No. But every company that gives information to Equifax could and probably should be.
DMV can't afford the kind of external auditing that would've caught this. Not with their current budget. Setting aside taxes etc, what do you propose a public service organization should do in these situations other than trust a company to do what they're saying?
edit: removed a statement distracting from the two questions.
It wasn't intended politically, but rather to say the tax situation is a known quantity already which is why the second question asked to set that aside before answering.
Usually, the prevailing wisdom of HN will respond to such a statement with "if you can't afford to do it properly, you shouldn't be doing it at all".
So you have to consider if you really care about the privacy that auditing would bring. If you do, then increase the budget.
Maybe the real service provided by the credit data sharing is how data is used almost everywhere in reality: marketing?
If each lender does their own due diligence and risk ranking, any lender that has an above average failure rate will take a lot of flack from their investors and regulators.
If they say "We use the same scoring formulas and credit files as everyone else", they can push the blame back to the bureaus.
Around that same time the credit card companies were also getting a lot of flack for issuing cards to newborns, pets, and the deceased. That also took an act of congress to stop.
The US credit agencies themselves are only a few decades old, people have been borrowing and lending for a bit longer then that - you can read about it in the Old Testament.