Out-of-State Tuition
Board Balances Fee Increases
With Fee Remission Policy
According to a recent decision by the
State Board of Higher Education, tuition
fees for non-resident students will con
tinue to increase until within a few years
these students will be paying an amount
comparable to the actual cost of lower di
vision instruction. Students from other
states, however, might actually save money
next year, since the board also proposed
a system of fee remission scholarships for
outstanding non-resident students.
This action was based on some sound
principles approved by the Board, and with
which we agree.
• “The presence of students from
other states and other countries on Oregon
campuses is a significant part of the edu
cational process, since students learn from
students as well as from professors and
books.
• “A conscious attempt should be
made to attract students of exceptional abil
ity from other states to compensate, in
some measure, for the drain on Oregon’s
intellectual resources created by the loss
of many of our own superior students to
institutions in other states.
• “The enrollment of students from
other states whose predicted level of aca
demic achievement might lower the gen
eral average in the System institutions
should be discouraged.
• “At the two universities and Port
land State College we should move in tbe
direction of charging fees to students from
other states which will approximate the
cost of lower-division instruction.”
The Board hopes that the fee remis
sion scholarship program will help attract
outstanding students from other states.
At the same time, by making non-resident
students pay the cost of lower division
education, now about $785, the board can
insure that below-average students, who
do not help the University atmosphere,
will not be costing the state money.
It was also pointed out that the state
will still pay some of the cost of educating
out-of-state upper-division students since
upper-division instruction costs consider
ably more than lower-division. This sub
sidy is considered worth the expense since
by the time a student reaches upper-divi
sion level, his knowledge and experience
is probably contributing intellectually to
the University community.
Another consideration in approving the
proposals was that even with the fee re
mission program in effect next year’s $60
increase in out-of-state tuition will supply
$563,000 in badly needed revenue to Ore
gon higher education.
It was encouraging that Board mem
bers emphasized that considerable numbers
of non-resident students are desired by
the state system. If the action seems to
be causing too great a decrease in applica
tions from other states, the Board will be
willing and able to make adjustments in
the policy at any time, according to Board
Chairman William Walsh.
After an examination of the reasons
for the increase, the Board’s action seems
reasonable. We are pleased that the Board
has decided to institute the fee-remission
program to attract good students.
We believe, however, that the state sys
tem should continue to work towards an
eventual arrangement whereby a non-resi
dent student’s home state pays for at least
part of his education when he comes to
an Oregon school. In turn, the state of Ore
gon would pay part of the expenses for
those who go out of state to school.
Such arrangements would" provide op
portunities for students to get the best
possible education without too great an
expense, either in their home state or out
of it.
Until such arrangements can be made,
if ever, the State Board of Higher Educa
tion seems to be doing its best to achieve
maximum benefits from attendance by
qualified out-of-state students without hav
ing to subdize those who make no con
tribution.
Footnote
At the University of Colorado the
school paper editor was fired for indiscre
tion in accepting political opinion columns
from contributors. In one column Senator
Goldwater was improbably labelled a mur
derer. This caused a lot of controversy, but
the editor kept his job. The final straw,
however, came when the same editor al
lowed the same columnist to submit an
other column of political opinion. In that
column the writer called President Eisen
hower an old futzer. The editor then re
ceived his well-deserved dismissal notice.
We on the Emerald are a pretty cau
tious bunch. If we want to call someone
an old futzer, we will pick on someone who
1) will never hear of it and 2) is generally
regarded as pretty bad anyway. Therefore,
our list of old futzers includes such “safe”
people as Atilla the Hun, Adolph Hitler,
Typhoid Mary, The Abominable Snowman,
Mao Tse-tung, and Charles DeGaulle. We
would put Khrushchev on the list too, but
it’s beginning to look like he’ll be our
friend pretty soon.
Letters to the Editor
I
Plausible Scheme?
Emerald Editor:
In view of the recent and con
tinuing attacks on fraternities
and sororities, it seems that
some plausible scheme should
be worked out which would in
crease the effectivness of this
anti-fraternal agitation. Instead
of students hopping on the
‘ bandwagon” as so many seem
to be doing, why not create an
organized and vicious group, a
sort of “Ban the Fraternities”
movement?
The membership of such a
group might be composed of
those few people who sincerely
feel that private organizations
grate against their personal con
victions, those who are bitter be
cause they were unable to join
a fraternity or sorority, would
be humanitarians, and those who
simply like to be involved in
controversial issues. Participa
tion in this movement would, of
course, allow no room for the
admission that fraternities pos
sess good or desirable qualities.
It could not be mentioned, for
example, that sorority grades
are generally higher than the all
women’s average or that frater
nity grades are generally high
er than the all men’s average. It
could not be admitted that fra
ternities play an important part
in teaching an individual how
to get along with others. It most
certainly could not be admitted
that fraternities have made vast
contributions to the growth of
the University of Oregon. The
fact that fraternities are private
organizations and anyone who
dislikes them need not become
a member would have to go un
me-ntioned.
Instead, the movement would
have to place more emphasis on
the problems of segregation and
if possible, force the violation
of the rights of any private
group to chouse its members us
ing any criteria it secs fit. At the
same time it would be advan
tageous to play up the issue of
hazing in fraternities, whether
oi not it serves a useful pur
pose, whether or not those ob
jecting sneak from personal ex
perience.
