-editorial
OIC decision
a narrow view
While the persistent crusade against South African investments
now wandering the state's academic and political corridors of power is
not without a cause, it is almost certainly without effect.
A June 21 decision by the Oregon Investment Council (OIC) has
demonstrated that unhappy conclusion once again.
Accepting a narrow interpretation of recent legal opinions by Attor
ney General Jim Redden, the council decided to ignore a revest by the
Oregon Board of Higher Education that its stock portfolio be purged of
investments in firms conducting substantial business in South Africa.
To be sure, this latest skirmish in the economic battle for justice
abroad reflects the willingness of financial ‘technocrats" to brush aside
moral considerations in favor of a disturbing assiduity for detecting legal
loopholes that protect their professional flexibility. But it also suggests a
lack of focus and poor choice of battlegrounds by divestment advo
cates.
The Emerald has deep sympathy with those who oppose the
vicious anachronism of apartheid pursued by the racist South African
regime. In the past we have argued —with almost redundant regularity
— for all manner of struggle against the internal policies of the white
supremacist Prime Minister John Vorster. Those tactics rightfully in
clude economic pressure such as the stock-divestiture appeal.
An examination of present Oregon law, however, indicates that
while a different interpretation of Redden’s opinions could permit di
vestment in South Africa's case, it would almost certainly predude a
general application of the divestiture gambit against human-rights viola
tions throughout the world.
This perplexing and apparently contradictory situation comes
about as follows:
• The OIC investment counselors are obligated by state law to use
public funds in such a way as to make them “as productive as possible"
monetarily. Loss or lessened profitability of invested revenue amounts
to a legal falure by investors. In the words of the attorney general’s
opinion: “Persons responsible for investment of trust funds must con
sider both safety of the investment and probable return. Other consid
erations, such as political or moral judgments, should not deflect in
vestment managers from their legal duty.”
• The broader the proscription — the larger the number of
“tainted” firms and/or countries —the greater the certainty of an illegally
limiting practice. Redden argues “While we are satisfied that divestiture
of all investments in most of the world’s business community would
violate the rule (of prudent profitability), it is possible that minimal
divestiture might not.”
Thus, while the scores of American firms operating in one country
(South Africa) might be eliminated as Oregon investments, each wider
application of the tactic increases the likelihood of a violation erf state
law, in Redden s view.
But the work! is rife with cases of human degradation caused or
worsened through the byzarrtine intertwining of international finance.
And reformers, such as the divestiture proponents, who want to link
economic deciskjn-matong with social justice, should not stop \Mth just
South Africa. Can we say the largely unremunerated sweat wrung from
a black man's brow in a South African mine is morally different than that
of a Korean assembling Japanese electronics or a Brazilian building a
German automobile?
But enough of theory and more of Oregon's problem.
One flaw in Reddens reasoning might be the somewhat facile
equation of more investment choices with greater potential for profitabil
ity — a view point that the OIC readily seized upon. Surely, socially
benign and even benevolent investment subjects that are also profita
ble must remain after the rotters are weeded out. Aren’t we, after all,
talking about the quality of investment and not mere quantity?
This argument might well be picked up by those proponents of
divestiture who are considering a legal challenge to the OIC decision.
However, it is not the only, or even necessarily the best, option available
to the economic warriors for human rights.
A more promising course of action for divestiture backers lies in
that suggested by Roy Lieuallen. chancellor of the State System of
Higher Education, following the OIC’s most recent decision: Change the
law unambiguously.
Supporters of divestiture and related economic tactics should
move the battleground from the narrow methodology of the courts into
the legislature where the statutory values are determined that fuel the
machinery of the law.
There, in an environment steeped in the admittedly uncertain am
bience of the democratic electoral process, lies the arena where the
divestiture proponents can bring their political pressure to bear. One
presumes that Chancellor Lieuallen and the State Board of Higher
Education, which recommended divestiture, would be in the vanguard
of such an effort in the 1978 legislation.
