Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 13, 1961)
•EMERALD ROTC on the docket The time is getting near for the perennial ROTC issue to come up again. The State Board of Higher Education, earlier faced with the,problem of making it uniformly voluntary or compulsory for both Oregon and Oregon State, deferred action until its January 1962 meeting. That isn’t far off. AS IT STANDS now, the University faculty has gone on record in favor of the voluntary program. The Oregon State fac ulty favors a compulsory program. Both schools are on a compulsory (a two-year required basic course for all fit entering men) basis now. University President Arthur Flemming has indicated that he favors the voluntary approach. His only experience with ROTC was when he was President of Ohio \\ es lyan University where it was on a volun tary basis. FLEMMING SAYS he’s convinced that all services will get a much better quality officer on the voluntary basis. This is al most indisputable, although one might ques tion the loss of well-qualified officer ma terial simply because of the failure to ex pose young men through a compulsory program to the advantages of the program. This, Flemming concedes, is one of the big problems. The only realistic approach to it, he believes, is for an RO’l'C “selling job" to be clone before freshman men come to school. And even that, it would appear, would have certain disadvantages to a regu lar, two-year exposure to the program. Several kinds of sentiment towards ROTC has been reflected on this campus—but none recently. Most of the passion directed at it a couple of years ago was nothing more than youthful rebellion against the idea of being compelled to do something more than against the idea of the program itself. In files of exchange college newspapers we often find the fight against ROTC in full swing. It’s a national editorial pastime, it seems. WE’D BE RELUCTANT to criticize the philosophy behind the program that in fact produces the majority of all military offi cers in the service today. It’s pretty dif ficult to argue that ROTC isn’t necessary when the national guard units in most of the hometowns from which we come have been called to active duty. But all the same, the idea of a voluntary • program still has its appeal. Flemming even feels, from associations with high-ups in the Pentagon when he was in Washington, that the voluntary philosophy is a coming thing nationwide. We’ll see in January if Oregon joins the trend. Not so good (Reprinted from the Eugene Register-Guard) On the face of it. Sen. Robert Straub had what sounded like a plausible sugges tion—use athletic reserves to bail higher education out of its financial crisis. Like many ideas, however, this one isn't so good on close scrutiny. In the first place, some of that money doesn't really belong to the state. It was given to the universities and colleges for specific athletic purposes and must be held in trust for those purposes. Other money was extracted from the students, also with the understanding that it would go for the athletic plant. In the second place there is no guarantee that the state would pay the money back, once is was “borrowed" in the manner Sen ator Straub suggested. One never knows what another Legislature will do. And that includes Senator Straub, who won’t be in Salem next session. In the third place, remember that athletic programs are self-supporting, using no tax money. If they do well and the gravy is skimmed off for general education purposes, would it not be fair to put state money into these programs in years when financial suc cess has not ridden with the programs? The real answer to the problem, and we are sure Senator Straub would agree, is sufficient state support for an educational program at a level agreed to by the Legis lature. The answer will not be found in a frantic wrecking of programs that the Legis lature neither inspired nor guided. Letters to the editor i Pained Emerald Editor: I am pained to see that even the Emerald draws a line of distinction between the foreign and American students. No too long ago, the Emerald of No vember 3, 1961, published that “Candidates” (for the ASUO positions) “will be contacted by the Emerald for interviews with the editorial board between 1:30 p.m. and 3 p.m. Sunday. The Emerald’s editorial endorse ment will depend upon these interviews.” No one from the Emerald interviewed the candi dates for election as foreign stu dents representative. I would like to know why these candi dates were not contacted. Were these candidates not “candi dates” in the same sense as were others. Let me point out another in cident, howsoever minor, but of tbc- same nature as the one pointed above. In the Emerald of November 2, 1961, all election results were given coverage under “Election Tally” but for reasons best known to the Em erald the results of primary for the foreign students representa tive were omitted. It is sad realization that the Emerald does not consider the foreign students a part of the student body of the University of Oregon. Surprisingly the Em erald writes about discrimina tion on the one hand and prac tices it, though perhaps unin tentionally and inadevertently, on the other. Bhagwait Poddar Foreign Students’ Rep resentative * * Too much criticism Emerald Editor: There are many good qual ities that I have noticed about the Emerald that are too often overlooked in appraising our paper. You have some very well written articles of interest and thought, good campus cover age, and usually a good cover age of coming events. However, the paper does have some ques tionable habits. The Emerald has criticized the effectiveness of the Senate and of the rally. It has also criticized school spirit. Perhaps now is a good time for the Em erald staff to