Skip to comments.State law means names of state employee fraudsters stay secret (CT)
Posted on 07/04/2014 4:18:07 PM PDT by BillyBonebrake
The state employees were disciplined for lying to get money through the Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, an extension of food stamps available to poor residents who lost food or income in September 2011 after Hurricane Irene hit here as a tropical storm.
While Larson said the law merits revisiting, other members of the state's congressional delegation weren't so forthcoming about their views on the state measure or the similar federal law that have left taxpayers in the dark about the conduct and punishment of state employees -- many of whom were fired but rehired after they appealed.
U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Christopher S. Murphy, both Democrats, didn't return repeated requests for comment. U.S. Rep. Joseph D. Courtney, D-2nd District, also didn't return calls for comment.
A fraction of the disciplined employees appealed, and the Journal Inquirer was able to learn about some of those cases through court filings. They include the DOT worker who got to keep her job despite never losing electrical power, lying about how much money she made, counting her imprisoned son as a household dependent, and creating household members to get more money. A Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services kept her job despite lying about her income and the income of the nine people she says she lives with, including the grandmother she made up.
The disciplinary records of state employees normally are public documents, but the commission ruled that any information on the employees wasn't subject to open-government laws because of the state law concerning welfare benefits.
(Excerpt) Read more at journalinquirer.com ...
Once upon a time, there was a media that was actually interested in investigating things like this.
Now they dig into important stuff like the status of Joe the Plumber’s trade license and the DNA of Palin’s Down Syndrome child.
I should add that the employees’ “protection” is because these were welfare applications. That they were fraudulent welfare applications is somehow irrelevant.
So that they could be in for extra harassment.
Public employees are supposed to be "public servants", not thieves, and we SHOULD be able to see what they've stolen.
After all, it's OUR money.