I don’t know about Hawaii, but PA keeps the certificates on some kind of microfilm/microfiche or whatever. When you ask for your birth certificate, a copy is made from that stored document. I would imagine that the original certificate over time would disintegrate or there would be the possibility of loss or damage; that’s why the certificates are electronically stored.
“I don’t know about Hawaii, but PA keeps the certificates on some kind of microfilm/microfiche or whatever.’
IIRC, I saw a copy, online, of an Hawaiian statute that says that all birth certificates are to be on microfilm and in a vault.
It would be easy to test.
Anyone born there in that time frame could order a copy of their REAL birth certificate.
Well the kenyan weather would deteriorate miicrofilm quickly sarc...
States do, or did, keep a microfilm or microfiche copy on file. But that is not an electronic copy, although it may be indexed electronically. That is using the state's database, from which the Certification of Live Birth was printed, they can search based on the name, get the file number and the location of the microfilm/fiche, perhaps even mechanically retrieve it. But the image is an analog one on film, not and electronic/digital image. I remember reading some years ago that with the price of storage going down, many states were looking into just digitally storing the image of the original certificate, eliminating the film/fiche and the issues of deterioration inherent in any film technology. There would of course be backups and backups of the backups of the digital image data. It would also eliminate the use of the abstract version, which is what the Certification of Live Birth is, in favor a certificate with all the information on the original. If Hawaii did that, the Obama campaign would not have had a minimal information abstract to release, although they could have released a forgery of the long just as easily.. but with more information, it would be easier to cross check and verify the information.