to furnish any election authority with any document such as a birth certificate."

He said, "After [Sen. John] McCain was nominated at the Republican National Convention, Republican officials filed with the elections division a certificate of nomination that attested both he and his vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, met the eligibility requirements set out in the U.S. Constitution. The certificate of nomination filed by Democratic Party officials for Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden, contained no similar attestation.

"Critics will no doubt poke fun at SB114 and label Delph and those who support it as 'birthers.' To them I say it is no more absurd than the documentary proof required under state law for persons seeking a driver's license, or requiring all registered voters to present a valid picture ID in order to cast a vote in person at an election. And it certainly is no more burdensome than evidence required of ordinary citizens in any number of transactions," he said.

On Welsh's blog, a forum participant wrote, "All I can say is he is the only president in my memory who has not only REFUSED to present medical records, tax records, birth records, college records, etc., but he has hired a battalion of lawyers who vigorously fight every effort to force him to. Why is he so secretive?"

Iowa

In Iowa, lawmakers moved the plan to a committee, then subcommittee.

State Sen. Kent Sorenson, R-Indianola, introduced SF368 to require candidates for president or vice president to file a certified copy of their birth certificate along with their affadavit of candidacy. Both documents would be available for public inspection. The bill reads:

1. A candidate for president or vice president shall attach to and file with the affidavit of candidacy a copy of the candidate's birth certificate certified by the appropriate official in the candidate's state of birth. The certified copy shall be made part of the affidavit of candidacy and shall be made available for public inspection in the same manner as the affidavit of candidacy.

2. A candidate for president or vice president who does not comply with the requirements of this section shall not be eligible for placement on the ballot as a candidate for president or vice president anywhere in the state.

This bill provides that candidates for president and vice president shall file, along with their affidavit of candidacy, a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate which shall be made available for public inspection in the same manner as the candidate's affidavit of candidacy. The bill further provides that a candidate for president or vice president who does not attach to the affidavit of candidacy a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate shall not be eligible for placement on the ballot anywhere in the state.

Sorenson's bill missed a deadline for advancing.

Maine

Lawmakers in Maine took on the issue, assigned it to a committee, and then determined it "ought not to pass."

Maine's LD34 would have required candidates for public office to provide proof of citizenship.

It stated, "A candidate for nomination by primary election shall show proof of United States citizenship in the form of a certified copy of the candidate's birth certificate and the candidate's driver's license or other government-issued identification to the Secretary of State."

Missouri

The Missouri plan, HB283, by nearly two dozen sponsors, states certification for candidates "shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship."

It's in the House elections committee.

Montana

Under Montana's bill by Rep. Bob Wagner, candidates would have had to document their eligibility and also provide for protection for state taxpayers to prevent them from being billed for "unnecessary expense and litigation" involving the failure of 'federal election officials' to do their duty.

According to the database of the National Conference of State Legislatures, the bill was defeated at the committee stage, and it's unknown if there are plans to resurrect it by attaching it to another bill, a routine procedure in some states.

"There should be no question after the fact as to the qualifications [of a president]," Wagner told WND. "The state of Montana needs to have [legal] grounds to sue for damages for the cost of litigation."

Wagner's legislation cited the Constitution's requirement that the president hold "natural born citizenship" and the fact that the "military sons and daughters of the people of Montana and all civil servants to the people of Montana are required by oath to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States and Montana against enemies foreign and domestic."

But there are estimates of up to $2 million being spent on Obama's defense against eligibility lawsuits. There have been dozens of them, and some have been running for more than two years. So Wagner went a step beyond.

"Whereas, it would seem only right and just to positively certify eligibility for presidential and congressional office at the federal level; and whereas, it is apparent that the federal authority is negligent in the matter; therefore, the responsibility falls upon the state; and whereas, this act would safeguard the people of Montana from unnecessary expense and litigation and the possibility that federal election officials fail in their duty and would ensure that the State of Montana remains true to the Constitution," says his proposed legislation.