step back and look at the Emerald, especially in respect to the other student organizations. The most im portant question to ask is, aside from the basic coverage of the news, what good is the Emerald contributing to the University? Concerning school apathy, the paper has defined and presented it clearly, but could it take posi tive action to help correct this attitude? We can encourage very few people to run for office by telling them that the or ganization in which they seek office is worthless or that they themselves are worthless. Such criticism is the basis of apathy. We must be careful, however, for such a problem should never be contributed to one organiza tion. The Senate, the rally, and the Emerald all contribute their share. All newspapers have the obli gation to a free society to ques tion and, perhaps, criticize civic activities. However, a news paper must never become an omnipotent father who continu ally corrects or at least critic izes each action taken by civic organizations. If a paper does degenerate to this depth, then it could benefit the community more by closing its doors. Our student paper does contribute greatly to our University in keeping the different student or ganizations on their toes. But it, too, must be careful not to let the paper become overly critical. It often takes a much better person or organization to appreciate the good in another than to criticize his failings. Our daily paper has a splendid chance for positive action. I sin (Continued on patje 3) Little man on campus ~g\/e&TUiM c** rive • Ho » MO CCUJ0&6 t mo Hurrytn: / po*tr\v0'V f**4* rV*‘' PAi?r of oup New <$fr wytrff MAvem, policy-— FteW YOU AteAlCYMUST FULLFULL W MINIMUM CQUfZse £&?<JlZm£NT5 OfZ YOU FLUNK. * Waff Street on campus Mutual fund investments generally more secure By DEN NS STEEN QUESTION: How much of an investment advantage over individual stock purchases do mutual funds offer the amateur investor? ANSWER: For the most part, funds offer the average inves tor a larger amount of secur ity than do most individual stocks. The growth rate of mu tual funds has been very steady and above that of most stocks over the past ten years. Of course, there are exceptions to this, but some of the most wide ly known mutual funds have more than tripled in value over the past ten years. I think an investment in a mutual fund is a good idea for the person who wishes to invest on a monthly basis. » QUESTION: What is the minimum amount you can in vest in mutual funds? ANSWER: The price per share of most mutual funds ranges between $5 and $20. The investor may invest as much or as little as he wishes. He may invest on a monthly ba sis or purchase so many shares outright. • * • QUESTION: How can you get in touch with a mutual fund salesman ? ANSWER: There are over 40,000 mutual fund salesmen in the United States and you can find their names by looking them up in the yellow pages. Some of the better known mu tual funds are Massachusetts Investor’s Growth Fund, The Keystone Funds, The United Funds, and the Hamilton Funds. * * * Readers may recall that in last Monday’s column I men tioned that Studebaker-Packard was a good low-priced invest ment. After the column came out, the point was raised by a reader that Studebaker-Pack ard had experienced a consider able drop in the value of its price over the last several months. Apparently the reader pur chased the stock when it was selling in the $15 to $29 range during 1959-1960. Since that time, Studebaker-Packard had experienced some extremely hard blows and fell from a high of $24in 1960 to a low this year of $7 |>er share. THE KE.VSON I mentioned Studebaker-Packard is that I feel that Studebaker-Paokard’s troubles have l>ecn greatly over emphasized and that greener pastures are Just around the corner. Many investors have al ready realized this as shown by its rise in price from its low of $7 per share earlier this year to its current price of $12 jjer share. The company has an ex tremely strong financial posi tion as its current assets are $96,000.000 and current nubili ties are $33,000,000. This is a vi ry healthy 3 to 1 ratio. Stude baker-Packard now has a new management team and has been acquiring several new small companies. It is interesting to note that between Monday and Thursday of last week, the stock moved from $11 up to $12 per share. I would point out that this is an increase of just under 10 per cent in the value of the reader’s holdings in less than a week. I think the readers will agree that 10 per cent in one week is much better than is four per cent in terest per year in a savings ac count at the bank. (Address questions you'd like answered on the stoek market to Dennis Steen, c/o The Em erald, 301 Allen Hall.) OREGON DAILY EMERALD The Oregon Daily Emerald U published seven times in September and five days a week during the school year, except dur ing examination and vacation periods by the Student Publications Board of the University of Oregon. Entered as second cla'»s matter at the |x>st office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per year; $2 per term. Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of The Emerald and do not pretend to represent the opinion of the ASUO or the University. DAN PFAFE, Editor RON BULL, Managing Editor J-EE TURNBULL, Acting Business Mgr. KEITII POWELL, News Editor I ED MAHAR, Editorial Page Editor PHIL COGSWEEL, Asst. News Editor Y\ OWE KGGERS, Assistant Managing Editor DAVE SANDS, Photo Editor JOE BERGER, CHRIS CHURCH, Co-Sports Editors BARBARA CHANTRY, Women’s Editor LINDA BROWN, Entertainment Editor JANET GOETZK, Feature Editor EDITORIAL BOARD: Dan Pfaff, Ron Buel, Keith Powell, Ted Mahar, PhJ Cogswell, Yvonne log gers, Allison Blakely, Gayle Osburn, Quentin Breen, Virginia Anderson, Bar bara Chantry.
