Bill would protect the public's money

5/08/05

A Wisconsin lawmaker is pushing a simple and sensible bill to make sure the public's money is protected.

Rep. Steve Kestell, R- Elkhart Lake, wants to require all state agencies to run criminal history background checks on applicants seeking state jobs with access to money.

Kestell's strongest point is this: criminal background checks on employees with access to money are fast becoming routine in the private sector. Many business people have decided that paying a small amount of money up front for background checks is better that taking a giant hit to their bottom lines and reputations later.

State government is learning this lesson the hard way.

Malini Sathasivam, a Fitchburg woman, somehow left prison as a bank thief and, within a few years, landed a job carrying bags of cash and checks for the state Department of Commerce. She got the Commerce job even though the state Department of Transportation had previously fired her for forging checks.

Now she's accused of duping the Commerce Department out of $165,000 in taxpayer money. On top of that, she's charged with defrauding several banks out of almost $3 million in part by allegedly using falsified mobile-home titles she got from her Commerce Department job.

The state had at least two chances to run background checks on Sathasivam that would have turned up a history of forged checks, embezzlement and deceit. But her state bosses never bothered to explore her criminal past and weren't required to.

Taxpayers already suspect state government doesn't manage the public's money well. The Sathasivam case lends some proof to this suspicion. Even if most state agencies have a tight lid and watchful eyes on state coffers, the Sathasivam debacle -- no matter how isolated -- makes the public skeptical or even cynical about their leaders.

That's why the governor and Legislature should back Assembly Bill 383, which Kestell recently introduced.

A cost estimate for the background checks is pending. It's still not clear just how many state employees handle or have easy access to large amounts of cash, be it paper or electronic money.

The cost should be carefully considered. But we can't imagine the price tag will be too high to justify.

Remember that an increasing number of private businesses have determined that it actually saves money in the long run.

So far, Kestell hasn't heard of opposition to his bill. Yet only Republicans have so far agreed to co-sponsor it.

Democrats and state employees should offer their support as well. It's their reputations that are on the line as much as anybody else's.

Background checks won't guarantee honesty and good money management within state agencies. In the Sathasivam case, a conscientious state employee tipped off Sathasivam's bosses about her criminal past. Despite that warning, Sathasivam was allowed to continue in her job, supposedly with more oversight.

Yet many of the criminal charges she's facing stem from actions that are alleged to have occurred after the warning was issued.

Despite that, a formal process for routinely checking the backgrounds of applicants for sensitive jobs makes sense. It would provide more chances for a con artist to be flagged, and it would probably deter more of them from applying for state jobs in the first place.

That's good for the state's reputation and good for the millions of Wisconsin.

Click here to return to the E-zine and/or close this window