Nebraska

In Nebraska, the state lawmakers referred their proposal to the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee.

LB654 would require the certification for candidates to "include affidavits and supporting documentation."

The paperwork would need to document they meet the "eligibility requirements of Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States."

New Hampshire

According to reports in New England, state lawmakers considered a proposal to require that candidates provide a birth certificate giving evidence of their status as a natural born citizen as well as an affidavit swearing they meet the U.S. Constitution's requirements that presidents be 35 years old and have lived in the U.S. for 14 years.

State Rep. David Bates of Windham said in the report, "They need to produce a certified copy of the long form of their birth certificate and an affidavit swearing to residency."

However, the Union Leader reported the timing of the bill was wrong, and it was determined on a committee vote today that it was "inexpedient to legislate," the legislature's term for a thumbs down on the plan.

Oklahoma

In Oklahoma, the law would require documentation through an original birth certificate from a state or territory, an original U.S. Certificate of Birth Abroad, or an original Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States.

It also requires copies to be made available for public inspection.

The legislation started out as simple measure to verify the eligibility of all local candidates, and the presidential requirement was added. Sen. Ralph Shortey said the questions about Obama's 2008 race pointed out the need to protect the nation against an unqualified resident.

There, the plan has been approved by the state Senate and now has been recommended as a do-pass in a House committee.

Tennessee

At the request of a local tea-party group, Tennessee state Sen. Mae Beavers has filed a bill that would require presidential candidates to show an original birth certificate establishing constitutional eligibility for the office before getting on the ballot beginning in 2012.

Beavers told a local television station she said she wouldn't comment about whether or not she believes Obama meets the test because she has no personal knowledge about whether or not he can prove it. She said, however, this legislation would erase all concerns in future elections.

"We just want to make doubly sure in Tennessee if we put someone on the ballot, they are qualified to run," said Beavers.

It ended up be left on the table in committee.

Texas

In Texas, a plan has been referred to the State Affairs Committee.

It has been proposed by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, to require candidates' documentation.

Berman's legislation, House Bill 295, is brief and simple. It would add to the state election code the provision: "The secretary of state may not certify the name of a candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has presented the candidate's original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen."

It includes an effective date of Sept. 1, 2011, in time for 2012 presidential campaigning.

Berman told WND he's seen neither evidence nor indication that Obama qualifies under the Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural-born citizen."

"If the federal government is not going to vet these people, like they vetted John McCain, we'll do it in our state," he said.

He noted the Senate's investigation into McCain because of the Republican senator's birth in Panama to military parents.

New Hampshire last year adopted HB1245, but it requires only a statement under penalty of perjury that a candidate meets the qualification requirements of the U.S. Constitution, which is similar to what the political parties already state regarding their candidates.

At the time the Constitution was written, many analysts suggest, a natural-born citizen was considered to be a citizen born of two citizen parents. If that indeed is correct, Obama never would have been qualified to be president, as he himself has confirmed his father was a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, making Obama a dual citizen with Kenyan and American parentage at his birth.

Other definitions regard a natural-born citizen to be a person born of citizen parents inside the nation.

There have been dozens of lawsuits and challenges over the fact that Obama's natural-born citizen status never has been documented. Critics argue the short-form certification of live birth his campaign posted online is not definitive because Hawaii's lax laws enabled families to report a birth without proof that the child was born in Hawaii.

The controversy stems from the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

The challenges to Obama's eligibility allege he does not qualify because he was not born in Hawaii in 1961 as he claims, or that he fails to qualify because he was a dual citizen, through his father, of the U.S. and the United Kingdom's Kenyan territory when he was born and the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens from eligibility.

There are several cases still pending before the courts over Obama's eligibility. Those cases, however, almost all have been facing hurdles created by the courts' interpretation of "standing," meaning someone who is being or could be harmed by the situation. The courts have decided almost unanimously that an individual taxpayer faces no damages different from other taxpayers, therefore doesn't have standing. Judges even have ruled that other presidential candidates are in that position.

