Originally Posted by
GUWonder
I doubt most people have much if any clue about how the premise of this thread is distinct from that of those threads about questionnaires. A lot of things get missed when things get inappropriately muddied and muddled together.
...
It's nothing to do with inconvenience or difficulty/impossibility to present a document -- it has to do with "why" the change and what the change has achieved and/or will achieve.
...
Whether it's a huge issue or not, that's in the eye of the beholder. Some would argue that any issue where the government increases the requirement for primary evidence of citizenship is a big issue while others would argue that so very few people relative to the population of passport applicants would be impacted that it's a non-issue.
...
A current passport doesn't necessarily get accepted as proof of citizenship even when identity of the person is confirmed -- that such is a rather rare exception in terms of frequency doesn't really change a thing nor does it explain matters about the change in requirement that is the premise of this thread.
[That only a very tiny sliver of a fraction of a percent of people are being told to present a birth certificate at time of renewal does nothing to highlight what motivated the change which is the premise of this thread (but which is not the premise of the other two threads).]
...
The government cares about parentage and family relationships for reasons that have nothing to do with what prompted the questionnaires that are the premise of the approaches highlighted in the two threads whose URLs you kindly included here.
...
That's very representative of the state of affairs. It also ought to help to prompt questions about what drove the change that is the premise of this thread and some other things related to that.
What is 'the premise of this thread'? In your OP, you mention that State tightened up the requirements for birth certificates a year ago, and you wonder why no one has discussed it. Then you mention another (related?) change and comment that the burden of proving that your citizenship has not lapsed has been shifted to the citizen, rather than the government.
My guess is that the birth certificate requirement change was made because of difficulties determining the authenticity of some birth certificates presented in the past; State wanted to clarify the standard for a legal document. If you have a reason to think otherwise, could you share it with us?
As far as I can tell, the underlined statement above is the the issue that prompted you to start this thread. You have asserted that "The government cares about parentage and family relationships for reasons that have nothing to do with...", but can you please tell us what you think the reasons
are in addition to telling us what they have nothing to do with? AFAIK, the government has a legitimate reason to care about parentage, since that is one of the two ways you can be a US citizen.
What connection do you see between the two changes? What discussion do you think we should have? Please share with us the "why" you suspect and the "what" you think has been achieved.