WHAT IS A ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’ AND WHY AMERICANS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS KNOW NOTHING ABOUT AMERICAN HISTORY OR THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?

It is obvious that leaders of the Republican Party today, tend to be of John Birch Society extremist ideology and believe America was never ‘intended to be or is a democracy’. For example, in 2010, Republican Gov. Walker of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Republican State Legislature were all financed by the Koch brothers whose father Fred was one of the founders of the radical John Birch Society.

Walker and his Wisconsin Legislature have done everything they can to eliminate democracy in Wisconsin, and now Walker a candidate for President wants to make all America like Wisconsin, a plutocratic oligarchy (a government of the wealthy elite).

Also, Walker would eliminate in addition to democracy, eliminate labor unions that are the only voice of workers, eliminate public schools and privatize education for the purpose of indoctrinating all students in John Birch ideology, and in 2010, Walker would allow Koch industries to buy municipal power companies without open bidding (though this legislation was declared unconstitutional by the courts).

Now Walker would repeal the Fourteenth Amendment and eliminate citizenship based on babies born in America, being natural born citizens of America. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-good-chunk-of-gop-field-wants-to-repeal-the-14th-amendment_55d24915e4b055a6dab12015?kvcommref=mostpopular

AMERICA STATUE OF LIBERTY

Most Americans do not know what a ‘natural born citizen’ is, and they don’t know why the founders required Presidents to be natural born citizens.

A natural born citizen has never been defined by the Supreme Court and there is no ‘legal definition’ for natural born citizens.

The U.S. Constitution reads: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of this Constitution shall be eligible for the Office of President . . .”

When there is no legal basis for a term like ‘natural born citizen’, the court must rely on a historical definition; so why did the founders add ‘natural born citizen’ to requirements for a President?

When the Constitution was written in 1785, it was customary that when a monarchy of a nation was deposed, for the revolutionaries to often bring someone of royal blood, who was unknown and whose parents were exiled and they were born and raised in exile, to be established as the ‘new monarch’. Such individuals, being born abroad, did not know the culture of the land they were to rule.

Our forefathers were more intelligent and better educated in history than Americans today, it appears; they could perceive America experiencing a coup and revolutionaries bringing someone born of U.S. citizens abroad, and raised in another culture, back into the U.S. to be President.

“On July 25, 1787, John Jay wrote to George Washington, presiding officer of the Convention: ‘Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen. While the Committee on Detail originally proposed that the President must be merely a citizen as well as a resident for 21 years, the Committee of Eleven changed “citizen” to “natural born citizen” without recorded explanation after receiving Jay’s letter. The Convention accepted the change without further recorded debate’.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause

In our recent United States history, some candidates for President were not born within the borders of the United States, and they ran for the Presidency anyway, but they were not elected and the term ‘natural born citizen’ was never adequately defined.

Mitt Romney’s father ran for President and he was born in Mexico; Sen. John McCain ran for President and he was born in Panama where his father, who was in the U.S. Navy, and his mother was living at the time.

Presently, Republican Ted Cruz is running for President, and Cruz was born in Canada, his father was Cuban Canadian and his mother was American Canadian, however there is a question of whether or not both his father and his mother had been naturalized Canadians at the time he was actually born.

When Sen. McCain ran for office he refused to discuss the matter; Sen. Cruz has not yet discussed the matter, today.

When McCain ran for President, some Republican members of Congress suggested they passed legislation declaring McCain to be a natural born Citizen. It didn’t happen and McCain lost the election.

Personally, as an avid student of the U.S. Constitution, I believe the matter should be a resolved by a simple amendment to the U.S. Constitution and put the matter to rest. Ours is a different world today from that of 1785, and our forefathers had the good sense to provide for Amendments to our Constitution, and Americans should bring the U.S. Constitution up to date. And today for me, a ‘natural born citizen’ is a mute question!

America should also amend our Constitution to reflect today’s technology, because meanwhile, politicians keep insisting the Constitution says what they personally want it to say, and the Supreme Court has also taken liberties, to interpret the Constitution based on their own personal political bias that cannot be supported by any other legal means.

Today, the People have also expressed great disappointment in their government.

In 1785, these United States of America was a nation of law; the U.S. Constitution, Article VI states “The Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land. . . “

As a student of the U.S. Constitution it pains me to see political forces in America publicizing inaccurate translations of the law, and to see political elements like the John Birch Society be successful in convincing Americans that our forefathers did not perceive our Constitutional Republic to be as democratic as it could possibly be in 1785. (John Birch Society Blue Book, p.124 ” . . . democracy is merely a deceptive phrase, a weapon of demagoguery, and a perennial fraud.” (Continued in Footnote 25, p. 136.) “Our founding fathers . . .visibly spurned a democracy as probably the worst of all forms of government.”)

This is just not true; historically, America was conceived necessarily, due to conditions of the times, as democratic as a ‘democratic Republic’ could be in 1785!

Today, Americans seem to be void of any realistic understanding of the history of America. And, unfortunately, the public schools’ curriculum is being distorted by anti-democratic extremist political entities in America.

It is shameful that Americans are not better informed of their nation’s history; in my travels, I have discovered that foreign people have a better understanding of American history and its Constitution than the American People do. And I speak as a retired high school history and political science teacher.

Further, I understand American youth not being interested in their history or Constitution and considering it unimportant. However, the job of the teacher is to teach students history, provide the incentive for students to learn history, and teach the importance and the necessity to know American history and the Constitution to be reliable citizens, competent voters, and most of all retain their democracy and the power of the ballot.

Personally, I found the best incentive for history students to learn American history, is accomplished by informing students that it is imperative for the survival of our American democracy that they know more about our history and government than their parents presently do; it is a truism that students knowing more than their parents is the best possible incentive for students, it worked for me every time.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.