The result is that none of the court cases to date has reached the level of discovery, through which Obama's birth documentation could be brought into court.

Obama even continued to withhold the information during a court-martial of a military officer, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who challenged his deployment orders on the grounds Obama may not be a legitimate president. Lakin was convicted and sent to prison.

A year ago, polls indicated that roughly half of American voters were aware of a dispute over Obama's eligibility. Recent polls, however, by organizations including CNN, show that roughly six in 10 American voters hold serious doubts that Obama is eligible under the Constitution's demands.

Orly Taitz, the California lawyer who has worked on a number of the highest-profile legal challenges to Obama, was encouraging residents of other states to get to work.

"We need eligibility bills filed in each and every state of the union ... as it shows the regime that we are still the nation of law and the Constitution, that the Constitution matters and state representatives and senators are ready to fight for the rule of law. During the last election there were some 700 more Republican state assemblyman elected all over the country, as the nation is not willing to tolerate this assault on our rights and our Constitution any further," she said.

There also was, during the last Congress, Rep. Bill Posey's bill at the federal level.

Posey's H.R. 1503 stated:

"To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution."

The bill also provided:

"Congress finds that under … the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years."

It had more than a dozen sponsors, and while it died at the end of the last Congress, there are hopes the GOP majority in the House again will move such a plan forward.

There also is a petition, already signed by tens of thousands, to state lawmakers asking them to make sure the next president of the United States qualifies under the Constitution's eligibility requirements.

"What we need are hundreds of thousands of Americans endorsing this strategy on the petition – encouraging more action by state officials before the 2012 election. Imagine if just one or two states adopt such measures before 2012. Obama will be forced to comply with those state regulations or forgo any effort to get on the ballot for re-election. Can Obama run and win without getting on all 50 state ballots? I don't think so," said Joseph Farah, CEO of WND, who is behind the idea of the petition.

An earlier petition had been directed at all controlling legal authorities at the federal level to address the concerns expressed by Americans, and it attracted more than half a million names.

For 18 months, Farah has been one of the few national figures who has steadfastly pushed the issue of eligibility, despite ridicule, name-calling and ostracism at the hands of most of his colleagues. To date, in addition to the earlier petition, he has:

• erected billboards around the country demanding, "Where's the birth certificate?":
  
  
• produced a 40-page special report on the subject;
  
  
• produced a 60-minute documentary video primer on the issue;
  
  
• manufactured yard and rally signs to bring attention to the topic;
  
  
• pledged to donate at least $15,000 to any hospital in Hawaii or anywhere else that provides proof Obama was born there and given you an opportunity to raise the amount;
  
  
• created a line of T-shirts you can wear to appearances by the president to raise visibility of the issue;
  
  
• created a fund to which you can donate to further the kind of investigative reporting into this matter only this company has performed over the last two years;
  
  
• launched a line of postcards you can use to keep the issue alive;
  
  
• distributed thousands of bumper stickers asking, "Where's the birth certificate?"

Farah says all those campaigns are continuing.

"Obama may be able to continue showing contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law for the next two years, as he has demonstrated his willingness to do in his first year in office," he wrote in a column. "However, a day of reckoning is coming. Even if only one significant state, with a sizable Electoral College count, decides a candidate for election or re-election has failed to prove his or her eligibility, that makes it nearly impossible for the candidate to win. It doesn't take all 50 states complying with the law to be effective."

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.

Read more: States advance eligibility laws http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=284561#ixzz1Iyi1sHo9

BORN IN THE USA?

Hawaii elections clerk: Obama 'caught fibbing'

But will president be 'frog-marched from office' over eligibility issue?

---

By Joe Kovacs

© 2011 WorldNetDaily

The former Hawaii elections official who maintains there's no long-form birth certificate for Barack Obama in the Aloha State is now saying the president and his aides have been "caught fibbing" about Obama's background, and the "embarrassing" situation is making it difficult to fess up to the truth.

