Please forgive me if you receive more than one of this message as a result of being subscribed to more than one mailing list. It's an important enough issue to both genealogists and the public in general that we should get the word out quickly. If the increasing trend towards closure of public records throughout the country is of concern to you, be sure to tune in to the DearMYRTLE internet radio show discussing the topic TONIGHT by visiting www.DearMYRTLE.com and call the show 1-877-638-7234 between 9-10 p.m.Eastern Standard Time in US. Below is the post relating details of the show and a post Myrtle received regarding proposed legislation now in Indiana, following on the heals of the one that came up and passed in the VA House the other day. There's another one proposed in Missouri: http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills03/member/mem115.htm It's not too late to stop either of these bills if everyone takes action. While protecting ourselves against identity theft is essential, both the VA bill (http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/VAALBEMA/) (text of VA bill attached at end of this post) and the IN bill (http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/INHENRY/2003-02) http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2003/IN/IN1540.1.html are very poorly written and ambiguous, giving up much more than is necessary for reasonable and adequate protection of privacy against identity theft. The genealogy community must NOT be naive and think that we can simply sit back and blindly trust the "good intentions" of the people sponsoring such bills. Sometimes good intentions are enough; but when it comes to law, good intentions carried out with incompetence can be devastating. Regardless of the writer's intent, laws are carried out exactly according to what they actually say, only to the limits or with the intentions that are clearly and unmistakenly written therein. If the wording of the law is broad and vague enough to allow very strict limitations to access, you can bet that such strict limitations will ultimately occur. Likewise as genealogists, sitting by and saying "that's not my state, it's not my concern" is extremely foolish, because (1) we know our ancestors may leave us searching for their records anywhere; (2) every such law that is passed anywhere sets precedent for more to be passed;and (3) genealogy or not, these laws seriously restrict the freedoms on which our country was founded and for which our mothers have sent their sons (and now daughters) to die in defense thereof for over 200 years. I don't want to give the impression that I'm a fanatic, but the basic scenario of naive people blindly trusting the "intent" of their leaders and allowing certain restrictive laws to be passed while everyone stood by and did nothing, eventually resulted in the European holocaust of the Jews, not to mention the countless other human tragedies in history! The time to stop such serious restrictions is BEFORE the laws are enacted, not later. Please help spread the word about this critical matter; tune into www.DearMYRTLE.com tonight from 9-10 p.m.EST US; and contact the legislators of any state considering such legislation to make it clear that you are against it for very good reasons. Diane ------ <START> > 030940904 > HOUSE BILL NO. 2426 > AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE > (Proposed by the House Committee on General Laws > on January 28, 2003) > (Patron Prior to Substitute--Delegate Nixon) > A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered > 2.2-3808.2, relating to posting certain information on the Internet; > prohibitions. > Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia: > > 1. That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding a section numbered > 2.2-3808.2 as follows: > > § 2.2-3808.2. Posting certain information on the Internet; prohibitions. > > A. Beginning July 1, 2003, no state agency or court clerk shall post on a > state agency or court-controlled website any document that contains the > following information: (i) an actual signature; (ii) a social security > number; (iii) a date of birth identified with a particular person; (iv) the > maiden name of a person's parent so as to be identified with a particular > person; (v) any financial account number or numbers; or (vi) the name and > age of any minor child. > > B. Every agency and every court clerk that posts any document on a state > agency or court-controlled website may require that any party who files > documents in any form with such agency or clerk provide, in addition to the > original document, a redacted copy of such documents that excises the > information prohibited by subsection A. Failure to provide such redacted > copy shall relieve the agency or court clerk of any liability or > responsibility in the event that such information is posted on a state > agency or court-controlled website. > > Each such agency and clerk shall post notice that (i) includes a list of the > documents routinely posted on its website, (ii) the information listed in > subsection A shall be redacted from such documents, and (iii) such documents > are for informational purposes only. Such notice shall indicate the location > of the original document. > > C. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit access to any > original document as provided by law. > <END> >