Hi everyone, This is the best, most factual piece of information I have seen on SB 1614. I called John Burton's office last week and was directed to his webpage: http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/senator/burton/ the bill is not to his desk yet, however, the secretary said it does help if Sen. Burton gets letters as backup information, especially from members of groups like ours who would be impacted by the vote. If you choose to write, click on the "feedback" button on the left of the screen on Burton's page.... It is important to differentiate between identity theft and our ability to research public records. The key points in my mind are made clear below. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Jonelle Ellis Russell [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [SFBAY-CSGA] [Fwd: UPDATE MAY 15, 2002] I just opened this message from Iris. I hope you appreciate her efforts as much as I do. This message provides me with a clearer understanding of the bill, and I appreciate her advice regarding letters. You can tell from the previous my previous messages, my understanding of this issue was not as clear as it should have been. I am aware some of you have already written letters to express your opinions. THANK YOU! Every letter counts and if we identify ourselves a genealogist, we make our numbers known. Keep writing let our government representative know the genealogical community cares and we VOTE! Jo Russell - North Bay Regional Rep, CA State Genealogical Alliance -------- Original Message -------- Subject: UPDATE MAY 15, 2002 Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:11:51 -0700 From: Iris Jones <[email protected]> To: Master List 5 <[email protected]>, Master List 6 <[email protected]>, Master List 7 <[email protected]> UPDATE MAY 15, 2002 Several old or out dated reports have be posted in error. As of today: SB1614 The Closure of the Birth and Death Records INDEXES passed the Judiciary Committee on May 7, 2002. It has NOT been scheduled [as of 2 p.m. Wednesday, May 15, 2002] to be heard in the Appropriations Committee which does meet tomorrow May 15, 2002. Once it is heard and if it is passed in the Appropriations Committee it will then go to the Floor of the Senate for a vote. If it passes there it will go to the State Assembly. It must be heard by two rules committee in the Assembly also. Because of the nature of the bill it should be referred to the Judiciary and then to the Appropriations Committees in that order. WHAT WILL SB1614 DO? It will close the INDEXES to the Birth and Death records. It will cause to be developed an 'noncomprehensive index' to be viewed at the Dept of Health Services [DHS] and/or in individual county recorders offices. While initially drafted by Senator Speier, this is now the 'Governor's bill.' He stated earlier this year that he would do everything he could to protect Californians from identity theft no matter what the coast. No one disputes the need to stop identity theft. WILL THIS BILL CURTAIL IDENTITY THEFT? Neither the State [Dept of Health Services-DHS] or counties which we have communicated with have found any incidents where present identity thefts could be linked to either the sale of birth or death certificates or to these indexes. Studies show that identity thefts are a crime of convenience, or occur with the theft of wallets, purses and mail, all of which contain documents with personal information [drivers license, identification, credit, Social Security cards, checks, etc.]; or by access to personal information in homes and businesses. Originally on Television and in the Newspapers, Senator Speier voiced her concerns regarding the Birth Records Indexes because they included the mother's maiden names. The mother's maiden names are ONE OF A HALF DOZEN IDENTIFIERS used by banks and some credit companies for over the phone transactions. [Experts have for years cautioned the public not to use maiden names.] Senator Speier now has a bill SB1237 that would require banks [means: any institution engaging in financial activities] not to use MAIDEN NAMES as identifiers. If this bill passes then the maiden names on INDEXES [whether concerns were justified or not] become a NON-ISSUE. The concern with the Death Records INDEXES was due to the fact that the Social Security numbers appear on the death certificate. Once a person dies, that Social Security file is rendered closed. There is a lag-time. But in the case of California Death Records INDEX, there is a even greater lag-time between the date of death and when that date appears on an index. On the CDs of Indexes sold by the DHS [and halted by the Governor's Executive Order] the most current death date was 1999. In the files in the DHS offices for their own use the most current date is 2000. [Certainly, Social Securely can close an account within a year and five months.] Does this also make this a non-issue? WHERE IS THE MONEY? I just mentioned that the DHS is a year and five months from being current. Why? Because the department has for years not had the funds or manpower to update and keep current the indexes of their certificates. In fact, the sale of the CDs of Indexes was to help offset that cost allowing them to bring their records up-to-date. When the Governor first found out about the revenue short fall, he froze hiring and required all departments to cut expenses [I believe it was by 10%]. Do the math. Now if the State is having problems meeting their obligations due to a shortfall of funds and not enough manpower. Consider the situation at the county level. So, SB1614 will close the present [not current] indexes, require the State and counties to develop an entirely new indexing process. Would not that money, if there were any, be better spent to encourage and aid law enforcement to pursue 'White Color Crime' - catch, prosecute and punish the offenders? Would not that money, if there were any, be better spent to allow the DHS to implement a more extensive tracking system to help catch offenders instead of developing an 'noncomprehensive' index that essentially closes those indexes to the public who need and use them for legitimate endeavors. WHAT CAN YOU DO? Write the author Senator Speier. Write the Governor. If you write before SB1614 is heard before the Appropriations Committee, write the members of the committee. Have your organization's president write indicating the displeasure of your organization. If the bill goes to the Floor of the Senate write your own Senator. I recommend written letters [snail mail]. Write what you think. [I would not be impressed with 'canned' or form letters, would you?]. Phone calls are simply tallied, I am sure that may be the case with Emails for many Legislators. Some Legislators simply do not regard communications of non-constituents important, unless they might run for state office. WILL THEY LISTEN TO US? Maybe not, but can we afford to lose another piece of our public records? In an effort to solve a difficult problem, should legislators punish entire groups of honest citizens, rather than find ways to catch the criminals? IF YOU RECEIVE THIS BY EMAIL, you have the ability to find on the Internet all the information you will need. The bills, the history of activities, schedules, information on the committees, leadership and members, and where and how to contact or own Senators. <http://www.sen.ca.gov> ---Iris Carter Jones, Legislative Coordinator, May 16, 2002---