Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 15, 1981)
opinion_ Vote today — or hold your peace ASUO president: Wilkins best choice More than ever, the ASUO needs a president who will be a strong, effective advocate of student rights and issues. Even though the need is great, only four men — no women — are running. Tom Brannon, a self-proclaimed “average student,” is right when he says student govern ment is dominated by campus politicos, and would benefit from fresh ideas. Unfortunately Brannon has none. Donovan Guy and Bruce Mills have relatively little ASUO experience to boast of, so they have campaigned on an anti-Rich Wilkins platform. Wilkins, the fourth candidate, is supported by the same law school/Greek coalition that has been putting ASUO and IFC candidates into office — including this year's atrocious IFC — for the past few elections. The biggest difference between the can didates is proven experience. Wilkins has done a good job as ASUO vice president for state and university affairs, and his experience with the Legislature will prove invaluable. Any ground that he’s made with the Legislature will be lost if another candidate is elected. Wilkins probably would model his administra tion after that of current ASUO Pres. Dave Eaton. Eaton has managed the executive office effec tively, and Wilkins is his natural successor. With the law school and the Greeks endorsing Wilkins, his victory seems likely. We, too, endorse Wilkins. His fairness and knowledge of the ASUO and the University make him best qualified to respond io the concerns voiced by students. No dearth of good IFC candidates Next year’s Incidental Fee Committee is going to be one helluva lot better than this year’s com mittee. This year’s committee was at times rude, unprepared, irresponsible and arbitrary. At no time did the committee show the maturity neces sary of a group that handles $2.5 million. Luckily, plenty of competent candidates have entered the field to ensure improvement on next year’s committee. Kathleen “Katcha” Phinney, an intelligent and energetic sophomore, is concerned with the welfare of student programs. She wants more cooperation between the ASUO and IFC, and would make a fine committee member. Xavier Romano would bring a unique per spective to the committee along with his dedica tion and desire. Romano, a Latin Jew who is in the Chi Psi fraternity, has done his^ homework on all ASUO programs, not just the Third World pro grams he’s been involved with. Alan Contreras sen/ed on the committee in 1979-80, and would give next year’s group added experience. Unfortunately, Contreras enjoys the political games that have helped ruin the IFC this year. Still, his track record is excellent. Second-year law student Karsten Rasmussen isn’t familiar with individual ASUO programs, but is determined to make IFC hearings forthright. Rasmussen correctly states that programs “got the shaft” because the IFC was not candid this year. His experience on the EMU Board has given him suitable budgetary experience. David Gibson has also done his homework on ASUO programs. He’s concerned with addressing the needs of the programs and not being rude. This year’s committee didn’t take the time to do their jobs right, he says. Ken Packman has been on the wrong side of the IFC this year — as a member of the Food-Op. He’s seen what a dishonest and adversarial com mittee can do, and would add social conscience to the committee. Law student Steve Baldwin has worked for OSPIRG, and echoes Packman’s disregard for this year’s committee. Baldwin, who has a mas ter’s degree in philosophy, wants to instill some accountability to the committee. Pam Jordan and Cathi Balone would make adequate committee members, but neither are as enthusiastic as the top seven candidates. Jordan filed for the post, withdrew, then withdrew her withdrawal. Balone, a law student, doesn’t seem to be familiar with the committee. The other two candidates, Jonathan Bern stein and John Miche, both have ideas about the issues, but neither knows enough about the IFC or the ASUO programs. We urge you to vote for Phinney, Romano, Contreras, Rasmussen, Gibson, Packman and Baldwin. Gus Palmitessa, the running mate of pre sidential candidate Rich Wilkins, has apparently lined up an entire Greek/law school “ticket.” It looks like nothing more than an endorsement of their seven favored candidates. Regardless of who’s “on” the ticket, it’s important to judge the candidates individually. vars Join marchers A month before his March 1980 assas sination, El Salvador’s Archbishop Oscar Romero asked that the U.S. government prohibit military aid to his country. He asked also that our government not in tervene with military, economic or di plomatic pressure. Intervention by the U.S. government, the archbishop said, would “undoubtedly aggravate the re pression and injustice against the or ganized people who have been strug gling for their fundamental human rights.” News reports tell us Romero was right. The April 18th Coalition is outraged by U.S. government’s intervention in El Sal