Too many people yelling "NO" (on general principle, of course ), when they really mean to say "not Arnold".
Not true, many Cuban born people live in the United States and have become citizens. Many of them absolutly dispise Castro and want him out of power for the sakes of thier family members still living there. As the commander-in-cheif he/she would have the power to do something about it whether the people like it or not.
This is just a generalization, many countries could be substituted for Cuba. If someone had to flee thier country for political reasons with family members still in that country with the same leadership as when they left, you would have a very strong conflict of intrest.
Yes, folks did, but JFK wasn't born in the Vatican and the Constitution allows people to be religious as long as they don't try to esablish a state religion.didn't people ask the same kind of questions of JFK when he was up for President - that is, if the Pope would come first before America?
RK,However, please realize that the argument you are positing is the same one people use to call for more restrictions on RKBA.
You could make the same argument about any number of things, including corporate conflicts-of-interest. The fact is, it would be the responsibility of the electorate to make the decision about whether any perceived conflicts-of-interest (whether to foreign countries or domestic corporations, etc.) outweigh the strengths of the candidate.
RK,I have enough reasonable faith in the electorate to believe they would do the right thing in regards to ascertaining potential foreign conflicts-of-interest in a naturalized citizen candidate running for President.
Uhmm, non-native born Americans were involved in writing this restriction into the constitution. If it ain't broke; don't fix it.but I do think in a nation founded by immigrants and on the principle of rights for all, we oughta let non-native-born Americans run...
Yes, you could. Except these things are not covered in the constitution. The country of birth of a presidential candidate is. That provision has served us well since the ratification of the constitution. Why change it now?
As well as James Madison:Col. HAMILTON was in general agst. embarrassing the Govt. with minute restrictions. There was on one side the possible danger that had been suggested. On the other side, the advantage of encouraging foreigners was obvious & admitted. Persons in Europe of moderate fortunes will be fond of coming here where they will be on a level with the first Citizens. He moved that the section be so altered as to require merely citizenship & inhabitancy. The right of determining the rule of naturalization will then leave a discretion to the Legislature on this subject which will answer every purpose.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/debates/813.htmMr. MADISON seconded the motion. He wished to maintain the character of liberality which had been professed in all the Constitutions & publications of America. He wished to invite foreigners of merit & republican principles among us. America was indebted to emigrations for her settlement & Prosperity. That part of America which had encouraged them most had advanced most rapidly in population, agriculture & the arts. There was a possible danger he admitted that men with foreign predilections might obtain appointments but it was by no means probable that it would happen in any dangerous degree. For the same reason that they would be attached to their native Country, our own people wd. prefer natives of this Country to them. Experience proved this to be the case. Instances were rare of a foreigner being elected by the people within any short space after his coming among us. If bribery was to be practised by foreign powers, it would not be attempted among the electors but among the elected; and among natives having full Confidence of the people not among strangers who would be regarded with a jeoulous eye.
Ok, you got me there! Of course, that just proves that natural-born citizens can have conflicts-of-interest (in Clinton's case - women other than his wife) in the same or greater degree.I gotta rib you on faith in the electorate; we voted for Clinton, twice!
However, even if nothing has changed, one can still make an argument for allowing naturalized citizens to run as Alexander Hamilton did:
Clause 5: 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.