President Barack Obama in the Oval Office April 4, 2011

Tim Adams, who was senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu during the 2008 campaign, made the statements in a two-hour interview with a group looking to disprove claims made by so-called birthers, those challenging Obama's legal qualification to be president.

"I think people believe there's been some kind of cover-up. And I don't think it's some big nefarious conspiracy. I think it's politics as usual," Adams said March 31 on Reality Check Radio, an Internet program on BlogTalkRadio.

"Barack Obama's official autobiography was put out to the public for the public's consumption and we all know politicians – they have a public persona, it's created for consumption by the electorate – and I think that they've been caught fibbing, and it's embarrassing."

Be the first to get the new eligibility book signed by Jerome Corsi and help get TV commercials on the air to bust this issue wide open!

But Adams, who described himself as "pretty much a liberal" who backed Hillary Clinton in the campaign, thinks the president should produce a long-form birth certificate if he has one, even if it contains information that does not go along with the narrative proffered so far by Obama and his surrogates.

"I think as much trauma as all this has caused," Adams said, "I think if Barack Obama has lied about where he was born or if there's something about his birth that he doesn't want people to publicly know, if he would come out and simply say something like that, I think most people would go, 'Oh, OK,' and they would go on about their business 'cause they've got a thousand more important things to do."

(Story continues below)

Adams burst onto the national scene last June after claiming his superiors at the elections office in Honolulu checked with the state health department and local hospitals, only to find out that none had Obama's long-form birth certificate, a document specifying the hospital where he was born and the attending physician.

Tim Adams, the former senior elections clerk for Honolulu in 2008

While not having access to Hawaii Department of Health birth records, Adams says his office had access to numerous databases to verify people's identities, including the Social Security database, driver's licenses, passports, tax and banking records, police files and the national crime computer.

He said elections officials themselves have been embarrassed by the disclosure about accessing criminal records, saying, "They were not happy about it when they found out about it."

He has since signed an affidavit swearing to his allegations.

As the controversy over eligibility has resurfaced recently with billionaire developer and potential Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump suggesting Obama's presidency could be illegal, Adams is not expecting the commander in chief to be removed from office.

"That gets into the extremist fantasies that somehow they're going to frog-march Barack Obama out of the White House – it's never going to happen," said Adams.

"Barack Obama was given permission to run for office. Barack Obama won the election. He is the president of the United States. The more extremist people out there try to, you know, bring up this issue that he's not legitimately president. It doesn't hold water. You can't say, once you give the man permission to run, and he wins the election, that he's not president. It's not going to happen."

At one point in the interview, one of the questioners, who ironically never provided his real name and only went by an alias, challenged Adams about the "short-form" birth certificate, also known as a certification of live birth, or COLB, that has been displayed on the Internet.

This short-form "certification of live birth" released by the Obama campaign in 2008 does not have the name of the hospital or an attending physician, which would be included on a long-form "certificate of live birth," which has never been produced by Obama.

It notes a birthplace of Honolulu, but does not specify a hospital or doctor.

The radio hosts suggested that Janice Okubo, the public information officer for the state health department had previously vouched for the authenticity of the COLB, though in reality she has refused to do so. But Adams maintained the online scanned image is fraudulent.

Adams was asked, "So you're calling Janice Okubo a liar?"

"Yes," Adams responded, "if she's saying that that document that is sitting out there on the Internet is an actual document because we can prove it's not in about 30 seconds. Because it's altered."

Long-form birth certificates from 1961 still exist, including one released by Susan Nordyke, who was born in Honolulu Aug. 5, 1961, the day after Obama's alleged birth.

Copy of original long-form birth certificate of Susan Nordyke, born in Honolulu the day after Obama's reported birthdate. Obama has never produced any document like this.

In response to a direct question from WND, Okubo refused to authenticate either of the two versions of President Obama's short-form certification of live birth, posted online – neither the image produced by the Obama campaign nor images released by FactCheck.org.

