Ed Howard

    State Auditor Mike Foley has continued to make headlines with comments on some of the hot-topic reports compiled by his staff.
     The latest involves questions of nepotism in the Department of Labor. Specifically, questions have been raised about whether five children of department employees received preferential treatment in being hired for some temporary jobs.
     Questions and answers about the use of tax dollars at any level of government are always appropriate subjects for discussion. They are especially worthwhile when the questions center on official suggestions of improprieties, whether the questionable doings were intentional or coincidental.
     Foley's much-noted comments on the Department of Labor audit followed on the heels of an earlier report that raised questions about the hourly pay for inspectors employed by the state Brand Commission. The former involves tax dollars. The latter does not, since the commission is financed by fees, paid by those in the industry.
     Gov. Dave Heineman ordered a freeze on labor department hiring for temporary jobs, pending an examination of the situation.
     It isn't uncommon for questions to be raised about possible political motivations when newsworthy audits are heralded by elected state auditors.
     Foley, a former state senator, has not been spared some of those questions. Suggestions of "political grandstanding" come with the territory.
     It is easy to understand why state auditors go to the public via the media on reports they regard of special interest.
     Audits are public record. Years ago, some reporters regularly stopped by the auditor's office to have a peek at them. Stories sometimes followed. Those spot checks are mostly a thing of the past.
     Over the years, some audits of government agencies led to criminal investigations and scandals of sorts.
     Remember former State Treasurer Lorelee Byrd?
     She resigned in January of 2004 after pleading guilty to the misdemeanor of official misconduct. Byrd sought and received a plea bargain, acknowledging that she improperly wrote state checks that she never intended to use.
     Critics said she was trying to protect her budget from a cost-cutting Legislature. Byrd said she was setting aside money to back up the child-support distribution system, in case a new accounting program failed.
     Years earlier, then-Treasurer Frank Marsh ran afoul of the law over improper use of state funds to pay for personal, long-distance telephone calls. The consequences included losing his job in the subsequent election, with voters making the truly rare decision to put a Democrat in one of the statehouse constitutional offices.