8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
1/47
R.C: Good evening, everyone, and welcome to Reality Check
Radio for March 10, 2011.
This is your host, R.C. Welcome to the show again. This
is my weekly show on politics and presidential eligibility, and
we have a guest this week who couldn't be with us last week,
because some of his legislative business took priority, so I
appreciate - I talked with Representative Hatfield yesterday,
and we were able to reschedule him here tonight for a few
minutes, so certainly appreciate him giving up his time.
Representative Mark Hatfield is from the 117th District in
Georgia, from Waycross. He's a graduate of the fine University
of Georgia law school, and I believe he's also Secretary of
what's the equivalent of the Judiciary Committee.
Representative Hatfield has introduced a bill on presidential
eligibility - one of the so-called 'birther bills'. There are
about - depending on how you count - ten or twelve of them. So,
without further ado let's bring up Representative Hatfield.
0:2:42
R.C: Good evening, Representative Hatfield. Welcome to the
show.
Rep. M.H: Good evening R.C. How are you doing?
R.C: Hey, doing great. (they talk over each other)
Rep. M.H: Real quickly let me just correct you about a
couple of things. I'm in District 177 in Georgia, and I'm also
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
2/47
the - I'm the Vice Chairman of the Judiciary Non-Civil Committee
in the Georgia House.
R.C: Okay, thank you. I misread the district there, I
appreciate the corrections. So, why don't we jump into it,
because I know you said you only had about twenty minutes here
tonight so let's get right into the meat of it.
Rep: M.H: Sure.
R.C: Why did you submit the bill, and what - what's in the
bill?
0:3:20
Rep. M.H: Well, this is House Bill 401, and it's entitled
the Presidential Eligibility Assurance Act, and this bill is
basically a bill which would require that presidential and vice-
presidential candidates, in order to be included on the Georgia
ballot, in the Presidential Preference Primary, or in the
General Election, would have to submit documentary evidence of
his or her satisfaction of the natural born citizenship
requirement, as well as the age and residency requirement of
Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.
And this Bill is - basically, it's an important bill I
feel, because, it's important that we work to uphold the
principles of our founding fathers as laid out in the
Constitution, and right now, there is, there is currently
nothing that we have from Congress in the way of guidance, as to
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
3/47
the enforcement of Article 2, Section 1, and I feel that in the
absence of any action by Congress, that the states have the duty
and obligation to step forward, and try to make sure that those
eligibility requirements are enforced.
0:4:46:
R.C: Okay. And what are some of the specific requirements
in the bill?
Rep. M.H: Well, the bill, as I mentioned to you when we
spoke last evening, the bill is - has undergone some change
since it was originally introduced. We have a substitute that's
drawn up, but I'll just tell you, basically, as it was
originally introduced, the bill would require that a
presidential or vice-presidential candidate submit an affidavit
showing that he or she meets the requirements of natural born
citizenship, age and residency; fourteen years residency in the
United States, and that the candidate would append to the
affidavit, documentation, showing - proving that the candidate
meets those requirements, and it expresses a first preference
for a certified copy of an original, a first original long form
birth certificate.
In the absence of that, if such a birth certificate does
not exist or is not available, then the candidate would be
permitted to submit other documentation as he or she deemed
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
4/47
appropriate, that would either individually or collectively show
that he or she meets the eligibility requirements.
The bill also - as to the affidavit - originally included
some language which we discussed, that would ask that the
candidate swear to the fact that he or she had never been a -
held dual citizenship or multiple citizenship, and that the
candidate had only had allegiance to the United States of
America, and finally, that the candidate list the residences
that the candidate lived at or in for the fourteen years
preceding the execution of the affidavit.
Now that has, that has changed with the substitute, because
we had, as you and I have discussed, there are, certainly the
issues have been raised, they - people - a lot of people have
claimed that, you know, it's a political bill, and so in order
to, to allay concerns about the bill's potential political
nature, I have proposed a substitute which would move the
effective date of this bill to July 1 of 2013, and that makes it
clear that President Obama would not be subject to the
requirements of the bill, yet we would still be able to get into
law some definite means of enforcing the Article 2, Section 1
requirements.
0:07:40
Also, just finally, the substitute would also remove the
dual citizenship issue, multiple citizenship, and basically just
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
5/47
require a fairly bare-bones affidavit stating that the candidate
meets the age, and natural born citizenship requirements, and
that he or she has been a resident for fourteen years in the
United States.
R.C: I'm sorry Representative Hatfield, I'm having a little
difficulty - it's bringing up some callers here before I'm
ready, and a little bit of that got over - unfortunately it
didn't come through, but I think I got the gist of it. So you're
resubmitting the bill - let me summarize and you can correct me
if I'm wrong.
Rep. M.H: OK
R.C: You're re-submitting the Bill, and you're removing the
no dual citizenship requirement?
Rep. M.H: Right, right.
R.C: And...
Rep. M.H: But we're not - it's not... it's not re-
submitting the bill. Basically, you know, as the bill, any bill
that is filed goes through the process of Committee hearings,
and most bills, during that process, evolve in form, and
eventually result in an amended bill, or in a substitute bill,
and that's basically what I'm doing here is, is offering a
substitute to the original bill - it'll still be under House
Bill 401.
0:09:03
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
6/47
R.C: OK. So we'll call it the revised... revised House
Bill 401.
Rep. M.H: Right.
R.C: Does it still have the same requirements on the birth
certificate, that - the same language? That it has to be a
certified exact copy of the candidate's first original long form
birth certificate?
Rep. M.H: Yes, yes, it does.
R.C: And does it still say it has to have the name of the
specific hospital or other location, attending physician at the
candidate's birth, name of the parents, respective birth places
- that language, is that still in there?
Rep. M.H: It has most of that language. I took out the
portion about the parents current residences, as well as the
requirement that the birth certificate show attending witnesses,
and I'll tell you, just, my basis for doing that, I, when I was
at home over the weekend, you know - as you know we're in the
legislative session right now, but we break for the weekends,
and when I was at home over the weekend, I was able to pull a
copy of my long form birth vertificate, and was able to, you
know, look at the specific items that are on the birth
certificate here in Georgia, and I think that these are, what
I've got now is that it would include the candidate's date, time
and place of birth, the name of the specific hospital or other
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
7/47
location at which the candidate was born, the attending
physician at the candidate's birth, and the names of the
candidate's birth parents and their respective birth places.
0:10:30
R.C: Now, aren't you going to have a problem on this bill,
with the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution?
Because other states - as a matter of fact several other states
- only issue what is commonly now termed the short-form birth
certificate, the Certification of Live Birth, the computer-
generated type certificate that we're all familiar. And, it
sounds like your bill still reads in such a way that that would
not be acceptable proof (they talk over each other)
Rep. M.H: Well, that's true... the Bill does actually
contain - I've got a line in here that says the candidate shall
not attach certified or other copies of non-original documents
or records, and you know, I agree with you that many states, if
you just go and make a generalized request for a birth record,
they're going to give you a summary document, which is a
Certificate of Live Birth - it's computer generated. But that
doesn't mean that you can't obtain that - the original long form
birth certificate, and I have heard the arguments about the Full
Faith and Credit clause, but this really, basically, when we're
taking some action at the state level, I'm relying on a couple
of things: One, that yes, the United States Constitution sets
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
8/47
out the eligibility requirements for the office of President.
However, the States have the duty of carrying out the elect...
the - the actual qualification of the candidates and the
elections of the candidates. And so, I don't think that -
inasmuch as we're dealing with the access to the Georgia ballot,
and not any other State's ballot - that we would have the
ability in Georgia to, to set the requirements to get on the
ballot in our State.
0:12:25
R.C: Well, I certainly disagree with that, because I think
that you're trying to require a birth certificate beyond what
many states will give, and you - you said something I'm going to
take issue with. You said the original long form birth
certificate is obtainable. I've, I know many, many people have
tried - of the birther community - to get a long form birth
certificate of Hawaii. They claimed they were going to do it.
And Hawaii has stated specifically that since 2001, when you
request a birth certificate, what you get is a Certificate very
similar to the one that was published for President Obama. They
will not supply the other birth certificate with certification
on it now...
Rep. M.H: Let's - and I don't mean to interrupt - but let's
assume that that is correct, and that Hawaii can only issue the
Certificate of Live Birth that's computer generated. Even under
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
9/47
- under that scenario, in my bill, you would still be able to
submit other documentation, and I've got in there language that
says other documentation that may include but not be limited to
- and then we've got things like, medical records which would
include birth records, baptism records, school records, passport
records, things of this nature. I've got a, sort of a laundry
list, but it's a non-exclusive laundry list of things that would
be acceptable, and would meet the requirements of the bill, in
order to get on the Georgia ballot. So if we're not saying
that if you don't have a long form birth certificate that
there's no way that you get on the ballot.
On the contrary, if you don't have - if there's not a long
form birth certificate in existence, then this bill would
specifically allow the submission of other documentation, and,
that would - you know - satisfy the eligibility requirements, or
show compliance with the eligibility requirements.
0:14:35
R.C: Well, isn't there a problem requesting medical
records? Don't you butt up against the medical privacy laws in
that case?
Rep. M.H: Well, sure. I mean if, if, assuming - and I
think you're assuming that the state would be making that
request, but my bill would put the onus on the candidate to
obtain those records and provide them to the state. So I agree
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
10/47
with you that, you know, just like in the current situation with
the President, that, you know, someone cannot come in and
reque... someone that does not have a tangible interest in the
record cannot come in and request from Hawaii those records,
which are confidential, and not subject to public review, but
here we're talking about a bill that says the candidate, in
order to get on the ballot, would supply those.
0:15:31
R.C: But aren't these documents - would these documents
then be placed on public review, or only seen by the Secretary
of State?
Rep. M.H: They would - they would be available for public
review.
R.C: So you're asking you're going to ask the candidates
to supply private records, then?
Rep. M.H: Well, yes... and R.C, I think that, you know,
while some people may see that as a, as a burdensome
requirement, I mean we're not talking about running for city
council here, we're talking about running for the highest office
in the land - I mean the leader of the free world - and to
expect the person who is going to take on that awesome task and
responsibility to submit just the minimum amount of
documentation showing that he or she meets those requirements as
set out in the Constitution, I think is not asking a lot.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
11/47
I mean, you know, we have kids today, in order to play
Little League baseball, they've got to produce a birth
certificate. So, you know, to say that a candidate would be
required to produce some documents - and yes, they would be
subject to public inspection - but then how many presidential
candidates have released their medical records over the years?
And presidents who actually made it into office? So, I don't
think that's asking too much.
0:16:48
R.C: Actually, I didn't see John McCain's medical records.
I saw about a one-paragraph summary, and I didn't see a lot of
Obama's, I mean that's - that's been overblown...
Well, let's, let's move on. Does your bill - does your
bill still have the requirement that the candidate has to supply
an affidavit showing - stating where they've lived, and their
places of residence for the precedingfourteen years?
Rep. M.H: Right. No, that was taken out
R.C: Okay...
Rep. M.H: - because I do - I do think that - to the extent
that we said that - that I said the precedingfourteen years,
prior to the execution of the affidavit, that may in fact
conflict with the Constitutional requirement that they'd just
have been a resident for fourteen years. So, in order to make
sure that this was not something that was - that was going
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
12/47
beyond the strict requirements of the Constitution, I made that
change, so that it only requires just a showing that the
candidate has been a resident for fourteen years total.
0:17:51
R.C: Okay. And, well, let me ask you this question. I -
as we discussed last night, I don't see that we've ever had a
problem. I don't think we have a problem with this President.
I don't think we've had a problem with other Presidents, but,
knowing what you know, from what's available in the public, and
in your opinion, is the current President eligible to hold
office? Knowing what you know, and just an opinion.
Rep. M.H: Well, I'll I will have to say - to give the
same answer I've given when I've been asked this in the past,
and that is, I don't know. And, I could - I could say, as a lot
of people have said, that sure, that he, he - he said that he
meets the eligibility requirements and that's it. But, you
know, I think that there - we have reason to be, at least,
suspicious over the situation, because whether you agree with
the issue or not, you have to admit that this issue has become -
has taken on national significance.
And, at a minimum, it seems to me, that the President would
come out and say, hey, we're going to put this, we're going to
put this issue to rest. I'm going to release documentation,
whether it be a long form Birth Certificate or other
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
13/47
documentation, that - that will put this issue to rest. And I
think the fact that this has gone on for so long, and has not
been addressed by the White House, it - you know - it raises
suspicions. And I'm not - I'm not here to say that the
President was not born in Hawaii. I have no personal knowledge
of that one way or another.
I would say that I understand he said that he was, and I
don't have any basis to say otherwise, but it - it still begs
the question aren't we, as a country, entitled to expect that a
candidate who is running for the highest office in the land is
going to meet a higher threshold. And in order to do that, I
think that you have to - you have to bring forth the records,
you're going to have to - you know - have an honest dialogue
with your population.
0:20:00
R.C: Well, what about Joe Biden? I'll ask you the same
question about Joe Biden, because you didn't even - your
original bill last year didn't even include anything about the
vice president.
Rep. M.H: I agree with you, and that's absolutely true,
but basically, what - what I was doing last year was putting -
putting something out there, and I'll tell you I got the
language for last year's bill straight from the Arizona version,
because it was an issue that was up and coming at that time, it
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
14/47
was something that I'd had interest in, and I felt like - that
we needed an opportunity to put something out there, and start a
public dialogue about the issue. And, in fact, you know it did
trigger public dialogue in Georgia, and has contributed to the
overall dialogue in the country about this issue. And what I
did was, I came back this year, as I said I would, and I came
back with a more comprehensive bill that I think addresses the
issue, probably in a more thoughtful manner, and recognizing
that the Constitution specifies that the requirements for
holding the office of vice president are the same as those for
holding the office of president - you know - I think it's only
fair to include that.
0:21:24
R.C: Right. Well, I'll tell you what, I've got a whole
slew of callers lined up here. What I'd like to do is maybe
give a couple of them maybe a shot here.
Rep. M.H: Sure.
R.C: The first caller is actually from Georgia.
Rep. M.H: Okay.
R.C: Go ahead. I think this is Loren.
Loren: Yes. Good evening Representative Hatfield.
Rep. M.H: Is this Loren Collins? [hereafter, L.C]
L.C: Yes, it is.
Rep. M.H: How're you doing?
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
15/47
L.C: Doing well, sir.
Rep. M.H: Good.
L.C: I've got to say, sir, first of all it's good to talk
to you, and...
Rep. M.H: Good to talk to you.
L.C: And it's encouraging, what I've heard so far. It
sounds like you've addressed a lot of the - not just the issues
that I - that I've written about, but also some other ones that
I was planning on bringing up, but you've pre-empted me on it,
it appears, so...
Rep. M.H: Well, I - you know - the process of a bill
talking shape is - is sometimes a slow one, but it's a matter of
going through the committee process, hearing from your
colleagues, and hearing from the public, and trying to make the
bill the best it can be.
0:22:29
L.C: Okay. There's still a couple that I wanted to ask
you about. One is - you already discussed there a little bit,
the different things that you want to see required on a - the
first original long form birth certificate.
Rep. M.H: Right.
L.C: What is it that you think is necessary about seeing
the name of the hospital and the parents' birthplaces?
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
16/47
Rep. M.H: Well, because that would be - those would
ultimately be the best evidence of where the person was actually
born.
R.C: Well, I'm going to step in here. I'm going to step
in, Loren, because when Hawaii puts out a document, like they
did for Obama, and puts that state seal on it, what the
representative is saying - that basically, he doesn't trust
those state officials. He doesn't believe them, if - if they
have a state certified document. And by the way, Representative
Hatfield, did you know there is a - the federal government does
define a birth certificate for federal use? And the one Hawaii
issues, and the other short forms, meets that definition. Also,
are you saying you don't trust Hawaii? Is that what you're
saying?
0:23:37
Rep. M.H: Well, no, not at all... but again, you're - you
make assumptions that because a state issues something that's
generated by computer, that - and that we've seen only, you
know, on the internet - that somehow, that that should resolve
all questions. I would submit to you first thing about Hawaii's
certificate of live birth is that we - as we discussed before -
that a person that is not born in Hawaii would be eligible under
Hawaii law, to have his or her birth registered in Hawaii, and -
L.C.: But...
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
17/47
Rep. M.H: - as a result of that, would be able to obtain a
computer-generated certificate of live birth such as the one
that the President has put up on the web.
R.C: Go ahead, Loren.
L.C: It's true - it's true that in Hawaii someone can
register a birth, but there are - if they're issued a
certification it will not say that they were born in Hawaii.
Hawaii does not issue certification saying 'Born in Hawaii' to
people who were not born in Hawaii.
Rep. M.H: Well, that - that begs the question. I think
that we have - we have yet to see that evidence of what the
actual long form birth certificate says. I'm just - and I'm
just at a loss to - to figure out why? Why not just go ahead
and - even assuming - assuming that what you're saying is
correct, and that Hawaii's position is that that is the correct
birthplace, why not go ahead and put this issue to rest if
you're the President of the United States, and you've got other
things on your agenda that are - that are important, and - and
of worldwide import, why not just go ahead and put this thing to
rest, and just go ahead and release the records that would - you
know - shut all these people up?
(Foggy joins the call.)
FOGGY: This is Foggy here.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
18/47
L.C: Well, I - my thought has always been that the
certification is conclusive. It says he was born in Honolulu,
Hawaii, and Hawaii doesn't issue birth certificates saying born
in Honolulu, Hawaii, to people who weren't born in Honolulu.
Rep. M.H: I'm kinda - I'm sorry, I was losing you a little
bit there. I think we had some bleed-over from another line.
Could you repeat that?
0:25:47
FOGGY: Yeah, I joined the conversation because - because
the State of Hawaii has made it very clear that this is the only
birth certificate they give out.
They actually have a program where, if you're more than 50%
native Hawaiian - I mean ethnic Hawaiian - that you get some
special privileges from the government of Hawaii, and the
website that describes that program says that if you have one of
the old birth certificates that - you know - like, like a long
form birth certificate, that they'd prefer to see that if you
still have one, but if you don't have that and you want to get a
birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, the only birth
certificate they're going to give out, is the short form
abstract that the state of Hawaii gives out.
Rep. M.H: Sure, and, and...
