WHO CAN QUALIFY FOR A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD?
The official U.S. Government answer is that only Welfare Applicants may get a Social Security Number.
Since welfare remains unconstitutional within the Unites states, the only welfare available is "foreign welfare." Your federal government administers this foreign program. Social Security came into existence in 1936, three years after the federal government went bankrupt. The foreign bankruptcy receivership offers this welfare plan for destitute people who volunteer to become their permanent Wards. The original intent was to get the ownership of American's labor (people don't like it when I use the word "slave") to put up as "collateral" for the national debt. Those who survived the Great Depression were grateful for the indentured servitude that allowed them to survive. Are you?
If you persist in your inquiry, you will get many answers. I've collected many different Pamphlets and IRS Publications and responses to letters. These are all unofficial. In my Appendix G you will learn what the Courts think about unofficial answers:
COURT CASES. In the last Chapter, you were introduced to the six Court cases that forced people to get Social Security Numbers. All six were welfare recipients.
THE LAW. There is no government requirement for anyone to apply for a number. SSN's cannot be assigned unless you first apply for socialist benefits. Section 205(c)(2)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act allows the Social Security Administration to assign numbers "to any individual who is an applicant for or recipient of benefits under any program financed in whole or in part from Federal funds including any child on whose behalf such benefits are claimed by another person ..."
Read that again. Do you meet the eligibility requirements for a Social Security Number? It is available ONLY to those who claim government funds. Only those who need benefits can receive a Social Security Number. Social Security is not a Trust Fund, nor insurance, nor a Pension - it's a handout. A Christian cannot associate with freeloaders per 2nd Thessalonians 3:6-14. If you ask them to take care of you, then you are asking to become a Ward of a foreign authority. TO GET BENEFITS, YOU MUST BECOME A WARD OF A FOREIGN AUTHORITY. For constitutional reasons, they can give welfare ONLY to these Wards. James Madison said: "it is an absurdity to state that welfare can be given to ordinary people." A "Pauper" is someone who is supported at public expense. As you've seen from the Articles of Confederation, a Pauper cannot have rights. Never did, never will. You, like Esau, gave up your birthright for a future bowl of stew.
The only other categories of people who can be given a SSN are "Aliens"
applying for federal citizenship, and students enrolling in federally funded
schools. [even though the Supreme Court in a 1982 case Plyler v.
Doe, 457 US 202, says that schools cannot require SSNs from students].
Title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 422.103:
"(b)Applying for a number."(1) Form SS-5. An individual needing a social security number may apply for one by filing a signed Form SS-5 'Application for a Social Security Card', at any social security office and submitting the required evidence. ....
The Paperwork reduction Act (Public Law 96-511) requires all federal Forms that request information from the public to display an OMB Number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget. Title 44, US Code, Section 3507(f), prohibits government Agencies from collecting any information unless the Form displays an OMB Number. To get an OMB Number for the Form "Application for a Social Security Card, Form SS-5," the Agency that created the Application Form (Treasury Department, not the Social Security Administration) had to file a Form SF83 with the OMB. The Standard Form 83's, Section 24 is entitled "Respondents obligation to comply" and then has three boxes to check: "Mandatory," "Voluntary," or "Required to obtain or retain a benefit." Their SF83 confirms that the SS-5 Application for a SSN is required to obtain a benefit and is not mandatory. And the Form SS-5's "Legal authority for information collection" is Section 205(c)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act, which I've quoted above.
The Privacy Act (Title 5, US Code, Section 552a) in Subsection (e)(3) requires all federal Forms that solicit information from the public to state what law authorizes the solicitation and whether or not disclosure of the information is mandatory or voluntary. The Application for a Social Security Card, Form SS-5, has a Privacy Act statement. It states in part: "You do not have to give us these facts, but without them we cannot issue you a Social Security number or card. Without a number, you could lose Social Security benefits in the future ..."
The laws, regulations and Court decisions and Official Notices are entirely consistent with each other. They conform with history and with the U.S. Constitution and with the truth. And they are entirely consistent with the poor laws.
People v. Shirley, 92 ALR 2d 413, (indexed under the topic "Poor Laws"):
"The provisions of the welfare code are to be administered fairly, with due consideration not only for the needs of applicants but also for the safeguarding of public funds; if children are not in need, they are not eligible for assistance regardless of who is paying for their support."
I have yet to confirm that religious objectors who work for the government can get a temporary ITIN instead of an SSN by filling out a W7 Form. On the other hand, I've read where ITINs/IRSNs only apply to Amish objectors per Section 1402(g) of the Internal Revenue Code (mentioned in the Legislative History of Public Law 99-514, Section 4), and I've also read Revenue Ruling 85-61 which makes it seem that only Alien limited partners qualify for these alternate numbers.
The instructions for ITIN application (Form W7) state that the Form is only for those who do not qualify for a Social Security Number.
Here are some notes that lead me to believe that "Legal Notice" has to be served, by a process server, on anyone required to get a Social Security Number.
U.S. Supreme Court in US v. Batchelder, 442 US 114: "Due process requires that a person be given fair notice as to what constitutes illegal conduct, so that he may conform his conduct to the requirements of the law."
Service of Notice requiring TINs is acknowledged by 26 CFR 422.6109-1(h):
"... Nothing contained in the regulations under section 6109 shall limit the authority of the Internal Revenue Service to obtain taxpayer identifying numbers required before or after the effective date of this paragraph after notice is served upon the taxpayer pursuant to section 6001."Now take a closer look at this Section 6001 of the Internal Revenue Code. It uses the deceptive terminology "may require" and "or by regulations":
"... Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary it is necessary, he may require any person, by notice served upon such person or by regulations, to make such returns, render such statements, or keep such records, as the Secretary deems sufficient to show whether or not such person is liable for tax under this title."Concerning the "or by regulations" terminology: This is one of the places where the word "or" really means "and." If you are going to claim that some people are served Notice in person, while others are served Notice via the publication of regulations, then I demand the equal protection of the law, equal with those who have been served Notice in person. [In statutes, the word `or' can mean `and' unless preceded by a comma. Also see Appendix B where `must' can mean `may'].
Concerning the "may require" terminology here is proof that "may require" really means "must require." Note how "may" is defined in 34 AmJur, Mandamus, Section 72:
"Frequently, however, the word 'may' or the like as used in statutes relating to the duty of public officers is construed as mandatory, and not merely permissive, Anno: 6 L.R.A. 162; 12 L.R.A.(NS) 340, See STATUTES (also 25 RCL p. 750), and when such is the case, mandamus may issue to compel the officer to perform the duty so imposed. Rock Island County v. United States, 4 Wall. (US) 435, 18 LEd,419; Brokaw v. Highway Comrs., 130 Ill 482, 22 N.E. 596, 6 L.R.A. 161."U.S. Supreme Court in Mahler v. Eby, 264 US 32:
"It is essential that where an executive is exercising delegated legislative power he should substantially comply with all the statutory requirements in its exercise"
(originally published by worldnewsstand.net)
Freedom School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
Freedom School information served for educational purposes only, no liability assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to unlawful action. Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and defend all law which is particularly applicable.
CopyrightŠ 2003, 2013
All Rights Reserved
H O M E