[or-roots] or-roots Digest, Vol 72, Issue 9

Sun Apr 7 16:53:46 PDT 2013

Can't think of anything nice to say abt. politicians, so I won't say anything.  Look at the track records, they speak for themselves.

From: or-roots-request at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
Subject: or-roots Digest, Vol 72, Issue 9
To: or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 12:00:23 -0700

Send or-roots mailing list submissions to
	or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	or-roots-request at listsmart.osl.state.or.us

You can reach the person managing the list at
	or-roots-owner at listsmart.osl.state.or.us

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of or-roots digest..."

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: l.horine at comcast.net
To: or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:56:41 +0000
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

sorry you don't think much of people in our Legislature, but NO ONE is trying to "ram anything down your throat" - the people who drafted the bill did not check what already exists and now that daylight is appearing, the bill is being rewritten.  NO one is trying to create another agency, much less another level of government.  I guess you could call me a bureaucrat because I work at the Capitol and I am sorry you have such a low opinion of any of us, but your information in this case is not right.  Ways and Means does NOT try to find ways to raise money.  

From: "Glen Jones" <glenkc7mbm at comcast.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:41:10 PM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Yes! Lyn there is the State Archives, I go there all the time, they 
want to create another agency, that would add another level of government
and cost millions if not billions to setup and run, that is why the HB 2093 is being
sent to Way's and Mean's to figure out how to raise the money.
I have already said what they want to do is already covered by other agencies
and State Statues, we do not need more Bureucrats.
I am trying to be nice in my opinion of our politicians, which I do not
think much of.

Glen Jones

From: "l horine" <l.horine at comcast.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:16:27 PM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

The initial bill was designed as a fitzall for any state.  As Mary Beth pointed out very well in her testimony, an agency already exists that is responsible for archiving all state records and Glen, none of them cost Billions - 
Now that there are hearings on this bill, IF it goes out of Committee, it will be appropriate for Oregon, or it will not go - and Ways and Means would NEVER send it out if there are additional costs for which there is not a plan identified to cover them.  

'lyn

From: "Kith-n-Kin" <Kith-n-Kin at cox.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 11:36:44 AM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Glen
I guess I did miss the point. What is the point of another department? 
Pat

From: or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us [mailto:or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Glen Jones
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 4:30 PM
To: or-roots mail list
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Pat
you have missed the point what is wanted is to setup another
Governmental department that would cost Taxpayers Millions
if not Billions to setup and administer, and there are already other State 
Statues covering everything they want to do, the bill is not to increase revenue
but to close records to prevent I/D theft, but this is not where I/D Thieves
get there info.
Currently many Vital records are kept at the County level until the closed
time expires then are transfered to the State Archives.
Prior to that time only an immediate family member can obtain the
record and you must prove you are an immediate family member,
an immediate family member is spouse, child, or Brother/Sister or
parent if you are a cousin then forget it, unless you have a written
letter from an immediaate family member, my wife has gone through
this with her late father's info when a cousin wanted to get info.

I have answered this is another email Heritage tourism is the number one
reason people traveled to Oregon this was a study commissioned by
the Oregon Heritage Commission.

Glen Jones
Portland Oregon 

From: "Kith-n-Kin" <Kith-n-Kin at cox.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2013 11:47:25 AM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Of course, I'd say 'nix the bill' -- but then, I'm in Arizona(!) so I'm
pretty sure they don't care what I think.

More to the point, let's talk about money. "Impact of loss of revenue?"  The
only revenue issue I see here is that for "current records" the HB charges
"walk-ups" for staff finding and copying the certificates, as well as the
cost of the copy machines. For "out of staters" I think Oregon uses
"VitalChek," so if anyone is making money, it is them.

The Archives (who would have the original documents) already pays for
storage, that would be their only cost, and the system is already in place
for charging us. (as I recall, if you make your own copies, it's pretty
cheap, if you write for one, it costs more, to pay for the staff, and
postage.)

Already, if you want a certificate that has not been sent to Archives, you
"prove" who you are, and order it. I have done this several times, and it is
no problem. 

As to the "revenue issue" of tourism. Really? Do you think tourists travel
all the way to Oregon just to get vital records? I doubt it. Yes, I go
there, and I do stop by and get records, but then, I also go to visit
cousins. If not for that, I'd just use the internet.

The point here is that using "revenue" as a point may backfire, unless
there's something here I don't see (won't be the first time). 

By the way, as further ammunition, California Death Index goes to 1997, the
Birth Index goes to 1995 (and readily available on Ancestry.com). I have
grandchildren younger than that! While they are not certificates, the
"information" that is being cried about is there! 

Pat
In Tucson

-----Original Message-----
From: or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
[mailto:or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of W David
Samuelsen
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:59 PM
To: Historic Cemeteries; Or-Roots; Oregon
Subject: [or-roots] HB 2093

To all,

The bill has been scheduled for April 10 in Health Care Committee.

Please take note of the amendments which have NOT been adopted.

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2013R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/924

Still in need of few more tweaking.

1. One is changing to 105 years for birth records to be transferred to State
Archives. 125 is most extreme and only Oregon is pursuing it. 
Pennsylvania considered it and balked, going to 105 instead. Virginia
changed from 125 to 105.

2. There's nothing herein, requiring the State Archives to stamp or mark the
uncertified copies for genealogy purposes. This is a safeguard against
identity theft. Wisconsin do this.

3. Revenue is in question. Impact of loss of revenue for the Health Bureau.
What about tourism $ impact if the amendments are not adopted and the bill
is?

