State Dept. Admits Passport Form Was Illegal, but Still Wants It
Approved
Papers,
Please
The
new U.S. passport application forms are back, worse than ever.
Ignoring
massive
public opposition, and despite having recently admitted
that it is already using the “proposed” forms illegally
without approval, the State Department is trying again to get
approval for a pair of impossible-to-complete new passport application
forms that would, in effect, allow the State Department to deny
you a passport simply by choosing to send you either or both of
the new “long forms”.
Early last
year, the State Department proposed
a new “Biographical Questionnaire” for passport
applicants, which would have required anyone selected to receive
the new long-form DS-5513
to answer bizarre and intrusive personal trivia questions about
everything from whether you were circumcised (and if so, with what
accompanying religious rituals) to the dates of all of your mother’s
pre- and post-natal medical appointments, your parents’ addresses
one year before you were born, every address at which you have ever
resided, and your lifetime employment history including the names
and phone numbers of each of your supervisors at every job you have
ever held.
Most people
would be unable to complete the proposed new form no matter how
much time and money they invested in research. Requiring someone
to complete Form DS-5513 would amount to de facto denial
of their application for a passport — which, as
we told the State Department, appeared to be the point of the
form.
The State Department’s
notice
of the proposal in the Federal Register didn’t include
the form itself. After we published the proposed
Form DS-5513, the story went viral and more than 3,000 public
comments objecting to the proposal were filed with the State Department
in the final 24 hours of the comment period.
After that
fiasco, the State Department went dark for several months, and claimed
that they would “revise” the form. But they didn’t
give up, and apparently they didn’t listen to (or didn’t
care) what they had been told by members of the public in our comments.
The
State Department is now seeking approval for a (slightly) revised
Form DS-5513 as well as a new Form
DS-5520, also for passport applicants, containing many of the
same questions.
The
State Department no longer wants you to tell the passport examiner
about the circumstances of your circumcision, but does still want
to know the dates and locations of all of your mother’s pre-
and post-natal medical appointments, how long she was hospitalized
for your birth, and a complete list of everyone who was in the room
when you were born. The revised forms no longer ask for all the
addresses at which you have lived, but only for those addresses
you are least likely to know: all the places you lived from birth
until age 18.
And
so on, as you can see for yourself on the proposed Form
DS-5513 and Form
DS-5520.
Pursuant to
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), any “information collection”
by Federal agencies must be approved in advance by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). If a Federal government form or questionnaire
(including verbal questioning, if the same questions are asked of
ten or more people) asks you to provide information, but doesn’t
contain a current, valid, unexpired “OMB control number”,
you
aren’t required to answer and can’t be penalized for
declining to answer.
There are still
no rules in the supporting materials submitted to OMB by the State
Department (supporting
documents for Form DS-5513, supporting
documents for Form DS-5520) for who will be required to complete
which (or both) of these two new forms. It would still be up to
the standardless, secret, administrative “discretion”
of any passport examiner who doesn’t like your looks to spike
your right to foreign travel by choosing to give you one or both
of the “long form” passport applications.
Supposedly,
Form DS-5520 will be for those passport applicants of whose “identity”
the State Department is in doubt, while the partially-redundant
Form DS-5513 will be for those whose “entitlement” to
a U.S. passport (i.e. U.S. citizenship) is in question. But both
forms say that, “Failure to provide the information requested
may result in … the denial of your U.S. passport application.”
As we noted
in our comments
(which appear to have been almost entirely ignored), the State Department
is entitled to require only that information which is actually necessary
to establish identity and eligibility. Once an applicant has provided
prima facie evidence of identity and eligibility for a
U.S. passport, the State Department has no further authority for
interrogatories. A passport must be issued unless there is sufficient
evidence to overcome the applicant’s showing of identity and
citizenship.
State Department
regulations
entitle passport applicants to establish their identity by the affidavit
of an identifying witness, in lieu of documentary evidence of identity.
