Apparently, Ed Mosca is unaware that he is unaware of the definition of the word “resident” and the consequences of HB 1264 along with its proposed amendments by Senator Birdsell and former Speaker, Bill O’Brien.
My article primarily addresses the Constitution of New Hampshire and its legal language with respect to voter qualification–not the opinions of politicians and their cohorts such as the Attorney General, who regularly ignore the Constitution.
Let’s begin with the most misunderstood words tossed around in the voting dialog: resident and inhabitant. Who is a resident? Who is an inhabitant?
The answer can easily be found in the Constitution of New Hampshire. The word resident is only used in one place in our constitution and that is Part II, Article 5:
“and also to impose fines, mulcts, imprisonments, and other punishments, and to impose and levy proportional and reasonable assessments, rates, and taxes, upon all the inhabitants of, and residents within, the said state;”
It is clear that an inhabitant and a resident are two different entities. This section of Art. 5 establishes that both inhabitants and residents are subject to fines, mulcts, imprisonment, and other punishments, and they are subject to reasonable assessments, rates, and taxes.
What’s missing? Conspicuously, “voting” is missing, as the language within the Article 5 makes no mention of voting.
Part II, the Form of Government, the laws of the land were established to control government, whose sworn duty is to protect the rights of the people. The fact is the word resident is only used in this one place explaining power of government over residents and nowhere else. The word resident does not appear in any of the 39 Articles of Part I of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, a resident is NOT entitled to the same rights as an inhabitant. If a resident had the right to vote, the Constitution would say so.
What is the definition of resident? A person who resides in a place; or Dwelling in a particular place; residing: resident aliens, or resident: a person not a Citizen of this State is a resident alien. Aliens are defined as any person not a Citizen of this State is therefore a resident alien. A legal resident is alien to this State, as they are citizens of another State or Federal Territory.
I am an immigrant from Canada, and when I moved here under Federal law, I was defined as a “lawful permanent resident alien” as I was neither a citizen of the United States, nor a citizen of this state.
What is the definition of naturalization? According to federal law the definition of naturalization is as follows: The term “naturalization” means the conferring of the nationality of a State upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.
Now let’s move onto HB 1264 and address its consequences. HB 1264 amended N.H. RSA 21:6. Which now reads as follows:
21:6 Resident; Inhabitant. – A resident or inhabitant or both of this state and of any city, town, or other political subdivision of this state shall be a person who is domiciled”
This statute is repugnant and contrary to Part I, Art. 11 which states that;
Every person shall be considered an inhabitant for the purposes of voting in the town, ward, or unincorporated place where he has his domicile.
As you can see, the term “resident” is missing as it does not appear in the Bill of Rights, Art 11. As it currently stands, RSA 21:6 is unconstitutional because the legislature cannot grant to a resident alien (by statute) the authority to establish a domicile for the purposes of voting. It is also repugnant and contrary to Part II, Art. 27. [Election of Senators.]
“The freeholders and other inhabitants of each district, qualified as in this constitution is provided” ….
And,
Part II, Art. 30 [inhabitant defined] “And every person, qualified as the constitution provides, shall be considered an inhabitant for the purpose of electing or being elected into any office or place within this state, in the town, or ward, where he is domiciled.”
In 1784, the Senate was the first chamber to establish voter qualifications within the defined term inhabitants. I highlighted the following section to make a very important point, “qualified as in this constitution is provided” is stated for a reason. What this means is that the inhabitants, as defined by Part I, Art. 30 wrote the constitution and established the voter qualifications. Only they, the inhabitants (qualified voters) can amend our voting laws and not any branch of government, including the legislature. These are the problems with RSA 21:6. and HB 1264.
Senator Birdsell and Bill O’Brien’s proposed amendment is all about doubling down on fraud. Under their proposal known as CACR 36 “only residents of the State may vote.” (That’s right she said it. Birdsell herself asserts that “only residents of the State may vote”.)