4. What about requiring the State Registrar to mark or stamp birth records
as deceased as soon as is known and VERIFIED. This will thwart the identity
theft because the thieves prefer CERTIFIED copy.

5. How about the possibility of having digital copies available online like
several states are doing now? Missouri (50 years death, 44 years for
marriages), Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Utah (50 years deaths, births 100),
Montana (most liberal, births 2004!), Iowa (deaths to 1990) to name a few.

6. Least of all, this bill is written as if we are still in PRE-Internet
Age.

W. David Samuelsen, 6th (5th if native) generation Oregonian
_____________________________________________________
or-roots mailing list
or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots
Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for
content.
Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or
the sender of the message, by phone or email.
Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800.

_____________________________________________________
or-roots mailing list
or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots
Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content.
Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email.
Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800.
_____________________________________________________
or-roots mailing list
or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots
Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content.
Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email.
Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800.

_____________________________________________________
or-roots mailing list
or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/or-roots
Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content.
Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email.
Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800.

--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: glenkc7mbm at comcast.net
To: or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:43:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

I am talking about out elected Reps. no offense to the working people.
We need to end this conversation on this list.
Glen

From: "l horine" <l.horine at comcast.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:56:41 PM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

sorry you don't think much of people in our Legislature, but NO ONE is trying to "ram anything down your throat" - the people who drafted the bill did not check what already exists and now that daylight is appearing, the bill is being rewritten.  NO one is trying to create another agency, much less another level of government.  I guess you could call me a bureaucrat because I work at the Capitol and I am sorry you have such a low opinion of any of us, but your information in this case is not right.  Ways and Means does NOT try to find ways to raise money.  

From: "Glen Jones" <glenkc7mbm at comcast.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:41:10 PM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Yes! Lyn there is the State Archives, I go there all the time, they 
want to create another agency, that would add another level of government
and cost millions if not billions to setup and run, that is why the HB 2093 is being
sent to Way's and Mean's to figure out how to raise the money.
I have already said what they want to do is already covered by other agencies
and State Statues, we do not need more Bureucrats.
I am trying to be nice in my opinion of our politicians, which I do not
think much of.

Glen Jones

From: "l horine" <l.horine at comcast.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:16:27 PM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

The initial bill was designed as a fitzall for any state.  As Mary Beth pointed out very well in her testimony, an agency already exists that is responsible for archiving all state records and Glen, none of them cost Billions -  
Now that there are hearings on this bill, IF it goes out of Committee, it will be appropriate for Oregon, or it will not go - and Ways and Means would NEVER send it out if there are additional costs for which there is not a plan identified to cover them.  

'lyn

From: "Kith-n-Kin" <Kith-n-Kin at cox.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 11:36:44 AM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Glen
I guess I did miss the point. What is the point of another department? 
Pat

From: or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us [mailto:or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Glen Jones
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 4:30 PM
To: or-roots mail list
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Pat
you have missed the point what is wanted is to setup another
Governmental department that would cost Taxpayers Millions
if not Billions to setup and administer, and there are already other State 
Statues covering everything they want to do, the bill is not to increase revenue
but to close records to prevent I/D theft, but this is not where I/D Thieves
get there info.
Currently many Vital records are kept at the County level until the closed
time expires then are transfered to the State Archives.
Prior to that time only an immediate family member can obtain the
record and you must prove you are an immediate family member,
an immediate family member is spouse, child, or Brother/Sister or
parent if you are a cousin then forget it, unless you have a written
letter from an immediaate family member, my wife has gone through
this with her late father's info when a cousin wanted to get info.

I have answered this is another email Heritage tourism is the number one
reason people traveled to Oregon this was a study commissioned by
the Oregon Heritage Commission.

Glen Jones
Portland Oregon 

From: "Kith-n-Kin" <Kith-n-Kin at cox.net>
To: "or-roots mail list" <or-roots at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2013 11:47:25 AM
Subject: Re: [or-roots] HB 2093

Of course, I'd say 'nix the bill' -- but then, I'm in Arizona(!) so I'm
pretty sure they don't care what I think.

More to the point, let's talk about money. "Impact of loss of revenue?"  The
only revenue issue I see here is that for "current records" the HB charges
"walk-ups" for staff finding and copying the certificates, as well as the
cost of the copy machines. For "out of staters" I think Oregon uses
"VitalChek," so if anyone is making money, it is them.

The Archives (who would have the original documents) already pays for
storage, that would be their only cost, and the system is already in place
for charging us. (as I recall, if you make your own copies, it's pretty
cheap, if you write for one, it costs more, to pay for the staff, and
postage.)

Already, if you want a certificate that has not been sent to Archives, you
"prove" who you are, and order it. I have done this several times, and it is
no problem. 

As to the "revenue issue" of tourism. Really? Do you think tourists travel
all the way to Oregon just to get vital records? I doubt it. Yes, I go
there, and I do stop by and get records, but then, I also go to visit
cousins. If not for that, I'd just use the internet.

The point here is that using "revenue" as a point may backfire, unless
there's something here I don't see (won't be the first time). 

By the way, as further ammunition, California Death Index goes to 1997, the
Birth Index goes to 1995 (and readily available on Ancestry.com). I have
grandchildren younger than that! While they are not certificates, the
"information" that is being cried about is there! 

Pat
In Tucson

-----Original Message-----
From: or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us
[mailto:or-roots-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of W David
Samuelsen
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:59 PM
To: Historic Cemeteries; Or-Roots; Oregon
Subject: [or-roots] HB 2093

To all,

The bill has been scheduled for April 10 in Health Care Committee.

Please take note of the amendments which have NOT been adopted.

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2013R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/924