Earlier today, Joseph wrote about how the Cincinnati Enquirer editorial board, whom they endorsed over Governor Strickland, over his lack of transparency with State hiring of political patronage jobs.

Well, you can add the Canton Repository to that list, too.

Gov.-elect John Kasich has been promising to conduct state business differently from his predecessor. But if that means conducting state business in the dark, it’s a promise he needs to break.

He doesn’t have to do so, his aide said, because the website is privately operated, and he doesn’t want to do so because he doesn’t want to operate “at state government speed.”


Strickland was able to fill jobs despite making the names and résumés of applicants public in batches, starting weeks before he took office.

Not only is Kasich sending the wrong message about his commitment to openness, he’s also not doing himself any favors when it comes to winning support for one of his more controversial ideas.

He wants to privatize the Ohio Department of Development. As we said about this idea in our editorial board’s endorsement of him, “as long as Kasich keeps his commitment to transparency and avoidance of conflicts of interest, it is a change worth pursuing.”

Where’s the transparency, Mr. Kasich?

On top of that, today the Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial board, who also endorsed Kasich, take Kasich and his allies in the GOP-controlled Senate to task over Kasich’s insistence that Strickland’s pending appointees be rejected in favor of Kasich being able to make his own:

But Republican quibbling now over the casino commission appointments is pretty nervy. The GOP-controlled Senate helped pass the law that required Strickland to make those appointments by a specific date this fall. Now, because he did so — and in notably bipartisan fashion — Senate Republicans want to penalize his choices. That’s hypocrisy of a high order.

Absent incontestable conflicts of interest, or demonstrable incompetence, there is no good reason why senators should reject Strickland’s BWC or casino commission appointments, beyond blind partisanship — of which Ohio has too much already.

For much of the campaign, John Kasich said he had no strong opinions about casino or gambling in general.  Kasich, himself, refused to take a public position on the casinos when asked when it was on the ballot.  So why does he now feel strongly about dictating who’s on the casino commission?

Because he can sell access to it only if he controls it, as I’m sure his campaign aides, many of them worked on the pro-casino issue campaign, has told him.  I’m sure there’s no connection, though.