vador — that’s why we are taking to Eugene’s streets on Saturday, April 21. We want to publicly demonstrate our resistance to policies which cut pro grams for poor and working people at home and divert resources to repressive governments abroad. We re asking people to join us in Sa turday’s march, which departs from 13th and Kincaid at noon. A 1 p.m. rally at the 11th and Willamette parking lot will fea ture speakers Ricardo Melara, of El Sal vador; Congressman Jim Weaver; Susan Morales, American Indian Movement; Sue Gordon, Oregon Church Women United; Gene Bailey, International Long shoreman Workers' Union, and Marion Malcolm, Clergy and Laity Concerned We are planning an evening cultural event and potluck at the Emerald Baptist Church. The April 18th Coalition is a broad based organization of more than 90 local groups and individuals We have banded together to oppose U.S. internvention in Dano i Qortinn A El Salvador, and to support the right of the Salvadoran people to self-determin ation. Please join us on Saturday. Kell Osborn and co-signers Courts unjust The recent “Martin vs Rostker" deci sion concerning draft registration goes to show our courts will trample on the Constitution, if doing so will further the interests of Federal power even at the expense of the civil rights of U S. ci tizens. “Liberty Lobby,” a grass-roots con servative organization, opposes the draft and forced registration. They brought the suit to court challenging the consti tutionality of ex-President Carter’s regis tration plan which forces 18-20 year olds to register for any future draft. The or ganization contends the current law violates the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment by singling out only a particular segment of our population who happen to be a certain age. Strangely enough, U S. District judge Thomas A Flannery actually sided with those against the law, but only in princi ple Unfortunately, he upheld current registration guidelines declaring them in government’s “legitimate governmental interest.” So much for the Constitution. It seems in the government’s interests to ignore it. Allowing government the power to exercise ownership over certain citizens of a particular age is a dangerous precendent to establish if you cherish living in a free country. What will the future be like if Americans sit back and allow their Constitutional rights to con tinue eroding away in favor of “governmental interests”? Aggressive foreign nations may pose a danger but the greatest current threat to democracy is a strong, centralized government. Madison and Jefferson realized this 200 years ago — lets not forget it now. Michael Cross Junior, political science Emotionally blinded James D. Miller’s editorial (4-8, “Love It or Leave It) is a good example of what happens when you write an editorial in an emotional frame of mind without any regard to the logic of what you are say ing. In the initial paragraph he implies that anyone that opposes forced military conscription is a “commie sissy.” Ob viously he also feels this is an accurate description of President Reagan's ad ministration which has taken a position against forced military service. Miller goes on to say that those who evaded the totalitarian-like practice of coerced servitude in the military service by skipping to Canada were “cowards" and "had no right to return,” even after they were pardoned by Mr Ford for their so-called "crime." These citizens did not desert because of fear but, rather, because they were courageous enough to stand behind their own convictions and refused to participate in a war for which they saw no cause. Mr. Miller then further shows how his emotions have successfully blinded his power to reason by making the glaring generalization that these draft evaders "are the same people who stand and watch someone beaten to death and are too afraid to stop it.” Miller’s call for getting 100 percent behind the government and his chast isement of Isenberg for making his com plaints public is typical of the American who puts blind faith in his or her some times inept leaders, and who fails to understand the nature of a democracy and the active role that dissent has in continually bettering the country in which we all happen to live. Looking at the thrust of Mr. Miller’s statement, perhaps he should make a career out of serving his country; he seems to be one of the few, the proud, and the ignorant that the Marines are looking for. Steve Thompson 2060 Alder Street letters policy The Emerald will accept and at tempt to print all letters containing fair comment on issues, ideas and topics of interest to the University community. Letters must be limited to 250 words. Each letter must be signed and the author’s field of study or faculty or staff status noted. Each should be dated, and must also include the address and phone number of the author for verification prior to publication. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length, style or content. Publication of letters is dependent upon available space and can not be guaranteed