So the new Form DS-5520 (”Supplemental Questionnaire to Determine
Identity for a U.S. Passport”) would be “necessary”
only if no identifying witness is available. Bringing an identifying
witness when you apply for a passport is a nuisance, but often easier
than completing the “long-form” application questionnaires.
As we’ve
recently
pointed out, however, the State Department seems to be trying
not to call attention to the option of establishing identity by
a witness, and to make it harder for applicants to exercise that
right. Apparently the government thinks that papers, not people,
are the ultimate arbiters of who we are. And the State Department
is succeeding. The number of people using the witness affidavit
(Form
DS-71) has fallen by about 75% in the five years since the required
form was removed from the State Department’s website.
The State Department
published another set of notices in the Federal Register
about the revised forms. But since the Federal Register
notices didn’t include the actual forms, there was no way
to verify whether the “revisions” actually addressed
the public
objections to the first draft of Form DS-5513.
Not surprisingly,
most people felt that we had already told the State Department what
to do with the proposed from — scrap it! — and hardly
any new comments were submitted.
The State Department’s
latest submissions to OMB make no mention of the thousands
of comments submitted in objection to the original proposal,
or of the issues
we raised that the proposed form and its use would exceed the
State Department’s authority and violate other Federal laws,
the First Amendment, and international human rights treaties that
protect the right to freedom of movement.
In July of
this year, OMB rejected the requests for approval of both the revised
Form DS-5513 (OMB
notice of action) and the proposed new Form DS-5520 (OMB
notice of action) as “improperly submitted”. OMB
didn’t say publicly what was “improper” about
the State Department’s requests, but we suspect that the impropriety
was that the State Department claimed that these were “new”
forms when in fact, as
we reported last year, they were and are already being used,
illegally, without OMB approval.
This August,
the State Department resubmitted the proposed forms (Form
DS-5513, Form
DS-5520) to OMB with new “supplemental statements”
admitting that both Form DS-5513 (MS-Word
version; PDF)
and Form DS-5520 (MS-Word
version; PDF)
are “existing collection[s of information] in use without
an OMB control number” and that both of these forms were “created
to correct a procedure that might have been inconsistent with the
Paperwork Reduction Act.”
In other words,
“We’ve been using these unapproved forms illegally for
years, but now we want OMB to give us its blessing to keep on using
them.”
OMB is now
considering these resubmitted State Department “information
collection requests”. There’s no fixed deadline for
the current OMB review, but in the meantime, use of the forms remains
illegal.
The State Department
still hasn’t answered our
year-old FOIA request for information about the current unauthorized
forms, including how long they have been in use and how many people
have been required to fill them out (under illegal threat of denial
of a U.S. passport if they are unable or unable to provide the requested
information).
OMB’s
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) says
that:
In addition
to submitting comments through regulations.gov, outside parties
may provide written comments to the OIRA Administrator on a regulatory
action under review. Parties may also request a meeting with the
Administrator. The best way to communicate comments to OIRA is
by fax at (202-395-7245). The best way to request a meeting regarding
a rule is to contact the Docket Library at 202-395-6880. At any
point, members of the public may also submit comments to …
OIRA about any currently approved information collections.
We’ve
already called
and faxed OIRA to resubmit our comments
(which the State Department ignored), and to request a meeting to
discuss the objections we and our many co-signers raised.
(We’ve
provided links above to all of the cited documents on .gov websites
where possible because the forms are so incredible that many readers
doubted their authenticity when we posted the original version last
year.)
If you submit
comments to OIRA, make sure you say that you are commenting on OMB’s
review of proposed Department of State information collection requests
Form DS-5513 (ICR Reference Number 201208-1405-002) and Form DS-5520
(ICR Reference Number 201208-1405-001).
Reprinted with permission
from Papers, Please.
November
10, 2012
M.D.
Creekmore [send
him mail] is a full-time blogger and preparedness consultant.
He currently lives completely off-grid somewhere in the Appalachian
mountains and is the author of 31
Days to Survival and The
Dirt Cheap Survival Retreat both published by Paladin Press.
To connect with M.D. Creekmore please visit his Survival
Blog.
Copyright
© 2012 Papers,
Please
|