Our Political Efforts
Like a Capon Entering a Henhouse
A student entering a political campaign
is like a capon entering a henhouse. He has
no chance of being effective, and he is naive
if he doesn’t realize that he is lacking the
crucial quality that will make him effec
tive. Down through the annals of capon
history, capons have learned to live with
their deficiency. One hardly ever sees a
capon strut into a henhouse these days with
anything but the most Platonic ambitions.
Our student political campaigns are fast
acquiring their own annals of history. In
1960 and 1962, our student leaders worked
with representatives of higher education
and went before the legislature to plead our
case. Both times they were met with polite
ness and understanding, but no help. Our
lobbyists stepped back, analyzed their fail
ures, and decided they would be more effec
tive if they could win “grass-root” support.
The referendum vote taught us that even
here we wrere doomed to failure. Yet, no
one seems to realize the reason for this fail
ure. In fact, incensed students are talking,
some jokingly and some seriously, of carry
ing on campaigns against anti-education leg
islators in the next elections.
Attorney General, Robert Y. Thornton,
has ruled that it is legal for students to join
a group like NSA or to carry on lobby ef
forts so long as we do not apply political
pressure to individual legislators. This is
mockery at its finest. We cannot apply poli
tical pressure because we don’t have any.
Most of us cannot vote; and like the capon,
the sooner we understand what our defi
ciency is, the sooner we will understand our
failures.
Why don’t we have the vote? Why not?—
it is in this context that the issue should be
raised. The burden of proof ought to be
placed with those who keep the eighteen
to twenty-one year old from the polls.
Voting is a right of a citizen. Being twen
ty-one is the only condition that must be sat
isfied to exercise this right. It is not based
on intelligence quotients, tax contributions
or who is to be influenced by electorate de
cisions. The age condition for voting is ar
birtrary—it is based on traditions followed
since the middle ages, not on any scientific
or philosophical reasoning.
Though twenty-one is usually accepted as
the age when we are expected to assume
full responsibility for our actions and show
maturity in our decisions, this is not in fact
how the law treats us. Long before age
twenty-one, we pay taxes, are obligated to
serve in the armed forces and may be pun
ished for criminal offenses.
The argument runs—and this is without
support of sociological or psychological
studies—that the average high school grad
uate, age eighteen, is not aware of issues,
he does not have the ability, developed with
experience, to make objective decisions.
This is a great fallacy. As a high school
graduate, the eighteen-year-old has just fin
ished a class in “American Problems” or
civics. He is aware of issues, of citizen res
ponsibility, of governmental organization.
The tragedy of the situation is that these
high school graduates cannot express their
interests. For those who do not go to col
lege, there is a vacuum of responsibile poli
tical activity. There are no organizations
where the principles taught in high school
can be exercised. These people must wait
three years before they can take part in
government and during that time apathy
replaces awareness of problems and issues.
Between high school and college, political
inactivity rather than interest becomes the
habit. This habit is too easily made, too
easily repeated in later years. For lack of
an opportunity to express it, political inter
est is lost.
Several states have an eighteen-year-old
voting age. Our own Gov. Hatfield has sup
ported, in years past, a lower voting age.
Just recently, Ed Elders. State Represen
tative from Eugene, praised the Young Re
publicans at the Western Republican Con
ference, saying that their activities showed
that a review of the voting age is in order.
We are missing a greater opportunity if
we don’t capitalize on this support. Our
Young Republicans and Young Democrats
ought to get together and support a peti
tion. as was done with NSA and the propo
sition against the House Committee on Un
American Activities, for an ASUO vote on
lowering the voting age in Oregon to eight
een. Then, with the access to power that
YR and YD have, and with the support
of the ASUO vote, we ought to go to the
people of Oregon on initiative.
Students from this campus made 20.000
visits in the Eugene-Springfield area in sup
port of a Yes-vote on the tax referendum.
On a $15 budget and with a five-member nu
cleus committee, we raised over $3,000 for
the Lane County United Appeal. In a short
time, we raised $13,500 to support the tax
program.
it can De aone. j. rrancyi nowaru suc
ceeded in getting enough petition signa
tures with only the support of his Albany
newspaper. We have access to thousands
of alumni; people come to us throughout
the year for football and basketball games,
for conventions aftd other campus and cul
tural entertainment. How easy it would be
for Oregon students to cover cities and
towns in the Willamette Valley. Going door
to door on a Friday night, we could distrib
ute pamphlets explaining the need for a re
duced voting age and then return Saturday
afternoon with petitions.
With intra-college organization during
the winter, we could bring an initiative vote
to the public in the Oregon primaries. True,
we would still be like the capon entering
the henhouse. But whereas the capon can
do nothing about his impotency, we would
at least be approaching our deficiency at its
cause.
Students Developing Slave Mentality
A “slpve mentality” is developing in stu
dents because too many Americans define
excellence solely in terms of academic and
vocational success, a Stanford University
educator warns.
