BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
AB 130
Assemblymember Jeffries
As Amended June 15, 2009
Hearing Date: June 23, 2009
Health and Safety Code
KB:jd
SUBJECT
Vital Records: Marriage Records
DESCRIPTION
This bill would extend the current limitations on the release
and access of birth and death records to marriage records in
order to prevent the unauthorized use of personal information.
BACKGROUND
In November 2001, it was reported that the state had sold the
birth records of more than 24 million Californians which were
then posted on the Internet. In response to this revelation,
the Senate Insurance Committee held an informational hearing,
"Personal Privacy at Risk," which demonstrated the ease with
which identity thieves could obtain personal information about
others. The informational hearing also revealed that the State
Registrar routinely sold electronic compilations of public
record information to anyone who could pay for the records with
no restrictions on their use. The records sold covered births
from 1905 to 1995, and included the county of birth, the
person's full name, date of birth, and the person's mother's
maiden name. A mother's maiden name and date of birth are
common personal identifiers used by financial institutions to
determine if a person may have access to an individual account.
In order to prevent fraud and identity theft, the Legislature
enacted AB 247 (Speier, Chapter 914, Statutes of 2002) and AB
1614 (Speier, Chapter 712, Statutes of 2002), which established
controls for the release of, and access to, birth and death
(more)
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 2 of ?
records.
This bill, sponsored by the County Recorders Association of
California, seeks to apply these same controls to the release
of, and access to, marriage records.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law requires the State Registrar to prepare and
maintain comprehensive and continuous indices of all
certificates registered. Existing law provides that the
comprehensive birth and death record indices be kept
confidential and exempt from the Public Records Act, except as
specified. Existing law requires that the State Registrar
prepare and maintain separate noncomprehensive indices of all
birth and death records for public release. (Health & Saf. Code
Sec. 102230.)
Existing law limits access to birth and death data files and the
content of those files, including requiring that specified
personal identifiers, such as mother's maiden name and social
security number, be deleted from files released to the public.
(Health & Saf. Code Sec. 102231.)
Existing law provides that the State Registrar, local registrar,
or county recorder may provide a certified copy of a birth or
death record to an authorized person, as defined, who submits a
statement sworn under penalty of perjury that the requester is
an authorized person. Existing law provides that, in all other
cases in which the requester does not meet the requirements of
an authorized person, a certified copy may be provided to the
requester but the document shall be an informational certified
copy and shall be redacted to remove any signatures that appear
on the document. Existing law requires the certified copy to
contain the statement "INFORMATIONAL, NOT A VALID DOCUMENT TO
ESTABLISH IDENTITY." (Health & Saf. Code Sec. 103526.)
Existing law requires that certified copies of birth and death
records must contain specified information and be printed on
sensitized security paper with specified features, including,
among other things, a watermark, fluorescent security threads,
and fluorescent fibers and requires that the State Registrar,
local registrars, county recorders, and county clerks take
precautions to safeguard the security paper. (Health & Saf.
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 3 of ?
Code Sec. 103526.5.)
Existing law requires an applicant for a certified copy of a
birth or death record to pay an additional $1 fee, $.65 of which
is, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to be used by the
State Registrar to develop safety and security measures to
protect against fraudulent use of birth and death records, and
$.35 of which is to be used by the public official collecting
the fee to defray additional security costs, as specified.
(Health & Saf. Code Sec. 103525.5.)
Existing law requires the State Registrar to appoint a Vital
Records Protection Advisory Committee to study and make
recommendations to protect individual privacy, inhibit identity
theft, and prevent fraud involving birth and death certificates,
while still providing needed access to birth and death record
information to those seeking it for legitimate purposes.
(Health & Saf. Code Sec. 103527.)
This bill would require the State Registrar to keep
comprehensive marriage record indices confidential and exempt
from the Public Records Act, except as specified.
This bill would provide that noncomprehensive, nonconfidential
marriage record indices for public release or for preventing
fraud shall be comprised of the name of each party to the
marriage and the date of the marriage.
This bill would provide that nonconfidential marriage data files
released to the public shall contain the name of each party to
the marriage and date of the marriage, but shall not contain the
maiden names of the parties' mothers. However, marriage data
files for the purposes of law enforcement or preventing fraud
shall include the mothers' maiden names.
This bill would provide that the State Registrar, local
registrar, or county recorder may provide a certified copy of a
marriage record to an authorized person, as defined, who submits
a statement sworn under penalty of perjury that the requester is
an authorized person. This bill would provide that, in all
other cases in which the requester does not meet the
requirements of an authorized person, a certified copy may be
provided to the requester but the document shall be an
informational certified copy and shall be redacted, as
specified. This bill would require the certified copy to
contain the statement "INFORMATIONAL, NOT A VALID DOCUMENT TO
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 4 of ?
ESTABLISH IDENTITY."
This bill would require that certified copies of marriage
records contain specified information and be printed on
sensitized security paper with specified features, including,
among other things, a watermark, fluorescent security threads,
and fluorescent fibers and requires that the State Registrar,
local registrars, county recorders, and county clerks take
precautions to safeguard the security paper.
This bill would require an applicant for a certified copy of a
marriage record to pay an additional $1 fee, $.65 of which, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, is to be used by the State
Registrar to develop safety and security measures to protect
against fraudulent use of marriage, birth, and death records,
and $.35 of which is to be used by the public official charged
with the collection of the fee to defray additional security
costs, as specified.