FactCheck.org image of COLB released August 2008

Image of date stamp on rear of FactCheck.org document

Image of seal on FactCheck.org document

Close-up of FactCheck.org document

"I happen to be a trained document researcher, by the way," Adams continued, "and have worked with the Hawaii Historical Association and have worked in the state archives. So I do know what a document is."

Adams says he even offered the current Democratic governor of the state, Neil Abercrombie, his personal assistance to help verify any long-form birth certificate if it were ever produced.

"Governor Abercrombie said that he was afraid that even if they managed to bring out the original birth certificate or a copy of the original birth certificate, there would still be people who would say, 'Oh, it's a forgery, oh, it's a fake,' whatever. I told him that if he wanted help convincing people it was real, I would be happy to do so. If he actually had the birth certificate. I got nothing back from the man."

Abercrombie made national headlines earlier this year when he publicly sought to bring closure to the issue, and then explained he couldn't find Obama's long-form birth certificate, only some sort of written notation.

"It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down," Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser.

Adams explained, "He found a registration, he found an archive notation. He did not find a birth certificate. You'll never see one from him."

Adams also commented on a mysterious letter purportedly sent by Obama to Honolulu's Kapi'olani Medical Center in January 2009 in which the president ostensibly declared the facility his place of birth. It was read aloud by Abercrombie at the hospital's centennial celebration.

A photograph taken by the Kapi'olani Medical Center for WND shows a letter allegedly written by President Obama on embossed White House stationery in which he declares the Honolulu hospital to be "the place of my birth," The hospital, after publicizing the letter then refusing to confirm it even existed, is now vouching for its authenticity, but not its content. The White House has yet to verify any aspect of the letter.

"I know there was a letter that they refuse now to show to public scrutiny, that, as far as I can tell, didn't come from either President Obama – where it came from is a matter of conjecture. Some people think that somebody in Washington ... who's now a governor may have written it," Adams said. "Whether that letter is valid or not, all that letter proves is if President Obama wrote the Kapi'olani Hospital letter congratulating them on – I think it was their 100th anniversary."

As WND has reported, the White House has refused to confirm if it wrote or sent the letter, or if the information it contains is accurate.

Kapi'olani has used the letter for fundraising purposes, and the FBI has said there could be federal charges filed if the letter is not authentic.

Kapi'olani used a letter, allegedly written by President Obama in which he declares his birthplace to be at the facility, to solicit donations in its spring 2009 edition of its Inspire Magazine. The hospital, after refusing to confirm the letter even existed, is now vouching for its authenticity but not its content. The White House has refused to confirm both the letter and its content. The FBI and Secret Service have indicated criminal charges are possible if a fraudulent letter from the White House is being used to raise funds.

"It would be a charity-fraud scheme," said FBI spokesman Steve Kodak. "It would be investigated by us or the Secret Service. We both have jurisdiction over that."

Adams, who personally believes Obama is eligible for president simply because his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was an American citizen, is hoping laws are passed clarifying the meaning of "natural born citizen," which is what the U.S. Constitution specifies for presidents.

Adams thinks anyone born on U.S. soil, irrespective of their parents' heritage or citizenship, should be eligible. Still, he's urging the president to release his long-form birth certificate from wherever he was born to resolve the controversy.

"The fact is, we've had one person all along who could simply end this, who supposedly has the document in his possession, and that's President Obama," said Adams. "He could end this. I really wish he would."

Despite the fact major newspapers and broadcast networks have avoided interviewing Adams or probing his allegations, the former official who supervised about 50 people in Honolulu said he seriously considered leaving the United States because of the disruption to his life and threats against him after going public with his claims.

"When all this happened, it was nuts. It was a mess," he said. "I really got to the point [where] I thought, 'I'm going to have to leave the country.' I don't get nearly as much grief now, either professionally or otherwise. But it was really bad for a while. It got really violent. There are some really kind of dangerous people out there."

Note: To listen to Tim Adams' online radio interview, click here. The program may take a few moments to load. A transcript can be viewed here.

Read more: Hawaii elections clerk: Obama 'caught fibbing' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=283865#ixzz1Ir4NbGEi