Where is the authority? Replacing “inhabitant” and inserting “citizen” of the United States and a citizen of this state of New Hampshire is a distraction and fraud. Ask the question who is a citizen of the state of New Hampshire? Or, moreover, how do you become one? I will answer the last question first.
According to the proposed amendment, any person who establishes a residence in N.H. as currently provided under RSA 21:6 and RSA 654:7 in which you can establish a residence and declare it their domicile and vote on the same day. If CACR36 were to pass it would make the residency statute describe above constitutional, thereby allowing any citizen of the United States to show up and establish a residence and on the same day, thereby automatically becoming a citizen of the state of New Hampshire. How does this solve the problem? It doesn’t.
First question: who is a Citizen of the State of New Hampshire?
From 1784 until 1973, a Citizen of the State was a person who was a “native born or a naturalized” citizen of the United States. The word Citizen of the United States as used in the Constitution of United States is a Citizen of a State, and was so defined from 1788 until 1868, and the 14th Amendment.
In 1973, HB 363 removed the following words “native born or a naturalized” leaving the word citizen of the United States void of its previous descriptive and modifying words, defining who a Citizen of the State is.
The first statutes used in N.H. in 1808 created the means by which a person is naturalized to the State (emigrates from one State to another State), which was meeting a two year residency requirement in order become a Citizen of the State, and that they shall have made an oath before some Justice of the Peace, or other person authorized to administer oaths — That he will bear faith and true allegiance to the State of New Hampshire, and to the United States, and will support the Constitutions thereof.
The key is under federal law and previous State laws, residency requirements is always a pathway to becoming a citizen of a State and not a pathway for the right to vote. Durational residency requirements to vote have been struck down because of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Durational residency requirements for State citizenship are reserved to the States not to the federal government.
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Const. created and defined a second class of citizenship, federal citizenship, thereby creating federal civil rights which did not include the right to vote;
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
What is missing here? Voting, that is what is missing. The right to vote comes from the State Constitution and not the U.S. Constitution, therefore, requiring the people of this State to consent to being a U.S. citizen to vote is fraud as voting is not a privilege or immunity of the U.S. Constitution.
“The right or privilege of voting is one arising under the constitution of the state, and not under the constitution of the United States.” The qualifications are different in the different states. Citizenship, age, sex, residence, are variously required in the different states, or may be so. If the right belongs to any particular person, it is because such person is entitled to it by the laws of the state where he offers to exercise it, and not because of citizenship of the United States.” UNITED STATES V. ANTHONY. June 18, 1873.
So, in closing, it is time that we all agree upon the relevant words and constitutional provisions. Voting in New Hampshire did not become corrupt until uniformed politicians SCREWED IT ALL UP! Here are the proper definitions based on the Constitutions and relevant case law that would get everyone on the same page. Enjoy:
- NH RSA 21:6; Inhabitant; a Citizen of this State qualified as the Constitution provides to vote within this State, who establishes a domicile in the town, city, or other political subdivisions of this State.
- NH RSA 21:6-a; Citizen of this State; a man or women native born or a person naturalized as a Citizen of the State of New Hampshire.
NH RSA 21:6-b; Naturalization; The term “naturalization” means the conferring of the nationality of a State upon a person after birth, by any means what’s so ever.
- NH RSA 21:6-c; naturalized citizen of the United States; a Citizen of the United States (an American National) who is admitted to become a Citizen of the State of New Hampshire.
- NH RSA 21:6-d; national; the term national means a person owing permeant allegiance to a State.
- NH RSA 21:6-e; Domicile; the one place within this State where a Citizen of this State dwelleth and hath his or her home for voting purpose, to the exclusion of all other residences.
- NH RSA 21:6-f; Resident; a person who resides within this State who is not a Citizen of this State.
- NH RSA 21:6-g; Aliens; any person not a Citizen of this State is resident alien. A legal resident is alien to this State as they are citizens of another State or Federal Territory.
The post Response to Ed Mosca’s Opinion on My Article, “Who Is Qualified to Vote in New Hampshire under Its Constitution?” appeared first on Granite Grok.