Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

West Virginia Won't Release Broadband Report Because It Is 'Embarrassing'

Posted by Soulskill on from the i-just-bet-it-is dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Charleston Gazette is reporting that the state of West Virginia hired a consulting firm for over $100,000 to investigate the state's use of Federal stimulus money (which included the purchase of $22,000 routers for tiny buildings). Unfortunately, the state government is now refusing a FOIA request to release the firm's report. The reason? The findings 'might be embarrassing to some people,' according to Commerce Secretary Keith Burdette."

13 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Typo in summary by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Replace the word 'embarassing' with 'incriminating'.

    1. Re:Typo in summary by v1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Replace the word 'embarassing' with 'incriminating'.

      Possibly, but not necessarily, or at least, not primarily. Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin is the one witholding the information. He's an elected official whose job is probably more to collect campaign contributions than to actually serve the public.

      He very likely discussed the content of that report with the "parties" he is protecting, and was told exactly where he wasn't going to be receiving any more money from if that evaluation wasn't buried. He's probably very well aware that it's going to get pried out of his hands and plastered on page 1 eventually, but this will at least give him a "but I tried to stop it!" when those parties blow up his phone, and he's hoping this will at least do a little damage control.

      But things like that can turn and bite you. This may be a very big thorn in his side, come election day. Depending on how close the competition is, his opposition may drag this issue back above ground for a month of mud slinging. But money can really help to bury things. Depends on how much he can throw at it, and how deep it needs to go.

      "Never give a man a gun unless you know where he's going to point it." Same goes for inviting in a team of investigators to get to the bottom of any mess you are even remotely related to. You'd better either make sure you're squeaky clean, or make sure their opinion is already properly paid for.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    2. Re:Typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Here's more insight: Representatives of the people have only one job, which is written into their job title - represent the people. So if the representatives are too embarrassed to share what they've done with the funds granted by the people, especially in regards to a project that should benefit the community, it means the money have been either wasted with no regard for public interest, or stolen. Both of these scenarios are covered by criminal law. Hope that covers it. Monetary system is stupid anyway, but that's beside the point.

  2. This is what newspapers are for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a good example of what we'll lose if and when big city daily papers go under, and are replaced by national/international news outfits with makeshift and/or crowdsourced local staffs.

  3. Good strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just declare all governance an embarrassment and avoid the need for transparency.

    Genius!

  4. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? by v1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    how is that even a legal reason to refuse a Freedom of Information request? Last I checked, "we don't want to" isn't an acceptable reason to refuse.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? by poity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      and embarrassing the government is the whole point of FOIA, so they stop doing things to embarrass themselves.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  5. West Virginia is the butt... by WaywardGeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    of a lot of jokes. Yeah, they screwed up... Again. However, most people don't know that West Virgina was part of Virginia up until the Civil War. They believed so strongly in free labor (as opposed to slave labor) that they succeeded from their state. I can forgive them for a lot of crap after that. It's sad seeing them struggle over basic internet access, but I think it's always been a challenge in WV.

    --
    Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    1. Re:West Virginia is the butt... by el+borak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I too honor the brave and ethical stance made by the WV leadership 150 years ago. However zero of that honor is conveyed to people simply because they happen to currently inhabit the same geographic area.

      --
      An imperfect plan executed violently is far superior to a perfect plan. -- George Patton
    2. Re:West Virginia is the butt... by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, that's the story that's in the textbooks, at least.

      The reality of the Civil War was a *lot* more complicated. Slavery was only the third or fourth most important issue until Lincoln turned it into the moral justification for the war. Which was a brilliant PR move on his part, since even a century later we're believing in it.

      The #1 reason was the same sort of divisive party politics that continues to this day, with the same party names even. You know what the Republican fringe was saying about Obama during the last elections? That was pretty much what the Democrats were saying about Lincoln, except replace "socialism" with "abolitionism".

      Then there was the whole movement from rural, agriculture-based societies to urban, industrial society. Always a cause for major upheaval. And guess what? East Virginia was mostly agricultural, and West Virginia was mostly coal mines (and thus economically aligned with the Northern cities they fueled).

      Of course there was also the statehood issue. The states, at that time, still had quite a bit more independence than they do now. There had been a delicate balance for years over the slavery issue, trying to make sure that neither side had enough votes to force their own way. Lincoln's election proved that balance was gone - he wasn't even on the ballot in many Southern states.

      Finally was the whole issue of the war. There was a lull between the initial round of secession and the war proper beginning, during which Virginia was still Union. Only when Lincoln began calling up the armies did the rest secede (and West Virginia re-secede, or de-secede or whatever the term is). Even then, some states tried to declare neutrality.

      As for West Virginia, there was one more reason peculiar to them - geography. The two are separated by the Appalachian Mountains, which are a rather significant barrier. I think it's even easier for them to ship coal to New Orleans (via the Mississippi) than to Richmond. When you have such separation, it's somewhat natural for political divisions to occur.

    3. Re:West Virginia is the butt... by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

      The reality of the Civil War was a *lot* more complicated. Slavery was only the third or fourth most important issue until Lincoln turned it into the moral justification for the war. Which was a brilliant PR move on his part, since even a century later we're believing in it.

      The difficulty with your version of history is that it is directly contradicted by documents and statements made before and during the Civil War.
      Here are Declarations of Secession from the four States that decided to explain their reasons

      I could give you an almost endless list of primary sources to dig through,
      but if those declarations aren't convincing, I don't know what else would do it.
      Anyone who says that slavery was not central to the issues of the Civil War is engaging in historical revisionism.

      And, Lincoln didn't really want to end slavery in the South, his plan was to prevent any new States from having slaves, thus allowing slavery in the South to die out in its own time.

      If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time save Slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy Slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.

      Ignore whatever you learned growing up and go straight to the sources.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  6. They are waiting for a response from lawyers by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Funny

    They asked if "whiskey stills" can be considered internet routers. As soon as their lawyers sober up we should have an answer.

  7. Re:FOIA by headwes · · Score: 5, Informative
    The FOIA that we all know and love is a federal law that applies to federal agencies. West Virginia, like most states, has their own public records law that applies to their state agencies which you'll need to read to know whether they're in violation. Maybe they're claiming exemption #13:

    (13) Computing, telecommunications and network security records, passwords, security codes or programs used to respond to or plan against acts of terrorism which may be the subject of a terrorist act;