April 21st, 2010
06:00 PM ET

Latest 'birther' move: A good idea or a waste of time?

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/04/21/art.wh2.0325.gi.jpg caption="The Arizona legislature demands that President Obama show his birth certificate to get on the state's ballot in 2012."]


On Monday, the Arizona House voted Monday by a 31-22 margin to require all presidential candidates to prove they were born in the United States in order to meet the constitutional requirement. The measure still has to be considered by the Arizona state Senate before it can become law.

White House aides are scoffing at the move, which would force President Obama to show his birth certificate to get on the state's ballot in 2012 for his likely re-election battle.

What do you think? Is this a legitimate idea or a waste of time? Let us know!

soundoff (17 Responses)
  1. Sheryl Dunn

    Colossal waste of time. It's already been validated. Move on and stop wasting taxpayer money.

    April 21, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  2. sharlene

    Why NOT demand proof of a birth certificate when our laws state its importance explicitly? I have to show my passport as proof of citizenship every time I enter or leave this country–maybe that should be optional too? Or do I really need to show the cop my drivers license if he thinks I was driving too fast?

    April 21, 2010 at 6:17 pm |
  3. J in so cal

    I hope it passes and starts a trend of upholding our Constitution.

    April 21, 2010 at 6:14 pm |
  4. Tim Gibson

    If we as "average" citizens must prove our citizenship for work purposes and otherwise, then why would it be anything out of the ordinary to require the same of a presidental candidate.

    April 21, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
  5. MLeslie

    Aren't there already laws on the books about a presidential candidate needing to be an American citizen? Waste of time...

    April 21, 2010 at 5:52 pm |
  6. metimoteo

    I don't see this as a big deal. Okay, so the president may have to show his birth certificate prior to 2012 election. It's a minor inconvenience, but it's not going to diminish the fact that he is president now...duly elected by citizens of this republic.

    April 21, 2010 at 5:47 pm |
  7. Kevin

    It is a waste of time AND will lead to more of my tax dollars being wasted.

    April 21, 2010 at 5:40 pm |
  8. Lisa

    Waste of time!

    April 21, 2010 at 5:37 pm |
  9. Adnora

    It's another waste of time, etc. But who's counting?

    April 21, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  10. Carol B.

    Yes. All candidates sould be required to do so!

    April 21, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  11. Nick

    My original birth certificate was lost. Does that mean I'm ineligible to run in AZ or will a passport be sufficient?

    April 21, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  12. tkpowell

    Ha! Total bull. Fact is, he produced a birth certificate – the same one that EVERYONE in Hawaii has – and the naysayers wouldn't accept it. No other president has EVER had to go through such obvious and blatant disrespect and grandstanding.

    Then again, what do you expect from a state that didn't want to acknowledge the MLK Holiday...

    April 21, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  13. Van

    Arizona wouldnt care if it were a Republican's birth origin that was in question. This is just political.

    However, it does reinforce an existing Constitutional requirement that Obama hasn't fully met. A US president should be 100% law-abiding.

    That being said, as a Libertarian Im a huge critic of Obama but I dont particularly care where he was born so long as he was raised here – which Im satisfied he was. That's American-enough for me. His flaws are his policies, not some technicality of birth.

    April 21, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  14. Tom

    I had to show my birth certificate to get my passport and it seems simple that we should require someone who runs the country to show their birth certificate to run for President. I'm all for it.

    April 21, 2010 at 5:17 pm |
  15. Rob Hephner

    I have to show my Birth Certificate to get certain Government items.

    I guess the only issue would be if a person could not produce one...

    April 21, 2010 at 5:16 pm |
  16. Ethel M. Morgan

    It is definitely a legitimate idea. The rules are the rules. Why should anyone be exempt? If there is nothing to hide, why not just simply produce the document?

    April 21, 2010 at 5:16 pm |
  17. sarah Cross

    i voted for Obama and am pleased with him but it is, a constitutional requirement so seems fine to me. i know they are doing this hoping he will be disqualified but i thought that was already a non-issue (that he was indeed born in the states)

    April 21, 2010 at 5:11 pm |