steepholm: (Default)
[personal profile] steepholm
An acquaintance of mine who lives in America and is of the teabag persuasion (his political beliefs are full of holes) has been getting into something of a stew - and not for the first time - about the so-called mystery of President Obama's birth certificate. Now, Obama's place of birth is a matter of complete indifference to me, but I do understand that the US Constitution declares that you must have been born a citizen in order to hold the office of president. My friend's conspiracy theories - or his expression of them, which makes it sound as if being born outside the US is tantamount to being a traitor - have reminded me again how odd that particular provision is. Like the business of bearing arms, this strikes me as one of those items that was understandable at the time it was written down, but has become indefensible since. Because, let's face it, it means that there are two classes of US citizens: those who can be trusted with executive power, and those who can't, by reason of their birth. No other class of American is excluded except the young,* who presumably won't stay young for ever, whereas being born a non-citizen is a stigma that bars you for life, no matter how exemplary that life may be. I'm not aware of any other country that has this kind of provision.

Oddly enough, the ban doesn't seem (as far as I can see) to be a particular bone of contention in the States itself, and I wonder why not? Is it just because relatively few adults want to become President? I'd have thought that, especially now, when immigration into the States is largely by non-WASPs, there would be a case for saying that the provision is effectively racist, aside from being just plain unfair.

There is a way around the sanction, though. I harbour a fantasy that Arnold Schwarzenegger will be able to run for president despite his Austrian birth by the simple expedient of getting himself sent back in time to 1787 so that he fulfils the alternative criterion of being a US citizen "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution". Actually, I'm surprised he hasn't already done it.

* There may be others - convicts, perhaps? - but none seems to be mentioned in the Constitution.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 02:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] diceytillerman.livejournal.com
I harbour a fantasy that Arnold Schwarzenegger will be able to run for president despite his Austrian birth by the simple expedient of getting himself sent back in time to 1787 so that he fulfils the alternative criterion of being a US citizen "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution".

The biggest problem with this, clearly, is that then he'd be historical fiction, and then he'd have to go into y'all's book.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 03:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
You're right! Best not let him know, then.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 05:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lady-schrapnell.livejournal.com
Ha! *We* can exclude as much as we want with a free conscience - he'd never manage to be children's/YA fiction, and he's not got a British setting. :P

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 05:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] diceytillerman.livejournal.com
Oh good point! Hee hee.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 03:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Amazing isn't it that a country so vast can be so parochial?
I suppose that as a historian with a specialism in the civil wars of the 17th century, I shouldn't be altogether surprised how those 17th century attitudes are so persistent in the country of the saints.

Your friend would doubtless be gobsmacked at how much of the world out here isn't the US!

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 03:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
The strange thing is that he himself is from southern England - in fact, I don't think he's even got citizenship - but sometimes that makes for extra zealotry, I guess!

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 03:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Oy!

I met white South Africans of recent European origin like that- the biggest racists and apartheid supporters of them all!

Having a black Rhodesian (as it was back then) boyfriend back in the day cured me of that sort of thinking, if I ever indulged in it, I'm glad to say :o)

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 07:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fjm.livejournal.com
It isn't tradition/17th century.

It was passed in the twentieth century to stop Spiro Agnew becoming Prez after Nixon. One oddity is that the vp can be foreign born

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 07:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
I don't think that's right. It's in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution adopted in 1787: "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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-09 10:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com
Article 2 implies that there is no difference in qualifications for Pres and VP, but the 12th Amendment (1804, so a bit earlier than Nixon) explicitly states that people running to be VP must be qualified to be President. Before the 12th Amendment, candidates really didn't run for Vice President. The VP was simply the second-choice via Electoral College votes. Made for a couple of very interesting elections, what with split tickets in the executive branch!

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 07:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Also, Spiro Agnew was born in Baltimore!

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 11:03 pm (UTC)
ext_6322: (Vote)
From: [identity profile] kalypso-v.livejournal.com
But have you seen his birth certificate? Can you be sure it's genuine?

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-08 11:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Good question!

And then, of course, there's the question of which Baltimore...

(no subject)

Date: 2011-04-09 08:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tekalynn.livejournal.com
The thing that really aggravates/amuses me is that Obama's election opponent, John McCain, was BORN IN PANAMA. This has never been an issue for anyone. Odd, that.

Profile

steepholm: (Default)
steepholm

August 2025

S M T W T F S
     12
34 56789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags