The big news is that Governor Brewer vetoed the birther bill, which would have required presidential candidates to show proof of their natural-born citizenship status in order to appear on the ballot in Arizona.
Jan Brewer vetoes the birther bill.
On its face, we shouldn’t have any problem putting some constitutional checks in place on whether or not an individual is eligible to run for the Oval Office. To my knowledge, all prior candidates have only abided by the honor system.
But any attempt to verify citizenship at this point is politically treacherous. No one wants to be labeled a ‘birther’. It’s like being labeled a 9/11 ‘truther’.
A couple of thoughts on Brewer’s veto. Perhaps it is a genuine disinterest in the birther issue. After all, she has never raised any public concerns about President Obama’s citizenship status. Those murmurs have been limited to the legislature.
Perhaps the veto was based on legal concerns. Maybe she doesn’t believe that the law would stand up to some obvious legal challenges. I’m not a scholar on election law but it’s doubtful that a state could block a candidate running for federal office.
Or maybe this is just Brewer’s calculated move in a political chess match. The birther bill picked up 20 votes in the Senate and 40 votes in the House. That’s a veto-proof majority in the legislature.
If the legislature wants to do so, it apparently has the backing to override Brewer and pass the bill into law.
In hindsight it makes perfect sense. Why would Brewer step into this muck when there is absolutely no reason to do so? Even if she privately favors the bill, she can stay out of the birther debate and just let the legislature pass it on its own.
Poll: Who thinks Brewer would have signed the bill if she didn’t have the veto-proof majority in the legislature?
Neil Rosekrans is a founder and partner of StateBrief.com. He has been a guest political commentator for the Arizona Law Channel, NBC's Sunday Square Off and The Terry Gilberg Show on KFYI. Neil earned his undergraduate degree from Cornell University and earned his MBA and Masters in Public Policy, with an emphasis in International Relations, from Pepperdine University.
Neil and his wife, Beth, live in Scottsdale, Arizona. 
Hi Neil: First, Dwight Eisenhower was the first (and only, to my knowledge) other president who was asked to produce a birth certificate after his election.
Secondly, your scenario makes sense: Brewer can veto the bill and look like she’s above getting into the fray, with the knowledge that the legislature can still override her veto. It is a no-loss situation for her.
The question becomes, just how willing is the state legislature to pass yet another obviously unconstitutional law making us look like complete morons to the rest of the country? Sadly, I think they are more than willing, and more Arizona tax dollars will be wasted tilting at another ideological windmill.
America Wake Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
———————————————————————————————————————–
“OBAMA” Was not properly vetted!!!!!! ————————————————————————-
“OBAMA” Show the entire world you’re Real Birth Certificate!!– Because even if “OBAMA” was born in Hawaii that would @ most make him a “Native ” Citizen not “Natural born Citizen ” “OBAMA” is not the Constitutional President of The U.S.A. , because his Dad , a Kenyan National was not a U.S. Citizen , therefore “OBAMA” Is legally not the Constitutional President of the U.S.A. !!-Legal definition of Natural born Citizen per U.S. Supreme Court late 1700’s & Sill upheld Today = “A child born on U.S. Soil to Parents not owing foreign allegiance to any other Country “ “OBAMA” s dad owed allegiance to Britain
Therefore not Legally the President of the U.S.A.!! – “OBAMA” Is not a “Natural born Citizen “
The 14th amendment does not grant “Natural born Citizenship” it grants “Native Citizenship”
The President and the Vice President must be “Natural born citizens”