FOGGY: President Obama - unless you think President Obama
is above the law in Hawaii, it - the only birth certificate that
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
19/47
he can get, is the short form birth certificate that he got.
And of course if you've seen the photographs from factcheck.org,
that's a certified birth certificate, with a raised seal, and
the signature of the registrar, and it satisfies all federal
requirements to get a birth certificate and to prove where you
were born.
Rep. M.H: Well...
FOGGY: I don't understand - I don't understand what you
mean by saying why doesn't he put this to rest. He put it to
rest. He's shown an official - an official birth certificate
from the state of Hawaii. That's the only birth certificate
Hawaii gives out. The other comment I have is, you say that if
you were not born in Hawaii, that you can get a Hawaiian
certification of live birth. Birthers have been saying that for
two years now.
Not one of them has ever been able to obtain a birth
certificate saying that they were born in Hawaii, if they
weren't born in Hawaii. If that's true, why doesn't somebody
who wasn't born in Hawaii show us that that's true, by getting a
birth certificate?
0:27:45
Rep. M.H: Well, R.C., could I respond to that? Those
comments?
R.C: Yes.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
20/47
Rep. M.H: I'm sorry - who - who are we speaking with here?
R.C: This is Foggy.
Rep. M.H: Okay. Well - a couple of things there. You
know, you - you're making again assumptions about - about the
certificate of live birth, that I think that - to me, you know,
I'm not - I'm not willing to say something that's been put up on
the internet, that - you know - is not in the hands of some
public official, for example, right here in Georgia, of our
secretary of state, I'm not willing to just - to accept that an
internet image, in the absence of some hard proof - that is -
something that's tangible, that a public official can look at.
And - you know - you may not be in agreement with that, but I
think that, again, we're not talking about - you know - we're
not talking about a city councilman, we're not talking about
even a governor, we're talking about the presidency.
The other thing that I wanted to point out is that,
assuming that what you're saying is all correct about the
Hawaiian certificate of live birth, nevertheless, there's
nothing that is restricting the President from releasing other
records that would include - you know - birth records, that
would include medical records, it would include passport
documentation, college records, things of this nature, and...
(Someone interjects.)
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
21/47
Rep. M.H: I'm sorry, but just let me finish this thought.
Whether or not that you agree with the fact that this has become
a national issue, the fact of the matter is, that it is a
national issue, and, you know we had a recent poll that came out
- I think R.C. indicated that it was from CNN. I'm not sure if
it was CNN or if it was an NPR poll, but it showed that 51% of
Republicans think - or have concerns about this issue. You may
not be a Republican, you may not vote Republican, but you've got
to admit that - the Republican Party is obviously a sizeable
chunk of this nation's voters, and if you've got more than half
of the Republican Party saying this is an issue, I think it
deserves some national attention.
0:30:09
LC: If I could go back to the, you know, the actual
language of the bill and what it requires the candidates to
provide, I actually some time back, not recently, but I picked
up from the post office an application for a U.S. passport, and
in the passport application it says that if you're born in the
United States you have to provide a certified birth certificate,
and that birth certificate shall include your full name, full
name of your parents, date and place of birth, sex, date the
birth record was filed, and the seal of the official custodian,
and that's what's contained on a Hawaiian certification of live
birth. It's also the same information as what you would get if
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
22/47
you get a certification of birth from the state of Georgia.
Georgia will issue both, you know, a certified copy of the
original, but I also have here from 1997, they issued me a, sort
of almost identical to Obama's
MR. HATFIELD: I agree with you there. I don't have any
doubt about that.
LC: Yes, so my point is that since this is the standard
that the federal government uses to issue passports to U.S.
citizens, why is any additional information necessary for the
state of Georgia to put someone on a ballot?
MR. HATFIELD: Well, I think that's a good question, and I
think I've got a good answer for you, and that is that we're
talking about a passport right here, we're talking about
citizenship, but the constitution distinguishes between
citizenship and natural born citizenship, and as you know, under
law in the United States, if you're born on American soil you
are a citizen of the United States, there's no doubt about that,
but the constitution says natural born citizen, which is a
heightened requirement from that of just normal citizenship, and
I think it's reasonable to conclude that it requires more than
just simply being born on the soil, and that's why the issue
that's why I'm concerned about the issue of the parents'
birthplaces and the citizenship of the parents.
LC: And what more is it that you think it requires?
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
23/47
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, you and I have had, I guess,
a little back and forth on this in the AJC and in our emails,
but I believe that a person who holds dual or multiple
citizenship and this is just my belief I believe that the
founders never intended for such a person to hold the office of
the presidency, and there and I'll be the first to say that
there are conflicting lines of authority on that issue and there
are conflicting lines of legal thought on that, but the
significant thing to me is that we have some we have
scholarship from, that was around the time that the constitution
was written in the time of the founders that for example, the
Vattel's Law of Nations, that talks about natural born
citizenship being a unity of being born on the soil, having two
parents who are citizens, and having a unity of allegiance to
that nation.
And then we've got other anecdotal evidence. I mentioned
to R.C. last night that the presidential campaign of Charles
Evans Hughes in 1916, he ran against Woodrow Wilson, and Charles
Evans Hughes was born in the United States, but his father had
not yet naturalized at the time of his birth and therefore was
still a British citizen, and so Hughes
LC: And he was the Republican nominee, and he won 48
percent of the electoral vote.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
24/47
MR. HATFIELD: That's correct. He lost the election
overall, and so we don't have we don't really have a
conclusive answer to what would have happened had he been
elected, but what I was going to point out was that a gentleman
named Breckinridge Long if I could just finish this thought,
and then I'll
LC: Okay, go ahead.
MR. HATFIELD: But a gentleman named Breckinridge Long, who
was an attorney and a legal scholar and then subsequently served
as secretary of state and the U.S. Ambassador to Italy, he wrote
an article in the Chicago Legal News during the presidential
election campaign in 1916 questioning the natural born
citizenship of Charles Evans Hughes, and so my point in saying
that is this is not an issue that's just come up with our
current president. This is an issue that has been around for a
long time.
We know that President Chester Arthur back in the 1800s had
issues regarding eligibility. At least posthumously they were
raised. Charles Evans Hughes, we had George Romney in 1968
running for the Republican party nomination and having been born
in Mexico. We had John McCain. And so this is not an issue
that just came up yesterday.
