Late last week I wrote about how the Enquirer’s editorial staff should be pissed off at John Kasich for telling them he was going to be all about transparency and accessibility and then immediately proving those statements to be lies mere weeks after winning the election.

It turns out they were, in fact, quite offended by Kasich’s recent announcement to keep private the resumes of job applicants for public jobs. So much so that they wrote a thoroughly scathing editorial on Friday.

In case you didn’t catch it, here are some highlights:

Here’s what the GOP gubernatorial candidate said:

“I’m not worried about transparency. I’m not going to get hung up on that stuff. If you’ve got something you want to know, I’ll tell you. I’m not here to ‘hide the pea.’ My bias is toward openness.”

Well, apparently that was then, and this is now.

Governing is not an exercise in devising mechanisms to shut out the citizens you purport to represent – and for whom you are working. In short, it’s not a game of “hide the pea.”

They called his plan “an outrageous nose-thumbing at well-established principles of openness and disclosure of public information” because “the public will never know who applied, what criteria were used in hiring – or who might have been more qualified choices.”

and…

If this is “transparency,” we’d hate to see what opacity looks like in a Kasich administration.

and…

For a candidate who ran on bringing plain-speaking common sense to Ohio government, this is uncommon nonsense.

also…

“you don’t have to be an attorney to understand that well-established precedents toward disclosure are being snubbed – and that the spirit of Ohio’s open records laws is clearly being violated.”

and the big finish….

“Saying it’s a private site is a dodge, in a sense not unlike when Cincinnati Public Schools used a post office box for superintendent candidates to send resumes to, rationalizing that they didn’t have to make them public until they “received” them by taking them out of the box.

That was a crock, and so is this. It’s an attempt to hide from the public what the public deserves to see.

We endorsed Kasich in part for his business-friendly policies, believing him better positioned to harness the ingenuity and power of the private sector.

But he ought to know better than this. You can’t privatize the public’s right to know.

Mr. Kasich, you may not be “worried about transparency,” but we sure are.

Damn! The Enquirer editors are pissed off. Just like they should be. Just like all of us should be.

The difference is: they endorsed him.

You can’t say we didn’t warn you.

Evangelize!
  • Print
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
 
  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Enquirer: Kasich “Can’t Privatize the Public’s Right to Know” -- Topsy.com

  • Anonymous

    Pretty early for buyer’s remorse to already kick in.

  • Pingback: Yet even more Kasich-endorsing newspapers already showing buyer’s remorse

  • Anastasjoy

    Well, the Cleveland Plainly Republican already seemed to be suffering a bit of buyer’s remorse in the editorial when they endorsed him. This is pathetic and laughable. Kasich was never secret about who he is and what he would do. He’s a hyper-partisan thug and bully who crushes anyone who doesn’t do things his way and feels that nothing he does should be public or accountable. Remember, Enquirer, that this was the same guy who refused to release his tax returns and said it was no one’s business, then got all huffy when he was criticized for the money he (might have) made at Lehman Brothers while it was going bankrupt and nearly bringing down our economy? Remember that, Enquirer? Or what about the guy who whined incessantly that Strickland wouldn’t reveal a hard-and-fast plan for filling the budget gap while he himself refused to share any details on how HE would fill it, especially in light of his push for enormous tax cuts that would gut the states’s revenue stream? Remember THAT, Enquirer? Most of us who were paying attention were pretty alarmed and couldn’t see how a credible newspaper could possibly endorse such a reckless yet secretive candidate. So he was secretive and non-trasparent before the election and the same afterward — and he’ll be the same in office. And you should have known it before you endorsed him, because many of us sure did!

  • PublicAccess

    See today’s news? Enquirer intends to file suit for these records. Kind of makes you wonder: where’s Ben Marrison and the Dispatch crusaders for public access on this one? Truly an example of deafening silence.

  • ThatDeborahGirl

    BWHAHAHAHAHA! The Enquirer endorsed Kasich because they are as firmly a conservative organization as the GOP. The American media have bent over backwards for Republicans and are more than willing to spin the positive.

    Now The Enquirer, which could make FOX jealous as to firmly Republican coverage, is being told – buzz off – no access – which is journalism’s golden altar these days.

    Kasich’s policy is clearly “Transparency is whatever I tell you it is. What you don’t trust me to tell you the truth? I’ll tell you and you write it down. It worked for Bush and everyone else? You’re gonna keep doing that? Right?”

    I can’t help but wonder if this is a new trend – Republicans sidestepping even their cheerleading media – or if the Enquirer can truly exact a pound of flesh. I think, more like, their conservative readers will be confused at them having gone off message and chalk it up to “liberal media” influence. The Enquirer isn’t in the financial shape to make conservatives angry for long. And progressives who already read them at a slant, if at all, will just laugh and say, “I told you so.”

    Is the pen mightier than the GOP? Gonna be interesting to find out.

  • Pingback: Kasich Releases Resumes Submitted Through Transition Website

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!