editorial
Jeff Warren for
ASUO president
In what may be the best field of candidates in recent
years for the ASUO Presidency, Jeff Warren emerges as
the best of the lot. He has served for a year on both the
Incidental Fee Committee (IFC) and the Student University
Affairs Board and has experience in lobbying at the state
legislature. Warren would increase the amount of activity
coming from the ASUO Executive, as exhibited by his
promises to speak at the University Senate on issues
important to students and by his desire to be sure faculty
members sympathetic to the student viewpoint attend the
General Assembly meetings.
Of all the candidates, Warren has the best ideas of
exactly what he will do in office. He will fight for releasing
faculty evaluations and is considering going to professors
to have evaluations released on an individual basis. War
ren is also committed to more Executive contact with the
EMU Board and taking the football games off the athletic
passes sold to students.
All in all, Jeff Warren is the top man for the job.
Fellow IFC member Doug Benson and MEChA Direc
tor Ramon Herrera rate right behind Warren. Benson, in
particular, has shown independent thinking even in the
face of losing support from his fraternity, and is now
swayed by special interests. He does have experience in
both the EMU Board and the IFC, and seems very comfort
able with the prospects of filling Gary Feldman's shoes.
Benson wishes to hold a student convention at the
beginning of each school year to help determine what
issues the students feel are important. While the idea is
good, its practicality is questionable. Benson hopes to
attract up to 2,000 students to the convention, which, when
looking at the low interest in ASUO politics, seems too
far-reaching. Benson has not exhibited strong enough ex
perience in legislative issues and lobbying, and shares
Feldman’s view that the ASUO President does not have
much power, which could lead to another quiet year in the
ASUO Executive.
Herrera exhibits much enthusiasm and has some
good ideas, including establishing student peer counseling
and exploring the ideas of the University contributing some
money to the EMU. Herrera would also hold press confer
ences as a way to increase the office’s power and influ
ence. But besides these, Herrera is weak.
His major drawback is the fact he's only been on
campus since September and does not seem to have a
good grasp on how the ASUO operates. He does not
intend to use all the money allocated by the IFC to the
ASUO Executive, even though the amount is significantly
lower than what Feldman had to work with. Herrera also
intends to do much lobbying himself instead of working
with the Oregon Student Lobby, which could lead to the two
groups stepping on each other’s toes and decreasing the
overall effectiveness.
The final two candidates, Jim Dowhower and Mike
Lockwood, are both poor choices. While Dowhower’s re
venue generating co-ops may be a good idea, it is unlikely
he will be able to get them going well enough in his one
year term to convince his successor to keep it going
Whether the co-ops will, indeed, get off the ground is
questionable, since Dowhower isn’t even sure where the
money will come from initially.
He also has overestimated his involvement with the
OSL’s lobbying effort at the last session of the legislature.
Dowhower’s overall knowledge of the ASUO appears to be
minimal, and a one-issue candidate is a poor choice.
Lockwood seems to favor a subversive administra
tion, especially in relation to faculty evaluations. He would
survey students, asking them to write the names of the two
professors they think do the worst job teaching. Lockwood
would then compile a “blacklist” of these names and pres
ent it to University Pres. William Boyd, requesting him to
move these faculty members to administrative positions.
That’s a little too low for us to stomach.
Another of Lockwood’s ideas is to encourage students
to take a lower course load one term to lower the
University’s full-time equivalency (FTE) figure, so the Uni
versity would get less money from the legislature. Lock
wood says this would “hurt” the University, and that he
would use the ploy as a tool to get something from the
administration. That also strikes us as an action beneath
the office of the ASUO President. And the legislature funds
the University for a two-year period, so one term of
shenanigans will not affect the figure as greatly as Lock
wood would like.
Lockwood also has little experience with the ASUO
and knows even less about the state legislature.
Jeff Warren is the number one choice for ASUO Pres
ident.
V.
WIHNOH
SEWJNGU]
...OFDSRUM>,1R0R
kmes.wk BaoteiMSs
MOTE*
iivm
mt
HQUXiWZ
Letters
For Lockwood
To be president of the ASUO
* one must be an industrious in
novative person who is willing to
accept the responsibilities that
accompany the position. I feel
Mike Lockwood has these qual
ities and more. Mike is a conscien
tious worker who advocates the
following: Higher quality educa
tion; program expansion (with
out incidental fee raises); im
proved parking; effective and ad
vantageous use of our lobbyists in
the state legislature; favorable re
sults from bargaining with the Uni
versity administration. I highly re
commend that you employ your
vote in support of MIKE LOCK
WOOD.
Amy Tobias
Sophomore, History-Political
Science
For Warren
This week University students
have the opportunity to vote for
our next ASUO President. In order
to make an intelligent decision, a
voter must consider each
candidate's abilities and experi
ence in two important areas: stu
dent government and the Oregon
Legislature. It is imperative that
the 1978-79 ASUO President can
effectively represent student in
terests in both these areas. Jeff
Warren is the one candidate who
can undoubtedly do the job.