This bill would require the Vital Records Protection Advisory
Committee, which is studying and making recommendations to
protect individual privacy, inhibit identity theft, and prevent
fraud involving birth and death certificates while still
providing needed access to those records to those seeking them
for legitimate purposes, to include marriage records in its
study.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
The author states:
Currently, marriage certificates do not enjoy the same
protections as birth and death certificates. Any person can
request any other person's marriage certificate - and they can
receive a certified copy. This certified copy is a valid
document to establish identity. There is a large risk in the
system for people to use others' marriage certificates for
identity theft purposes.
AB 130 moves marriage certificates into the vital records
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 5 of ?
section in the county recorders offices throughout the state.
This gives marriage certificates an added level of protection,
equivalent to protection enjoyed by death and birth
certificates. Under [AB 130], only an authorized person, as
defined, can access an authorized copy of a marriage
certificate. An unauthorized person can still obtain a copy
of a marriage certificate, but this copy will clearly state
that it is "Informational: not an authorized document to
establish identity."
2. This bill seeks to prevent identity theft and fraud by
limiting access to marriage
records
This bill would extend the existing limitations on the release
and access of vital records to marriage certificates. First,
the bill would limit access to indices of marriage records that
the State Registrar is required to maintain, just as access to
the indices of birth and death records are currently limited.
Indices of noncomprehensive indices of nonconfidential marriage
records, and marriage data files available to the public would
only contain the names of each party and the date of the
marriage. Second, this bill would direct the State Registrar's
Vital Records Protection Advisory Committee, which is currently
studying and making recommendations to protect individual
privacy, inhibit identity theft, and prevent fraud involving
birth and death certificates, to include marriage records in its
study.
Finally, and most importantly, only authorized individuals,
including the people getting married, their immediate family,
and law enforcement, may have access to certified copies of
marriage records. All other individuals may be provided with an
informational certified copy, redacted to remove any signatures
that appear on the document, and containing the following
statement: "INFORMATIONAL, NOT A VALID DOCUMENT TO ESTABLISH
IDENTITY." The bill also requires that certified copies of
marriage records must contain the same special security features
that certified copies of birth and death records now contain in
order to prevent their alteration and misuse.
By restricting access to certified copies of marriage records,
this bill would arguably further the public policy of permitting
necessary public access to vital records, while protecting
personal privacy and enabling the State and local registrars to
carry out their administrative duties.
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 6 of ?
3. This bill would increase the fee for a certified copy of
a marriage record
This bill would require an applicant for a certified copy of a
marriage record to pay an additional $1 fee, $.65 of which is to
be used by the State Registrar to develop safety and security
measures to protect against fraudulent use of these records, and
$.35 of which is to be used by the public official collecting
the fee to help pay for the additional security costs. This is
the same additional fee that applicants for certified copies of
birth and death records must pay to defray the costs of the
additional security measures for those documents.
4.Recent amendments distinguish between confidential and
nonconfidential marriage records
Under current law, certain individuals may apply for a
confidential marriage license. The participating parties must
be at least 18 years old to apply for a confidential marriage
license, must be living together as spouses at the time they
apply for the marriage license, and must sign an affidavit on
the license attesting to those facts. (Fam. Code Sec. 500.) In
addition, the couple must be married in the county where the
license is issued.
This marriage license is a confidential record and is registered
at the County Clerk's Office in the county where it was
purchased. Only the married couple may purchase copies of the
marriage license. (Fam. Code Sec. 501.) Persons other than the
married couple requesting copies of a confidential marriage
license may only do so by presenting a court order to the County
Clerk in the county where the license is registered. (Fam. Code
Sec. 511.)
This bill would streamline the procedure and requirements for
obtaining a copy of a confidential marriage license to those for
obtaining certified copies of vital records. In other words,
persons requesting a copy of a confidential marriage license
would follow the same procedure as authorized persons requesting
copies of vital records. However, existing law, which only
allows parties to the marriage to obtain copies of a
confidential marriage license, would remain the same.
5. Need for legislative findings
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 7 of ?
Pursuant to Section 3 of Article I of the California
Constitution, a statute that limits the right of access must be
adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by
the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
Because this bill would limit public access to marriage records,
it must accordingly be adopted with legislative findings
demonstrating the interest in protecting identity theft through
information obtained in government documents, and the
corresponding need to ensure confidentiality of marriage
records.
The following suggested amendments would insert the necessary
legislative findings:
On page 17, between lines 2 and 4 insert:
SEC. 9. The Legislature finds and declares that Sections 1,
2, and 5 of this act imposes a limitation on the public's
right of access to the writings of public officials within the
meaning of Section 3 of Article 1 of the California
Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the
Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the
interest protected by this limitation and the need for
protecting that interest:
In order to protect personal privacy and reduce the risk of
identity theft when marriage records maintained by county
recorders contain personally identifying information, such as
an individual's date of birth and mother's maiden name, it is
necessary to enact legislation that generally restricts access
to, and release of, marriage records.
On page 17, line 4, strike "SEC. 9." and insert "SEC. 10."
6. Author's amendments
The author has offered the following amendments in order to
clarify the intent of the bill:
On page 3, before line 1, insert:
"It is the intent of the Legislature to protect individual
privacy, inhibit identity theft, and prevent fraud involving
marriage certificates while providing needed access to marriage
certificate information to those seeking it for legitimate
purposes. It is also the intent of the Legislature to protect
AB 130 (Jeffries)
Page 8 of ?
marriage certificates in the same manner as other vital records,
birth and death records"
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : County Recorders Association of California
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
AB 247 (Speier, Chapter 914, Statutes of 2002) and AB 1614
(Speier, Chapter 712, Statutes of 2002). See Background.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 79, Noes 0)
**************