Prof. Nevitt Sanford, director of the In
stitute for the Study of Human Problems,
says students are made to believe they
“must get good grades in school to get into
a good college where they must work hard
to go on to graduate school and success in
life.”
This, he says, is “turning husband against
wife, wife against husband and the children
against everybody.”
In the best colleges the demands on stu
dents haxe exceeded rational bounds, San
ford said. The amount of assigned reading
far exceeds' what anyone could do with in
telligence, he believes.
Recently, in a highly ranked university,
the 50 top freshmen were interviewed. Not
one had ever had a date, none was getting
any satisfaction from his relations with fel
low students, and some were suicidal.
—The Washington Post
Herblock
f ck,rr^
\
“And So’s My Old Man!”
Jitters To the Editor
Freedom of Speech
Emerald Editor:
In answer to the letter by Mr.
Donald McPherson, and the let
ters of others, I hope that they
haven’t been blinded by the
shining “brilliance" of their cru
sade to the extent that they fail
to consider one other angle.
Freedom of Speech, while one
of our country’s great attributes,
requires the same sportsmanlike
and mature conduct that sports,
business, and surely, politics to
day require. Perhaps Mr Mc
Pherson would cheer as an op
posing football player with a
broken neck was carried from
the field or boo and hiss ... or
hold up clever signs ... in a
public debate as the opposition
spoke their piece. I doubt he
would . . . but 1 don’t know
Yet this same good conduct
and maturity ceases to exist
when political leaders visit our
campus.
1 don’t suggest that we kneel
to their image or worship their
words, let alone agree with all
they say. They’re not gods . . .
nor “Messiahs ” They're merely
men . . . yet men who are try
ing to preserve our Freedom of
Speech, Mr. McPherson, no mat
ter what our views. Perhaps
they deserve a little respect.
There are things . . . and
political leaders ... I don’t like
either. There are things I would
use my Freedom of Speech to
speak out against. But I’m sure
that the way to win attention
and sympathy to my cause is not
to act like a ehlld, but to speak,
agree and oppose maturely, as
befitting a college student.
I would expect the majority
to agree.
i. Craig Mathiesen
Junior in Marketing
Athletic Controversy
Emerald Editor:
The current controversy and
discussion concerning a new
football stadium for the Univer
sity seems to show the distorted
values of this “academic com
munity.” What we should do is
forget about building a new
stadium, tear down Hayward
Field and ask every student and
alumnus to contribute five dol
lars to build a new and ade
quate library on the site.
Hayward Field would be a
perfect site for such a library
because it is centrally located,
near all the new university dor
mitories and married students
housing, and has adequate space
for a large parking lot so that
student will not get parking
tickets every time they have to
run up to the library to get a
book out of the reserve room.
Instead of hearing tirades
about the “value” of football to
this University, let’s hear a lit
tle bit about the value of edu
cation and research for a uni
versity, and instead of keeping
Hayward Field as a monument
to superficiality let's build a
new library there as a monu
ment, a living, vibrant monu
ment to education and knowl
edge.
Rill Devall
Graduate in Sociology
• • 0
Student Fees
Emerald Editor:
The editorial of October 14,
on the subject of the referral
by the faculty of the problem
of student fees to an ad hoc
committee, requires some an
swer. One of the points of the
editorial was that the faculty
was inconsistent in assigning re
sponsibility for student conduct
to students as well as faculty
while denying the same rights
in the matter of student fees.
I do not think the two cases
are parallel The faculty (to
gether with the President) is
specifically given jurisdiction
over matters of student conduct
and discipline The faculty is
thus in a position to legislate on
the matter. Our action has, so
far, resulted in a code and pro
cedures which place far greater
responsibility on students than
before. In my opinion, this is
an inevitable and praiseworthy
development.
On the other hand, the faculty
has been given no jurisdiction
whatsoever over the amount and
distribution of student fees This
matter Is in the hands of the
State Board of Higher Educa
tion. The effect of any faculty
resolution on this matter is
merely that of advise to the
President from his faculty. The
object of the motion was, and
continues to be, that of express
ing faculty views on the sub
ject. Student views need to be
expressed, vigorously, but di
rectly to the President and not
through the intermediary of a
faculty committee.
These comments notwith
standing, I should like to con
gratulate the Editor on the cali
ber of his editorials.
Clyde P. Patton
Acting Dean
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald fa publiahed
twice fn September anti five day* a *eek
during the academia year, Gtc&pit during ex
amination and vacation period# by the Stu
dent PabHeatibOi Boatd of the University of
Oregon. Entered a* aerond rlnaa matter at
the post office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscrip
tlon ratea 15 per year; 12 per term.
Opiniona expressed on the editorial page
are thoae of the Emerald and do not pre
tend to represent the opinion of the ASIJO
or the Univeraity.
EVF.RF.TTE DF.NNfS, Editor
LARRY WILLIAMS, ftustneaa Manager
JANET GOETZK, Munaging Editor
JIM SPEER, Advertiaing Manager
RON COWAN, New a Editor
DOUG RACEN, Editorial Page Editor