Birth Certificates for Dummies
Donald Trump has been on some news-talk shows lately trying to bring credibility to the birther movement. Most of what he's said has been rather obviously and stupidly wrong, but he's garnering so much attention from the sensationalist media that it needs to be squashed right here and now.
As always, as with any controversial subject, we have to define terms first, and then I'll tell a few stories that will explain how things work before we look at the data. And looking at the data is how we will solve the controversy. If any disagreement remains, it will be addressed by the presentation of further data alone, or it will shut the hell up and go away, right? Right?
Terms:
To certify: "To confirm formally as true, accurate, or genuine." A verb, this is done by a person or organization.
Certificate: "A document testifying to the truth of something." A tangible object that indicates the above verb has taken place.
Certification: "(Law) a document attesting the truth of a fact or statement."
Notice anything special about the latter two definitions? They're synonyms. That means they mean nearly, or even exactly, the same thing. They're semantically interchangeable.
I'm good friends with the QA guy at my job. He checks parts we get from our vendors to build stuff. Part of his check involves making sure the parts delivered meet the requirements we specified when we ordered them. But he can't test every electronic component, say, for environmental ruggedness. If agreed upon during the procurement process, he may accept the vendor's certification that the components meet specification.
Do you suppose he has ever rejected such a certification because it said "certification of compliance" at the top of the formal declaration document, rather than "certificate of compliance" at the top? He has not. Do you know why? Because they mean the same thing: they mean the certifying authority has formally confirmed compliance.
Another anecdote: when I applied for my military passport (brownish maroon jacket instead of blue), I sent in my only paper copy of my Ohio birth certificate. I got my military passport by mail, but the USPS lost my birth certificate, which was supposed to have been returned to me also. A few years ago, I decided I ought to get a new copy since I no longer had the original and my passports were expired. So I sent in the application and a small fee to some office in Ohio, and I got back... a piece of paper that looked nothing like the one I sent in for my military passport. Turns out, Ohio keeps digital records of births and deaths and such these days, and when I requested a certificate, they were able to print it on the fly from the information they keep in a database. It doesn't look like the same (plain, white) paper my original birth certificate was typed on; it has one of those "security backgrounds" with lots of subtle detail. The printer typeface has differently-shaped glyphs from the typewriter initially used to type up my birth certificate. The words are different, and wouldn't you know it, some of the information from the original birth certificate isn't even on this new copy! But its purpose is the same, it turns out: it certifies that I was born in Ohio. It formally confirms it.
Can I get a driver's license, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I confirm my eligibility to work legally in the US, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I get a passport, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I run for political office, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can someone who wasn't born in Ohio get one that looks like mine? SHOW ME if you think so. It must have happened dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of times, if it can happen at all.
So, let's say a guy wants to run for president. His party requires him to show proof of eligibility. Should he give them his personal copy of his birth certificate? What if he doesn't have a personal copy? It's pretty plausible to me that he'd order a copy from the state where he was born. As I know from my Ohio experience, the states are finding it easier to handle such requests by simply printing a new certification from their digital database rather than hunting for a scrap of paper deep in a filing cabinet somewhere. After all, they are the state; they can just authenticate the printout and, ta-da, we have a certificate! We know this is exactly what happened in Obama's case.
We know this, because we have the following data:
We have high-resolution photographs of the document itself.
We have the statement of the person whose signature appears on the document, and the health department director.
We have an official Hawaii.gov website that states, "The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."
We have multiple political fact-checking websites presenting mounds and mounds of evidence, all of which indicates the same thing.
(Here's a second one, for those who keep trying to fall back on the "FactCheck is biased" line instead of confronting evidence based on its own merit.)
The bottom line is, when Donald Trump tries to shout down the talk show hosts who try to point out that we've seen his birth certificate, he shouts that it isn't even good for getting a driver's license or a job. He's wrong. He's lying. He's provably incorrect, and his insistence all the louder just makes him look like a retard. He's throwing away his credibility, so we shouldn't be attributing any to him.