Precedents exist for believing in a successful battle Redden cites a
recent Wisconsin attorney general's opinion that agreed with the state
university s divestiture of South Africa-affiliated stocks. The decision
relied on a Wisconsin statute that prohibits investment in firms that
practice or condone discriminatory policies.
But an Oregon law could pass beyond this purely negatory re
quirement to incorporate a mandatory policy that evaluates economic
potential of businesses along their demonstrated social benefits. Purely
local or regional companies, firms entenng the promising alternative
energy market, or well-run businesses operated by and or for minority
groups exist that would provide a satisfactory return for the state's
investment dollar
But however the guidelines are drawn, the current investment
policy of maximum profit regardless of the human consequences must
end.
Letters
Student hopping on one leg
The fact that a few persons in the Sociology
Department have squelched several opportunities
for an exciting continued study of the discipline an
gers me.
As an undergraduate in the department I am left
with the prospect of standing, or rather hopping
around on one leg trying to catch one of the fine
people in the department, obviously missing those
potential teachers “blacklisted’’ during the hiring pro
cess, while fervently hoping to avoid any of the “gang
of nine,” whose dose-mindedness and disregard for
academic freedom would undoubtedly extend to
their philosophies and methods of teaching.
This is depressing, and we undergraduates
must play a passive role in the life of the department.
The gang, in their game of politics, has treated stu
dents like a sea of non-entities. But we are not pup
pets and our involvement in choices of classes and
quality of teaching should amount to much more than
running to the course guide to see what is offered.
I offer my support to those trying to maintain a
democratic and dynamic department.
Sonja Lucky
Freshman, Sociology
AMP 7f»T5 W0TAU.
^txw of cmse&ueuJ
srmv it iu w stu>.
m,
HfA'W fie>a
t/ai
seme
Meu
HOOK&P
ou „
tie&oiu?
twice dm &
yv Khioio uin/\f
ir nm ne? } >
MKfi Me im/r
W Mv m***** 5WKWW, nn
VKlUs
UO no place for evangelism
Reference is made to the article in the daily
Emerald. 27 April 1978, p. 1, “Football evangelist
asks for true faith in the Word.”
This article is offensive to students, faculty, and
university staff who are not Christian. Mr. (Rev?)
Skinner is oblivious of moral values of other religions,
many much older than Christianity and followed by a
large population in many areas.
I freely give my time to tutor two graduate stu
dents in English. Last week we had the word “mos
que in a travel article. This triggered a comment
from a Saudi student that he and others had rented
an apartment for a mosque, to follow their religious
beliefs. His government sent him to UOtoget a Ph D.
in physics. Does this Daily Emerald article make him
feel welcome?
Religious evangelism (of any kind) has no place
at a public institution such as the University.
Mr. (Rev?) Skinner’s remarks are not newsworthy
but simplistic. The Daily Emerald staff should have
used more discretion in featuring this evangelistic
message by Mr. (Rev?) Skinner, it could have been
handled as a short news story with off-campus ad
dresses arranged by Mr. (Rev?) Skinner's hosts, the
local chapter of Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Helene Johnston
Sr. Citizen, non-matric
UC Berkeley, BA ’45
Spend it on solar power
Consider the jobs created when Trojan was
built. Highly skilled technicians, paid high salaries,
operate the plant. Dunng the budding period a rela
tively small number of skilled tradesmen were em
ployed to do the construction. The money spent was
concentrated in a few hands, the number of jobs
created was small, the power generated is expen
sive.
Suppose the same amount of money had been
spent on solar retrofitting of Oregonians' homes and
for additional insulation. The insulation industry
would have been stimulated A large number of ade
quately paying jobs would have been created in the
home construction industry. The employment would
have been spread evenly over the state. The power
generated would have come from easy maintenance
units and would have been cheap, dean, and inex
haust able.
Leaving the question of danger aside, nudear
power is dirty, expensive, and creates unemploy
ment.
Donald Condliffe
110 W. 30 Ave.