This is what the bill is all about - preventing people from obtaining 'official' document copies to use as their doumentation in an attempt to create a new identity.. No one could use a newspaper obituary to prove who they are - that requires notarized copies from courthouses, and THIS is what the bill addresses; NOT simply finding out info on our ancestors in NON-official paperwork. Generally, the way it worked is that someone desiring a new identity, for whatever reason, went to the courthouse and 'went through' the death records, looking for a child who would have been around the same age as they are, if the child had lived.(They didn't pick names from a newspaper obit, for that person HAD an identity, credit cards, drivers license, family members, etc....a dead child HAD no identy, beyond birth and death.) They found a dead child's name and requested an official, notarized copy of that child's birth certificate.... armed with this, they could then get a drivers license, SS card, and the new identity was born. It's now much harder to do this, with multiple pieces of ID necessary, AND the courthouses not handing out notarized copies to just anyone! This, in no way will affect those who simply want the info for their genealogical research -they will still send you the data, just not in the official form. Sandra ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bonnie Burkhardt" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:54 PM Subject: *** SPAM *** [OHBELMON-L] Re: About HR10 - Provisions restricting our access to birth records > Michigan already has these requiremtns and have had for some time. > I wonder if they will restrict what is stated in obits about birth dates? > After all, if someone wants to change identity, they pick a person that > would have been about the same age as themselves who is deceased. > > Bonnie Burkhardt bb86it at wideopenwest. dot com > Norton Internet Security is not compatible with Windows 98 and Compaq combo. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard Kinkead" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:47 PM > Subject: [OHBELMON-L] Fw: [IABOONE] About HR10 - Provisions restricting our > access to birth records > > > > Folks, > > > > I thought this Boone, IA, message bore repeating. > > > > However, I fail to see where it pertains to "inspection" of public > records, > > only copies. > > Did I miss something? > > Does "access" restrict one from researching died-off lines where there ARE > > no descendants? (Such as my Boone Co., great uncle, the last of whose > > descendants died off in Pottawattamie County in 1929?) > > > > I'm writing, and I hope we all do. > > > > Dick Kinkead > > Lantana, FL > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Andy or Annie Utick" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 7:02 PM > > Subject: [IABOONE] About HR10 - Provisions restricting our access to birth > > records > > > > > > > > > > Hello, fellow researchers, > > > > > > I've recently learned of a bill moving swiftly through the U. S. > > > House of Representatives that would severely restrict our access to > birth > > > records, even those kept by counties and states, in the name of > > > "security." We genealogists (and any other citizens) would have access > > > only if we are the "registrant" (it's our own record), or are named in > the > > > document. If we don't meet those criteria, we would have to meet > "minimum > > > standards for issuance of a birth certificate to specific family > members, > > > their authorized representatives, and others who demonstrate that the > > > certificate is needed for the protection of the requestor's personal or > > > property rights." > > > > > > You might be interested in reading the actual language of this > > > bill. It can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov./ Put in the number of > the > > > bill (HR10) on the home page, where it says "Bill Number." Once on the > > > page where the bill starts, find the part about birth records using > "Find > > > on this page." > > > > > > It is my understanding that David Rencher, Chairman of the > Record > > > Access and Preservation Committee, a joint committee of the National > > > Genealogical Society and Federation of Genealogical Societies (FGS), has > > > sent a letter to the bill's sponsor, Congressman Dennis Hastert, > > > recommending an amendment to the bill as follows: > > > > > > "However, nothing in this Chapter 2 shall be construed to require a > State > > > to change its law with respect to public access to (A) non-certified > > > copies of birth certificates, or to (B) birth certificates or birth > > > records once a period of 100 years has elapsed from the date of creation > > > of the certificate or record." > > > > > > A copy of the entire letter is available on the FGS site at > > > www.fgs.org/rpa/formalactions.htm. > > > > > > Because this bill is moving toward passage so quickly, it is > urged > > > that the genealogical community take action immediately and let their > > > representatives know that they are in support of David Rencher's > proposed > > > amendment and the FGS position in this important matter. To find your > > > state representative's contact information, go to: > > > > > > www.house.gov/writerep/ > > > > > > > > ==== IABOONE Mailing List ==== > > > Visit the Boone County IAGenWeb message boards at > > > http://iagenweb.org/boards/boone/queries/index.cgi. View or post > Queries, > > Obits, Biographies and other genealogical Documents. > > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.802 / Virus Database: 545 - Release Date: 11/26/04 >