0:35:14
FOGGY: But none of those people was ever disqualified.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
25/47
MR. HATFIELD: I understand that, but that's
FOGGY: In fact, you're a Republican, aren't you?
MR. HATFIELD: I would argue that that was due to the fact
that I'm sorry, go ahead.
FOGGY: The very first nominee of the Republican party in
the election of 1856 do you know that was the first time the
Republican party ran a candidate was in 1856? His name was John
Charles Fremont. He was a really famous guy. He was called The
Pathfinder, because he explored the southwest United States, and
his father was a Frenchman who never did naturalize as an
American citizen, and he was the nominee of the Republican
party.
Now this was before the Civil War. This was before the
14th amendment. This was just a few years after the
constitution was enacted. His opponent in the Republican party
was John McLean who was a justice of the Supreme Court. So you
would think that if having a French father and having dual
citizenship was disqualifying, you would think that John McLean
would have brought up the fact that John Charles Fremont had a
father who was not a citizen of the United States. So even
before the 14th amendment stated that anybody who's born in the
United States immediately becomes a citizen of the United
States, the Republic party thought that having a French father,
having a dual citizenship, was not disqualifying.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
26/47
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, as I've said, there's
anecdotal evidence going both ways on this issue, and I'll be
the first to tell you I don't discount that, and I think, you
know, these are valid observations. But what I'm pointing out
is there are examples going both ways, and it shows to me and
suggests to me that there's a flaw in the system, because
Congress has never acted to tell us what natural born citizens
means, and the Supreme Court of the United States has never told
us, given us an opinion squarely on point.
LC: If I I'm going to change subjects here a bit if I
could, wanted to ask something slightly different. The bill, of
course, is just limited to the president and the vice president.
I was looking for the code section earlier, couldn't stumble
across it. I believe to serve in the Georgia House you have to
be a U.S. citizen.
MR. HATFIELD: No, I'm not aware of any U.S. citizenship
requirement. Now, I wouldn't tell you you're wrong on that, but
I haven't looked at that issue. But I wouldn't argue the point.
I mean, I think you should be a U.S. citizen. If it's not
required, you should be.
RC: Hey, Loren, let me step in here. I want to bring on
Kyrsten Sinema. She's my second guest of the evening. We're
running a little long. I know it's a great discussion.
Kyrsten, can you hear me okay? This is R.C.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
27/47
MS. SINEMA: Yes, I can hear you just fine. I actually
have an answer to the question that was just posed to Mr.
Hatfield. Now, I'm a senator in Arizona and not in Georgia, but
I do know the rules in Georgia, and you indeed do have to be a
United States citizen to be an elected official in the state of
Georgia, because you have to be qualified to vote, and as we
know, only U.S. citizens are qualified to vote. So while Mr.
Hatfield may not know the answer to that, it's pretty clear, and
it's spelled out pretty clearly in Georgia statute.
LC: I actually just managed to pull this up.
Members of the Georgia House must be citizens of the U.S.,
at least 21 years old, a Georgia citizen for at least two years,
and a legal resident of the district they are running in for at
least one year.
MR. HATFIELD: Right, but you know, I meet all those
requirements and to my knowledge, you know, the other members of
the House do, but we're not talking about citizenship issues
here with regard to the presidency. We're talking about natural
born citizenship.
LC: I do understand. My question was, however, what
documentation did you or the other members of the House have to
produce to show that you are in fact U.S. citizens?
MR. HATFIELD: Well, we had to sign an affidavit showing
that we met the requirements of the office, and I don't have
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
28/47
that affidavit before me, but I'm sure that whatever
requirements are specifically set out in the code are reflected
in the affidavits that we sign.
MS. SINEMA: I just want to note
LC: [inaudible]
MR. HATFIELD: I can't hear you both, I'm sorry.
MS. SINEMA: Well, this is Kyrsten from Arizona. I just
want to note for the record that's exactly the same kind of
affidavit that any candidate for president has to sign in each
of the states in which that person wants to be on the ballot.
So what Mr. Hatfield is proposing is a different standard for
people who run for one office than run for another office.
MR. HATFIELD: No, that's not my proposal. That's in the
United States Constitution that you have to be a natural born
citizen.
0:40:05
MS. SINEMA: What I'm saying, sir, is that your proposition
requires people to show proof of that, whereas to run for
Georgia representative or senator, all you have to do is sign an
affidavit. You don't have to provide a birth certificate. You
don't have to prove it.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, again, it's a big leap
between being a Georgia state representative or a Georgia state
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
29/47
senator and being the President of the United States, and I
would think that you would acknowledge that.
LC: Well, in my district
MS. SINEMA: I do acknowledge that, but what I certainly
wouldn't say is that we can hold some people to one standard and
people to another standard. If you're going to serve as an
elected official in any office in this country, you have to be a
United States citizen, and I think it's a violation of equal
protection to provide different rules for some people than for
other people. Everyone should
MR. HATFIELD: Well, that's patently absurd. That's
patently absurd. I mean, you're talking about the President of
the United States. You're talking about constitutional
requirements. This is an equal protection issue. I mean, we're
not talking about the government depriving a citizen of some
civil right here. I mean, we're talking about who's going to be
the leader of the free world. Give me a break.
MS. SINEMA: So I just want to be clear that, Mr. Hatfield,
you're saying then that it's okay to require other people to
show their proof of citizenship but not you?
MR. HATFIELD: No, I'd be glad to show you mine. If you
want to come over here to Georgia, I'll be glad to show you my
birth certificate. I could put it up online, too, if that would
satisfy you.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
30/47
But, you know, this isn't about my birth certificate, this
is about and this is not about my citizenship, although I can
gladly produce for you any evidence you need to see that I'm a
citizen, but this is about the person who occupies the highest
office in the land. That's different.
MS. SINEMA: Well, and as we know, our current President,
as well as every president before them, has also provided proof
of their own citizenship as well. I heard you mention that
there was a question about our own Senator John McCain. Now,
I'm from Arizona, and I want to be clear, I'm not a supporter of
John McCain's, but to imply
MR. HATFIELD: That doesn't surprise me.