Without putting too fine a point on it, I'm making this post public, and I will continue to update this page as a "wall of shame" with screenshots of people I encounter who also prefer to sacrifice their credibility by refusing to refute the data presented, and who also will not present data of their own. Keep posting on your weblogs, your Facebook pages, your online journals... anywhere you want. I will keep collecting them here to make sure your credibility gets all the respect it deserves. Be like Donald Trump! Turn up your volume; I'll make sure you get an audience! :D
As always, as with any controversial subject, we have to define terms first, and then I'll tell a few stories that will explain how things work before we look at the data. And looking at the data is how we will solve the controversy. If any disagreement remains, it will be addressed by the presentation of further data alone, or it will shut the hell up and go away, right? Right?
Terms:
To certify: "To confirm formally as true, accurate, or genuine." A verb, this is done by a person or organization.
Certificate: "A document testifying to the truth of something." A tangible object that indicates the above verb has taken place.
Certification: "(Law) a document attesting the truth of a fact or statement."
Notice anything special about the latter two definitions? They're synonyms. That means they mean nearly, or even exactly, the same thing. They're semantically interchangeable.
I'm good friends with the QA guy at my job. He checks parts we get from our vendors to build stuff. Part of his check involves making sure the parts delivered meet the requirements we specified when we ordered them. But he can't test every electronic component, say, for environmental ruggedness. If agreed upon during the procurement process, he may accept the vendor's certification that the components meet specification.
Do you suppose he has ever rejected such a certification because it said "certification of compliance" at the top of the formal declaration document, rather than "certificate of compliance" at the top? He has not. Do you know why? Because they mean the same thing: they mean the certifying authority has formally confirmed compliance.
Another anecdote: when I applied for my military passport (brownish maroon jacket instead of blue), I sent in my only paper copy of my Ohio birth certificate. I got my military passport by mail, but the USPS lost my birth certificate, which was supposed to have been returned to me also. A few years ago, I decided I ought to get a new copy since I no longer had the original and my passports were expired. So I sent in the application and a small fee to some office in Ohio, and I got back... a piece of paper that looked nothing like the one I sent in for my military passport. Turns out, Ohio keeps digital records of births and deaths and such these days, and when I requested a certificate, they were able to print it on the fly from the information they keep in a database. It doesn't look like the same (plain, white) paper my original birth certificate was typed on; it has one of those "security backgrounds" with lots of subtle detail. The printer typeface has differently-shaped glyphs from the typewriter initially used to type up my birth certificate. The words are different, and wouldn't you know it, some of the information from the original birth certificate isn't even on this new copy! But its purpose is the same, it turns out: it certifies that I was born in Ohio. It formally confirms it.
Can I get a driver's license, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I confirm my eligibility to work legally in the US, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I get a passport, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can I run for political office, using this as a form of ID? YES.
Can someone who wasn't born in Ohio get one that looks like mine? SHOW ME if you think so. It must have happened dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of times, if it can happen at all.
So, let's say a guy wants to run for president. His party requires him to show proof of eligibility. Should he give them his personal copy of his birth certificate? What if he doesn't have a personal copy? It's pretty plausible to me that he'd order a copy from the state where he was born. As I know from my Ohio experience, the states are finding it easier to handle such requests by simply printing a new certification from their digital database rather than hunting for a scrap of paper deep in a filing cabinet somewhere. After all, they are the state; they can just authenticate the printout and, ta-da, we have a certificate! We know this is exactly what happened in Obama's case.
We know this, because we have the following data:
We have high-resolution photographs of the document itself.
We have the statement of the person whose signature appears on the document, and the health department director.
We have an official Hawaii.gov website that states, "The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."
We have multiple political fact-checking websites presenting mounds and mounds of evidence, all of which indicates the same thing.
(Here's a second one, for those who keep trying to fall back on the "FactCheck is biased" line instead of confronting evidence based on its own merit.)
The bottom line is, when Donald Trump tries to shout down the talk show hosts who try to point out that we've seen his birth certificate, he shouts that it isn't even good for getting a driver's license or a job. He's wrong. He's lying. He's provably incorrect, and his insistence all the louder just makes him look like a retard. He's throwing away his credibility, so we shouldn't be attributing any to him.
Without putting too fine a point on it, I'm making this post public, and I will continue to update this page as a "wall of shame" with screenshots of people I encounter who also prefer to sacrifice their credibility by refusing to refute the data presented, and who also will not present data of their own. Keep posting on your weblogs, your Facebook pages, your online journals... anywhere you want. I will keep collecting them here to make sure your credibility gets all the respect it deserves. Be like Donald Trump! Turn up your volume; I'll make sure you get an audience! :D