COLUMBUS, Ohio - The state of Ohio has collected millions of dollars selling records with your name, address, driver's license number and other personal information so it can be used in all sorts of ways, from crafting insurance policies to screening job candidates.

Since 2005, the Bureau of Motor Vehicles has sold more than 1.39 billion records containing personal information to various companies, municipalities and other customers for about $42 million, according to state records.

Most of those records sold for a fraction of a penny each -- $0.00139 to be exact.

"It's just amazing," Sen. Tom Patton, a Strongsville Republican, said after learning of the sales.

Patton said he might attempt to shield some of the information through legislation because he has concerns about its widespread distribution and miniscule price tag.

"In my mind's eye, I don't want my information sold for a penny, much less a fraction," he said. "The information is sacred."

Social Security numbers are included in some records sold, but only for verification, meaning the entity purchasing the information proves it already has an individual's correct number. The customer also must prove to the BMV it is allowed to receive Social Security numbers under the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act.

Other states charge a lot more for personal information from drivers' records. But Ohio officials say their hands are tied because the information is considered public record, and the state can only charge what it costs to provide the information -- a minimal fee given that it is mostly transferred electronically.

TOP FIVE CUSTOMERS

Ohio sells in bulk records containing your personal information to more than 30 companies, municipalities and other customers. Since 2005, the state has collected more than $42 million. Here are its five best customers in the last five years and how much money they've spent in that time.

Choicepoint Services, Inc.

$36.3 million

iiX (Insurance Information Exchange)

$4.6 million

LexisNexis

$460,331

Explore Information Services

$445,645

SAMBA Holdings, Inc.

$252,903

Source: Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles

"We just wanted to reiterate that we are required to provide this information, and we do not profit off of it," Lindsey Bohrer, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Public Safety, which oversees the BMV, said in an e-mail.

But many other states do not treat the information as public records because federal and state exceptions must be met to access the information. So the states can sell the records at what they consider a fair price.

Oklahoma, for example, charges $10 for uncertified driving records and $13 for certified ones. Tennessee charges $5 per record. Neither state sells the information at cost -- the basis of Ohio's microscopic $0.00139 bulk price for records.

"Some states have chosen to set a fair price for this information because the private sector makes a profit by using this data in their business operations," said Chris Neff, spokesman for NIC Inc., a company that helps states sell driving records. "This information is an asset that the private sector wants and many states are not giving away for free because the resulting revenues help to fund their operations."

The revenue helps reduce the cost of other services NIC provides states it contracts with, such as shifting government services online. Those services include license plate renewals and new business registrations.

Anne Vitale, a staff attorney for the Ohio BMV, said legislative action would be required to increase the $0.00139 cost for the driver's license, vehicle registration and title records.

"We would love to be able to charge" more, Vitale said.

Here is the information Ohio includes when selling those records:

• Driver's licenses: name, address, date of birth, driver's license number, and Social Security number (for verification only).

• Vehicle registrations: name, address, Social Security number (for verification) and information about the vehicle.

• Titles: name, address and information about the vehicle.

All of those records sell for $0.00139 each when purchased in bulk. The BMV studied the cost of providing the records in 2000 and set the price.

Those three types of records make up the vast majority of records sold. But most of the state's revenue from selling records is generated by a product that makes up only 1 percent of its sales volume.

Driver abstracts, in addition to the information available from driver's licenses, contain an individual's three-year record of violations and accidents. Companies that request a driver's abstract must provide two unique identifiers, such as a name and a Social Security number, to buy the record.

These records, which insurance companies often use, cost $5 each.

The fee was increased last year from $2 to help fund homeland security and other programs. The state has appealed a Franklin County judge's ruling last month that the fee increase is unconstitutional because the extra revenue will not be spent on highways or highway safety -- the two uses permitted under state law. The hike will remain in effect until the case is resolved, according to the BMV.

The state has sold more than 14.7 million abstracts for more than $35 million since 2005.

The money Ohio makes from selling the records, however, is only one concern.

The state is limited in what it can do to protect Ohioans' personal data. Vitale said information about Ohio drivers is safe in the BMV's hands, but once it is sold the state does not have the resources to monitor further sales.

Many of the state's customers, which include data aggregation companies like LexisNexis, turn around and sell the information to third parties. The companies are expected to follow federal and state privacy laws that dictate who is entitled to this information.

Nevertheless, two known security breaches have compromised Ohioans' personal information.

LexisNexis, one of the state's most prolific buyers, told the state in June 2009 that it discovered two security breaches and sent letters to 3,184 Ohioans to inform them. Most of the letters -- 2,806 -- involved an identity theft case in U.S. District Court in New Jersey.

That case involved a conspiracy to obtain personal information from public databases and other sources to raid bank accounts, credit cards and home equity lines of credit. A New York man, Yomi Jagunna, pleaded guilty last May in the conspiracy. He was imprisoned and ordered to pay $3.18 million in restitution to a variety of banks and creditors.

In the second security breach LexisNexis reported to the state, an employee of a legitimate third party that received information from LexisNexis abused his access to obtain personal information.

As a result of these breaches, the state suspended its contract with LexisNexis for 30 days, reviewed the company's security policies and determined proper safeguards are now in place.

LexisNexis and other companies that buy data say they treat it carefully and follow federal and state privacy laws. LexisNexis monitors its customers' use of information to help prevent fraud, the company said through a spokesman. Safeguards also include site visits to third-party customers to ensure the businesses are legitimate.

"LexisNexis understands that meeting the challenges of privacy and security is an evolutionary process and our company's commitment in this area is ongoing," the spokesman said in an e-mail.

The security breach at LexisNexis underscores a fear that Ohioans' information could end up in the wrong hands. But Richard Varn of the Coalition for Sensible Public Records Access recently wrote that such anecdotes do not prove the availability of public records leads to identity theft. The coalition is an organization based in Des Moines, Iowa that promotes public records access.

In his report titled "Open Public Records: The Fountain of Truth," Varn argued against reducing access to publicly available personal information because most crimes that are called identity theft actually are cases of credit card fraud. Credit card numbers used to commit crimes are not public records, he wrote.

Varn also took a stand against raising the price of public records.

"They are paid for by the taxpayers and are the property of the people," he wrote. "Charging more than the marginal cost of reproduction is double taxation. When those charges become excessive, those charges stop being merely unfair and become an undemocratic tax on truth and its political and economic uses."