MS. SINEMA: - right, but to imply or to question that he
is not a natural born citizen or that he doesn't have the
qualifications to run for the president is not true and also
offensive as an Arizonan.
MR. HATFIELD: I didn't excuse me, I didn't imply that at
all. I said that there were eligibility issues raised with
regard to John McCain who was born in the Panama Canal Zone.
Now, I'm not you know, you can try to rewrite history if you'd
like to, but the fact is the question was raised. You gotta
deal with it, okay? That's just how it was.
MS. SINEMA: Well, he was born in the Panama Canal Zone on
a military base to military soldiers who were bravely serving
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
31/47
our country. So to imply that he or to question whether or
not he's a natural born citizen somehow says that the children
of soldiers who are serving on bases overseas don't have the
same rights to citizenship as you or I do, and that it just
patently unfair.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, first of all, I have not said that. I
am telling you that the issue about John McCain's eligibility
was raised. In fact, Barack Obama was a supporter of a
resolution in the United States Senate to declare John McCain
eligible.
So, I mean, let's get real here. What we're talking about
is we're talking about the highest office in the land, and you
can try to make this about a city council or you can try to make
it about a state representative or a state senator all you want,
but the fact of the matter is is the constitution's got higher
requirements for the United States president, and that is
something that you cannot get away from, no matter how much you
might try.
MS. SINEMA: And you know what, that is an important issue
SPEAKER: Well, Representative Hatfield, how does a
baptismal certificate how does a baptismal certificate or a
school record do a better job of establishing the president's
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
32/47
eligibility than a certified copy of a vital record from their
place of birth?
MR. HATFIELD: I'm not saying it necessarily does
SPEAKER: But that's what your bill says
MR. HATFIELD: - but what I'm telling you is that we should
have a requirement I believe in a requirement that original
documentation be produced. This stuff about producing a
computer-generated summary, to me, is simply that's
insufficient. We're talking about somebody who's spending
millions and millions of dollars to run for the highest office
in the land. Are you telling me they can't go out and spend $20
to get a birth certificate in order to show that they meet
natural born citizenship requirements? Get real.
MS. SINEMA: You know what I think is important here is the
underlying
MR. HATFIELD: You guys are triple-teaming me here on this,
too.
RC: Wait a minute, hold on.
MR. HATFIELD: I may have to tag team on you. Let's keep
it fair.
RC: I am, I'm going to mute some of the callers here.
We're going to go one at a time. It is getting a little bit to
be a bit of a zoo here.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
33/47
I want to step in this is R.C. and go back and ask a
question. You've talked about how there's this big controversy
over President Obama. First of all, were you a representative
in 2006?
MR. HATFIELD: Yes, I was.
RC: Okay, did you bring forth a bill in 2006 to make sure
that George Bush or actually 2004, let's go back to 2004.
MR. HATFIELD: I was elected in 2004. I took office in
January 2005.
RC: Okay, so you took office the same time George Bush was
sworn in for his second term, and you had no concern did you
have any concerns then about George Bush or Bill Clinton or any
of the preceding presidents? Was this an issue?
MR. HATFIELD: To be honest, I mean, I'll be perfectly
honest with you, no, it wasn't on my radar screen at the time,
but you know, I'm just like everyone else out in the world that
when something becomes a national issue I pay attention to it,
just like you apparently are doing by talking about the issue on
your radio show.
RC: Yeah, and I do it in kind of a mocking kind of way,
because
MR. HATFIELD: I noticed that. I noticed that.
RC: Yeah, you noticed that, huh?
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
34/47
MR. HATFIELD: But, you know, I think that is unfair that
because you automatically attack somebody as being, you know,
crazy or obsessed or something like this just because a question
is asked, but there are people people here in this country,
many people feel more deeply about our constitution and our
heritage than to simply just be brushed off like that.
RC: Then I'd
MS. SINEMA: You know, this is Kyrsten, I just want to say
that what I have some concern about is the idea that Mr.
Hatfield said this became a national issue. What this became
was a strategy by a few people on the radical right to question
the fitness and the qualifications of one candidate for
president, and it became an internet rumor. Now, there are a
lot of internet rumors out there, but to say that those internet
rumors are, quote, national issues, is, no offense, absurd.
That's absurd. This was just a small group of people saying
crazy stuff on the internet.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, when Chris Mathews, when Chris
Mathews, who is the darling of the left, gets on national TV and
he says, hey, the President should release his birth certificate
and put an end to the issue, come on, you can't make it about
crazy conservatives and extreme radical right wingers. Chris
Mathews is about as leftwing as they come, and he's saying, hey,
it's an issue.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
35/47
MS. SINEMA: Well, to be honest with you, I don't think
that's all that he said, if you would certainly take some time
and go back
MR. HATFIELD: I know he said that he felt a tingle running
up his leg when he saw Obama, I know that.
RC: Well, Kyrsten, I just want to step in and finish my
thought.
MS. SINEMA: Go right ahead.
RC: I don't think there's one I think this is an issue
in places like World Net Daily, all the birther sites, the
antibirther sites, of which I'm a member and mock you know, we
mock the birthers, but we also take them seriously, because some
of this birther movement represents some people who are
dangerous. There are sovereign citizens people, there are
people that have some really crazy ideas who are allied with
these birthers, and that's a whole nother subject.
MR. HATFIELD: R.C., there's extremists on all sides. You
know that and I know that, I mean, but you know I don't buy into
these things like sovereign citizens and all that. I'm just a
guy who believes that our constitution ought to be respected.
MIMI: Hello, this is Mimi.
RC: Yeah, go ahead, Mimi. I was going to pick you up.
MIMI: I have a quick question. I heard Representative
Hatfield on the Ed Show, and he said that there were cryptic
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
36/47
statements coming from the state of Hawaii, and I looked up that
statement and what Dr. Fukino said was: I have seen the
original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State
Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in
Hawaii and is a natural born American citizen. And I wondered
what part of that was cryptic.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, I believe that when you have
a public official that's coming out and making statements about
something that's supposedly a sealed record not open for public
inspection and not to be revealed to the public without the
permission of the individual whose records those are, that
certainly raises some questions and causes me to have some
pause, but then you have the governor of Hawaii that comes in.