Finally, it might be helpful to
chcosc a slogan. Among those
suggested are “Revolution, not
Evolution” and “Liberty, Equal
ity, but no Fraternity.” Anyone
interested in joining such a
campaign should apply at the
Emerald office or contact Mollie
Mudd or Jane Jones at Maxie’s.
Bruce Kellogg
Junior in History
*% M
COAST A RTILU5R-Y
-
i
Letters to the Editor
Defense of Competition
Emerald Editor:
Campus Chest is annually set
up as the only charity drive
which is University approved.
This means that the students
art- asked to donate, only once
throughout the entire year, the
paltry average of 50c per per
son. The proceeds go to local,
statewide, and national agencies
which are dependent upon such
funds. With this purpose and
goal in mind, this drive is one
worthy of support from the en
tire campus.
Some gro'ios have indicated
a feeling of coersion and PR
seeking in this drive. They feel
that competition is wrong. May
I remind these individuals or
groups that we have, at present,
no welfare state. The only way
that these welfare agencies can
survive, then, is to receive con
tributions from such drives as
this. A second point is that the
agencies receiving our aid suf
fered a great shortage of funds
in 1962 Why? Because dona
tions were not sufficient. People
were not mailing or depositing
enough money to meet their
needs.
This brings me to the reason
for our Campus Chest Drive
(and for that matter, for any
other drive): to raise money to
help these worthy welfare agen
cies in attaining the funds nec
essary to fulfill their purposes.
Can this be too much to ask?
It is true that giving to these
agencies helps our “PR” with
the city of Eugene and the state
and looks good for large con
tributors on the campus. In the
light of fraternity difficulties
and this year’s Legislative ses
sion, we need all the help we
can get in building up our good
name. But, let’s stick to our pri
mary purposes. Any fraternity
or other campus group which
individually contributed to a
charity would be recognized as
having performed a worthwhile
service. Does this mean we must
look down on them as publicity
seekers? Could it not be that
they desired to help someone in
need, without another motive?
The competition of which
some are complaining docs help
to raise more money and this, in
itself, justifies its use. Further
more, it shows which groups on
this campus are most able to
take the initiative and to make
a sacrifice for someone less for
tunate. The competition will
show the highest contributors;
those who give little support to
this drive will be unmentioned.
It is only our hope that we may
be successful enough to be able
to mention every living organi
zation on the campus, not leav
ing any perhaps conspicuous by
their absence.
John Luvaas
Campus Chest
Promotions Chairman
Publicity Gimmick
Emerald Editor:
Once again the students of
the University ore being call' d
upon to contribute to campus
public relations with the citi
zens of Eugene. This year the
contributions requested are
montary in the form of a charity
drive, Campus Chest As a group
we feel that charity in itself is
a worthwhile means for men to
help their less fortunate fel
lows. We further believe that
charity is giving based on per
sonal initiative and a feeling of
responsibility to help someone
else. Charitable giving that is
not of free will, however, is not
really charitable at all. it is in
stead hypocrisy.
As a fraternal group we be
lieve the impetus given to the
Campus Chest drive has evolved
from a philosophy of giving in
order to get something in re
turn, not free will giving but
giving resulting from coercion,
embarrassment, and intimida
tion We feel the methods of the
Campus Chest committee violate
the spirit and meaning of chari
ty First, the publicity in the
Emerald of which groups have
and have not contributed is an
unnecessary form of embarrass
ment by publicity Secondly, a
large sign in public view in
front of the SU showing which
groups have given the most and
which have not met their quota
turns this charitable drive into
another publicity gimmick for
harrassing people into giving in
order to gain or preserve a
“good image.” It would be much
more sensible and in keeping
<Continued on pnqe 3)
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published
seven times in September and five days s
week during the School year, except dur
ing examination and vacation perk*!* by
the Student Publication* Board of the
University of Oregon. Entered a* second
class matter at the post offlct, Eugene,
Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per year;
%2< per term.
Opinion* expressed on the editorial page
ase those of The Emerald and do not pre
tend to represent the opinio is of the
ASUO or the University.
HON BUEL, Editor
MARTY K12TELS, Business Manager
TED MAH AH, Managing Editor
EVERETTE DENNIS, Nexa Editor
PHIL COGSWELL,
Editorial Page Kditoi
LARRY WILLIAM.1.,
Advertising Manage!
LARRY GRAVES, Sports Editor
DLIXY MORAN,
Assistant Managing Ed tor
DAVE SANDS, JIM KK \KE,
JANET GOETZ I ,
As»i«taut News Lditu .<*
GEORGE BIG1JAM, Phot Editor
LINDA BRC WN, Entertain* ent Editor
RON COWAN, CATHY NE 'ILLE,
THOKA WILLIAM!*.,
Associate Newr, Editoi *
EDITORIAL BOARD:
Ron I uel, Phil Cogswell, Ted Mahar
E ’erettc Dennis, Dav< Sand*
* 1 ulcy Moran, Linda Irown
Bob Forayth
Gra it Ledlkerwood. Dot- j Hagen
Jan-1 Gcctie, and T ill II itchi*on