• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Tales of the Red Tape #10: The State Department’s Passport Inquisition

    Rewarding failure is a fundamental precept of The Bureaucratic Code, which helps to explain why government’s regulatory powers grow in spite of its incompetence. Examples are legion, of course, including the recent case of the State Department and passport fraud.

    The General Accounting Office (GAO) has on several occasions investigated the department’s procedures for processing passport applications and found them dangerously wanting. In 2009, for example, the GAO “easily” obtained passports using counterfeit documents. A 2010 investigation also yielded passports despite numerous discrepancies and suspicious indicators within each application (including, for example, photos of the same investigator on multiple applications; a 62-year-old applicant using a Social Security number issued in 2009; passport and driver’s license photos showing a 10-year age difference; and the use of a California mailing address, a West Virginia permanent address and driver’s license address, and a Washington, D.C., phone number in the same application).

    So, pray tell, just how do State Department officials propose to remedy the problem? Predictably, they are proposing to expand the very investigatory powers they have failed to use properly and, in so doing, impose onerous new burdens on passport applicants—i.e., us.

    Specifically, the department is proposing a new passport application, Form DS-5513. It would require the name and address of your every employer, as well every supervisor’s name, and the address of your every residence. And if you were not born in a hospital (or if your birth was not officially recorded within a year) you would also have to document:

    • The circumstances of your birth, including the names of everyone in the room when you were born;
    • Whether your mother received pre-natal and post-natal care and the names of the doctors and dates of the appointments for that care;
    • The name of your mother’s employer when you were born and her dates of employment;
    • Your mother’s address when you were born and her address one year before and one year after your birth.

    In their submission for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (as required under the Paperwork Reduction Act!), department officials claim the new application will take just 45 minutes, on average, to complete. But that calculation comes from the very same folks who issued passports to fictitious and fraudulent applicants.

    Want to read more Tales of the Red Tape? Check out these stories below:

    #1: We See Dead People

    #2: The EPA Is Fueling Nonsense

    #3: Don’t Touch That Dial!

    #4: The Unwitting Peddlers of Toxic Tomes

    #5: Calorie Counts Forced Down Our Throats

    #6: Equine Equality Under the ADA

    #7: Energy Department Plumbing for More Regulatory Powers

    #8: How Many Hazmat Suits Does It Take to Change a Light Bulb?

    #9: Regulators Going Off on Microwave Ovens

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to Tales of the Red Tape #10: The State Department’s Passport Inquisition

    1. Tom Clayton, MD says:

      Besides complaining about the problem, who is doing something about it? What can the average person do? Government regulations are out of control; the average person has no idea what is going on. What good does it do to require more and more documentation of that which makes no difference (such as the requirement if you were not born in a hospital)? Who remembers any of this?

    2. Pingback: Tales of the Red Tape #13: An “F” for Train Regulation | The Foundry

    3. Randi Briggs, Smarts says:

      I write a conservative newsletter, and wrote an article on this. The most disconcerting thing is that no one believed me! Even though I attached links to the articles. I actually called the State Department, and although the people there were exceeding nice, the answer was " We haven't seen any new forms, but if they were too intrusive they probably wouldn't happen". Huh? Is that like "I don't have any of the facts, but the Police acted stupidly"? Anyway, I,m glad to find this article from Heritage that I can point to.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.