He tells us he's going to put an end to all this. He's going to
show the birth certificate. He's going to bring it out. And
then all of a sudden, that's the end of the issue.
MIMI: Well, he didn't exactly say that.
MR. HATFIELD: To me, you know, those are cryptic
statements. It's quite a mystery to me.
MIMI: Born in Hawaii is cryptic? Actually, the governor
didn't say that.
MR. HATFIELD: Were you there when he was born in Hawaii in
1961? Were you there? I wasn't.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
37/47
MIMI: What she said was that she has looked at the
records, and she verified that he was born in Hawaii, yes, but
Governor Abercrombie, what he wanted to do was release other
records that would verify, but not the birth certificate itself,
but he found that he couldn't do that.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, the bottom line is he didn't release
anything. He didn't release anything. The only thing I know
that came out of him was that he said there was some sort of
notation in the files. You know, what in the world is that? A
notation in the files.
MIMI: Well, we've actually, the birthers have verified
that the index data showed that he was born as well. In trying
to find something, they actually debunked their own, and they
used to say that Maya had a certificate of live birth, but what
they actually did was debunked their own lie.
0:50:58
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, I can't speak for what
somebody else brought up. I have no idea about Maya, and I
don't know where her what her involvement in it is. But I
haven't said that. That's not a contention I've made it. I
can't speak to that.
MS. SINEMA: Can I this is Senator Sinema.
RC: Yeah, Kyrsten, go ahead.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
38/47
MS. SINEMA: I just want to say one thing. I just have to
remark on the fact that we are all having a conversation on live
radio about whether or not the president of the free world, the
leader of the free world, whether or not he was born in Hawaii,
and there is absolutely zero evidence
MR. HATFIELD: That's not what we're having a conversation
about. We're having a conversation about why he won't release
his records. That's what we're having a conversation about.
MS. SINEMA: Okay. So then my question is, Mr. Hatfield,
why do you so desperately need to see his records? Because
there is zero zero evidence that he was born anywhere other
than Hawaii. And I have to just say that we are facing critical
times in our country. Your state is in a recession. My state
is in a recession. We are trying to recover from the worst
recession in either of our lifetimes. Our schools are
struggling. We have major budget deficits. And I just want to
note for the record that we're having a debate about whether or
not Barack Obama's birth certificate is from Hawaii. And I just
have to say that I feel like we're having
MR. HATFIELD: That's not what we're having a debate about,
but again, I'll go back to my bill, my bill in its current form,
doesn't even apply to Barack Obama. It would become effective
on July 1, 2013. Now, you tell me what objection that you have
to if that is not an issue with regard to Mr. Obama and the
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
39/47
state of Hawaii, then what objection do you have to requiring a
candidate to comply with the constitution?
LC: Okay, can I pick up again? Am I on the air?
MS. SINEMA: Well, quite simply, quite simply this, that
individuals who choose to run for the United States presidency
already have to file forms with the Federal Elections Commission
and with each state in which they choose to run, and those forms
are notarized, signed affidavits in which they attest that they
are natural born citizens, are at least 35 years old, and
obviously have the right to vote. And so it seems to me as if
we're having a big conversation about something that, to be
quite honest with you, doesn't matter at all. It doesn't
matter.
MR. HATFIELD: Correct me if I'm wrong, correct me if I'm
wrong, but I don't think that the candidates themselves sign
anything like that. I think that that is certified by their
party leadership, and that is provided to the states.
MS. SINEMA: And the Federal Elections Commission is
responsible for reviewing not only the affidavits from each
state but also the candidates' own forms. As we know, each
MR. HATFIELD: The Federal Elections Commission is not
there it has never been and is not now a body that is tasked
with overseeing that candidates meet eligibility requirements.
If you know anything about the law, you know that that is true.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
40/47
MS. SINEMA: Well, Mr. Hatfield, with all due respect, I'm
a constitutional attorney, so I know the law very, very well.
MR. HATFIELD: I'm a constitutional attorney, too. How
about that?
MS. SINEMA: Oh, you are? I'm sorry, I was not aware that
you are an attorney, Mr. Hatfield.
MR. HATFIELD: I am. How about that?
MS. SINEMA: Well, that's great news.
The problem with your legislation, quite simply, is this,
that it is based on a faulty premise that our current president
and, as you've argued, prior presidential candidates had
questionable status as American citizens, and that, quite
frankly, is an issue that was arisen by a very, very small
rightwing, very narrow group of people in our country, who were
upset about the individual who was running for president,
whether it be John McCain or Barack Obama, and what I would like
to posit to all of us this evening is that each of us, each of
us, every single one of us, would do our state and our country
proud by letting go of this frankly ridiculous issue and instead
working to solve the very real problems that we face every day
in our states and in our country, because this is not a problem.
This is not a problem. We do not have a problem in our country
of having individuals run for president who are not qualified to
be president. We don't.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
41/47
MR. HATFIELD: Senator, I respect your opinion, and I
respect your right to your opinion. I hope you would respect my
opinion and my right to my opinion, and you know, that's a
wonderful thing about living in the United States of America is
that we have the freedom to have our own opinions and to work to
further our beliefs as we see them to fit under the United
States constitution, and I do have respect for your opinion, and
I appreciate the dialogue, but I think we have to, at the end of
the evening, we have to agree to disagree on this issue, and you
know, I've enjoyed the debate.
0:55:58
MS. SINEMA: Well, I think that's fair enough. Well said.
MR. HATFIELD: Thank you.
RC: Okay, Representative Hatfield, I know you have stayed
twice as long as you intended, and I really appreciate it.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, I've enjoyed the debate, R.C.
RC: I'm sorry that I had four or five callers on there. I
didn't really intend for it to get that boisterous here, but
we've got it under
MR. HATFIELD: Next time maybe you'll let me have a few
extras, but I really have enjoyed the debate, and appreciate you
having me on.
RC: Oh, you're welcome back any time, and you do have some
supporters over there in the chat room that goes with the show.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
42/47
It's quite lively, and there are few I have a fellow who's in
there every week, you know, on the other side of the spectrum,
and I only kicked him out once, because I got a little miffed at
him one night, but I let him have his say every week, and we
have a lively debate.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, you know, I really think it's
important that, you know, even though that you and I may
disagree on the issue, it's important that we have the
conversation, and I appreciate you making that available to your
listeners.