Warren has been active in stu
dent government during the past
two years at the University. He
was a member of the Student Uni
versity Affairs Board during the
1976-77 academic year. Since
May of last year, Warren has held
a position on the Incidental Fee
Committee. As a fellow IFC
member, I can attest to Jeff’s abil
ity in evaluating programs fairly,
and cutting through the inevitable
budgetary fat. Oftentimes
throughout the year Warren has
provided the committee with a u
nique and valuable insight into the
functions of various program^. He
thoroughly understands the oper
ation of the student government
and the entire University.
Warren is also knowledgeable
about Oregon’s legislative pro
cess. He has a good working rela
tionship with the leaders of the
Oregon Student Lobby, the or
ganization he worked for as a lob
byist in the 1977 Legislature. This
point is of significance considering
that the OSL is the state’s
strongest lobbying body dealing
with student issues. With Jeff
Warren as ASUO President, stu
dents can expect to have strong
leadership on key legislative is
sues.
I urge students to compare the
five presidential candidates on the
basis of qualifications for office.
Jeff Warren is eminently qualified
to be our next ASUO President.
He possesses the necessary ex
perience, intelligence and ability
to be an effective advocate for
students.
Ted Walker
Senior, Political Science
Not for Dowhower
Jim Dowhower, in his campaign
literature, is circulating a set of de
liberately misleading statements
regarding his qualifications to be
ASUO President. Because of my
personal knowledge of the facts, I
feel compelled to set the record
straight.
oomrary 10 uie impicMiun
created by his statement that he
has “worked with the previous
three ASUO Presidents,” Mr. Dow
hower has in fact worked for the
ASUO a total of only about four
months, part of the time as a vol
unteer and part erf the time on the
paid staff of ASUO State Affairs,
under my supervision. Of the two
— not three — ASUO Presidents
with whom he worked, neither
was in office at the time.
Regarding his claim that he
“published" a legislative newslet
ter for the ASUO, you should know
that he did no more than to ar
range for the printing of articles
that were written by others.
Of all the misleading state
ments circulated by Mr. Dow
hower, the worst distortion of the
facts is his implication that his per
sonal lobbying efforts were a
major cause of the Oregon Stu
dent Lobby’s success at the 1977
Legislature.
In response to this more arro
gant assertion, some facts must be
brought out. Direct lobbying was
not a major part of Mr.
Dowhower’s efforts for the ASUO.
His testimony before a legislative
committee was limited to a single
appearance, this on a bill that did
not pass. The few times he even
went up to Salem last year were
primarily for the purpose of deliv
ering — not to contact legislators.
This slim record of involvement
scarcely entitles Mr. Dowhower to
take credit for the success of a
legislative program. Many per
sons on this and other campuses
put much more time and talent into
lobbying efforts than did Mr.
Dowhower.
Finally, to finish setting the re
cord straight: Mr. Dowhower didn't
even write many of the statements
published in his pamphlets. The
statements on tuition policy are
substantially copied directly out of
position statements written by the
Oregon Student Lobby. This
plagiarism violates one of the fun
damental principles in an
academic community — that of
giving due credit for statements
that are “borrowed” from other
sources.
It is sad that some candidates
abuse and distort facts in their
zeal to get elected. I am sorry and
disappointed that Mr. Dowhower
has chosen this tactic.
Mark Cog an
Senior, Political Science
1976-77 ASUO Vice-president
for State Affairs
Pave paradise?
In Mike Lockwood’s letter of
Tuesday the 25th, he demon
strates that he is not qualified to be
ASUO President. He demon
strates this through his desire to
“Pave paradise, and put up a park
ing lot.” While the athletic fields on
18th may not be paradise they are
not “rarely-used” as Mike sug
gests. These fields are used by
students for recreation. Softball,
flag football, soccer, and kiteflying
are a few of the activities which
take place on these fields.
Another mistake Mike makes is
that he does not seem to consider
the effect of increased parking at
the University. We are living in a
time when we must consider all
the aspects of a problem before
proposing a solution. It does not
make sense to encourage people
to add to air pollution, burn up our
limited resources, add to noise
pollution, and increase traffic
problems. This is what providing
more parking space does. If peo
ple are tired of the hassles in
volved in driving to school, the ob
vious solution is to walk, ride the
bus, carpool, or ride a bicycle.
We have not heard the ideas of
the other candidates yet, but Mike
Lockwood demonstrated with his
ideas on the parking problem that
he is not capable of fulfilling the
office of ASUO President.
Hey Mike Lockwood,
Put away that automobile,
Let’s not destroy
All of our nice open fields.
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got
till its gone
Ya pave paradise,
Put up a parking lot.
Gordon Mallon
Junior, Philosophy
and Gary Lewis
Senior, Linguistics