LC: Would I be able to say one thing with Representative
Hatfield still on the air? Am I on the air?
RC: Yeah, go ahead, Loren.
LC: Okay, excellent. Representative Hatfield, when you
tried taking it back to the bill a minute ago, I wanted to jump
in. I've told people before, you know, despite what I've said,
despite what I've written, I'm not actually inherently opposed
to such a documentation bill, to be honest. As I detailed
before, there were some problems, some serious problems that I
saw with the bill. You've addressed a lot of them.
The two big ones I still see specifically with the bill are
the privacy issues for making the records public, and I think
your bill could avoid potential litigation and potential
problems if you defined birth certificate simply the way the
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
43/47
U.S. State Department does for passports. I think that would
solve the two major problems still as I see them with the bill.
The other thing, as I started to go down the line of
talking about earlier and then other people joined and we got
sidetracked, part of the reason I brought up the Georgia House
is that I live in District 80, Mike Jacobs' district. I've
voted for Mike Jacobs every time since I've lived here.
MR. HATFIELD: Mike's a good guy.
LC: Yeah, he was ahead of me in Georgia by a few years.
MR. HATFIELD: Right, and we have that in common, Loren, as
you and I both went to Georgia.
LC: Exactly, sir, and you may recall it was a little more
than two years ago when the it turned out that the Democrat
who was running here against Mike somewhat at the last minute
found out that he was not eligible, Keith Gross. Did you recall
that?
MR. HATFIELD: I remember something about that, but you
know, I live in southeast Georgia, and so we're not in the same
areas of the state. So it's hard for me to keep up with that.
LC: Oh, I understand. Precisely, it was a localized
issue. It turned out that Mr. Gross did not meet the residency
requirements here. He, I think, living up north, still had tax
and voter registration up north, and someone figured this out
within the timeframe they could object to it, I think because
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
44/47
someone spotted like other state license plates on his car, if I
remember correctly, and he found out, not to be eligible. A few
years before that, Max Barber got tossed off a Public Service
Commission ballot against Bubba McDonald [phonetic] for also not
meeting the residency requirement.
MR. HATFIELD: Right.
LC: And so the way I see it and there was a challenge a
few months ago I forget if it was for the Supreme Court of
Appeals for one of the judges, who didn't meet the bar
requirements, and she was eventually found to be eligible. But
in other words, in the last decade, the two most notable
challenges we've had to eligibility here in the state, which
proved to be successful challenges, were on local ballots, the
PSC being statewide, District 80 being local. And local races,
as I see it I mean, when you're talking about a billion dollar
presidential race, these are candidates who have massive
opposition research. If they have elibility issues, they'll
discover it, more likely than in a House race or a PSC race,
many of which are going to be unopposed, frankly, and then no
one's doing opposition research.
And therefore, I think it's as Keith and Max demonstrate
that is frankly where we probably need a documentation
standard more than we need on the presidential level.
1:00:16
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
45/47
MR. HATFIELD: I certainly wouldn't have any problem with
it. I think that anybody that's seeking to hold an office,
whether you are at the national level or if you're even at the
local level, you should be you should expect to be asked to
meet a higher standard and to make sure that you are satisfy
all the requirements. So I wouldn't have any problem with that
at all.
LC: Yes, and I think that's one of the ways that the bill
could be improved is to, you know, instead of making it appear
that it's simply targeting just the presidency, make it also
apply to our other federal officers.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, that would be a fine idea except for
one thing. In the Georgia constitution, we are prohibited from
passing a bill that has more than one subject matter, and I fear
that we would violate the constitution's single subject matter
requirement the Georgia constitution's if we were to take up
a wholly different set of offices with regard to that. Now, you
know, if we got a legal opinion from legislative counsel or
otherwise, I mean, I'd be all for that. I don't have any
problem with it. As I said, I mean, I'd be prepared to share my
birth certificate if anyone wants to see it, and be glad to, but
I won't have any problem with that, and I think that it's not
unreasonable to ask for it.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
46/47
LC: So if they have to be separate bills then so be it,
but like I said, I think that's where the need is here in
Georgia.
And to be honest, I've seen in other states that there are
some other states oh, that was the other thing I was going to
say. Quite frankly, I think the problem here in Georgia isn't
that we're letting too many people on the presidential ballot;
it's that we're letting too few. You know, Georgia has, quite
frankly, the strictest ballot access laws in the nation.
MR. HATFIELD: I agree with you there, and I don't know if
you've looked at this, but a couple years ago I cosponsored a
bill along with Representative Alan Powell and some others to
ease those ballot access requirements. I do believe that we
should be more willing to allow third party candidates,
independent candidates, et cetera, to get on the ballot. So I'm
all for that.
LC: Yes, and thank you for that. I hope you resubmit such
a bill and it gets more support.
But, yeah, like I said earlier, the two things I named
earlier, the privacy, the definition of a birth certificate, I
think those are quite frankly going to be obstacles to your bill
going forward. I think fix those, and it would stand a much
better chance of passing, would stand a better chance of
surviving a challenge.
8/7/2019 RC Radio 03-10-2011
47/47
MR. HATFIELD: Well, I think that you know, I'm not going
to make any predictions about whether or not the bill passes.
There's you know, we're certainly at a point in the
legislative session where there's a lot of major issues out
there, and frankly, I think the, somewhat the media spotlight
that's been put on this attention probably has caused some
people to get cold feet over it, certainly not me, but you know,
whether or not that it goes forward it remains to be seen, but I
think you have some good suggestions and I think that you're
certainly right on target with ballot access as an issue in
Georgia, and I will continue to pursue that issue into the
future.
LC: Well, thank you for that.
MR. HATFIELD: All right.
RC: Okay, Representative Hatfield, I'll give you a chance,
if you have to leave, I'll certainly give you a chance to take
off here. You're also welcome to stay, because I have three or
four other callers who have their hands raised and would love to
talk to you. So it's up to you.
MR. HATFIELD: Well, we've been at it for about an hour
now, and I do have some preparation to do for we're going into
session at 9:30 in the morning again, and so I've got some
review of the bills that are coming up for tomorrow to do and