Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Dec. 3, 1981)
opinion Higher ed dra ws another bad hand The Legislature and Atiyeh have overlooked the economic impact to the cities with colleges and univer sities. Those institutions generate jobs and millions of dollars for the economy of the cities. Loss of that economic capability can kill a city. But who loses in the shuffle of the budget cards? Oregon students — as per usual. Students’ concerns for strong educational institu tions have long echoed the concerns of education ad ministrators, and yet, the legislators are deaf to the realities students and administrators address. Students who graduate from the University in the next two years will emerge battle-weary, and not a little cynical. They have seen too many programs and entire schools closed because of the legislature. This is, of course, if the University gates aren’t chained shut before June. What is baffling is the state’s reluctance to institute wholesale measures to increase depleted revenues. It’s an arsy-turvy kind of legislature that will not increase revenue sources when needed, but will over and over again cut the budgets of its own agencies. Does that spell suicide? There are so many voices railing against this round of cuts — and those voices aren’t being recognized in Salem. Short of storming the statehouse, Atiyeh and the Legislature must be made to reevaluate their goals for Oregon. Perhaps it is time to toss the rascals out. Meanwhile, Oregon students shouldn’t stand pat with the aces and eights they’ve been dealt. It's advisable to fold; there are better “card games” in other states. The cards dealt Oregon higher education by Gov. Vic Atiyeh and the Legislature in this latest budget fiasco are aces and eights. That’s a “Deadman's hand” and an ap propriate analogy for the plight of Oregon’s educational system. The State Board of Higher Education met Tuesday and easily endorsed Chancellor Roy Lieuallen’s four point package of budget cuts. The four-point package en tails an additional $8 million in cuts from institution budgets, the rescinding of a salary increase for state system employees scheduled for 1982-83, the elimination of about 425 academic members and 85-90 classified staff, and nearly 5,000 students eliminated from the state system. The state system has been again unduly assessed an untenable reduction in funding. Atiyeh and the Legislature, by placing higher education among other state agencies and demanding budget reductions across the-board, are making education inaccessible for the peo ple of Oregon. There is a point of no return in cutting budgets. The Emerald sees the previous round of budget cuts as the last possible without bankrupting education. These latest cuts go beyond the bounds, and Oregon higher education will never rebound from these devastating cuts for years -- perhaps decades -- to come. The Legislature and Atiyeh have overlooked the economic impact to the cities with colleges and univer sities. Those institutions generate jobs and millions of dollars for the economy of the cities. Loss of that economic capability can kill a city. But who loses in the shuffle of the budget cards? Oregon students — as per usual. Students’ concerns for strong educational institu tions have long echoed the concerns of education ad ministrators, and yet, the legislators are deaf to the realities students and administrators address. Students who graduate from the University in the next two years will emerge battle-weary, and not a little cynical. They have seen too many programs and entire schools closed because of the legislature. This is, of course, if the University gates aren’t chained shut before June. What is baffling is the state’s reluctance to institute wholesale measures to increase depleted revenues. It’s an arsy-turvy kind of legislature that will not increase revenue sources when needed, but will over and over again cut the budgets of its own agencies. There are so many voices railing against this round of cuts — and those voices aren’t being recognized in Salem. Short of storming the statehouse, Atiyeh and the Legislature must be made to reevaluate their goals for Oregon. Perhaps it is time to toss the rascals out. Meanwhile, Oregon students shouldn’t stand pat with the aces and eights they’ve been dealt. It’s advisable to fold; there are better “card games” in other states. letters Disarmament Before we take President Reagan's nuclear disarma ment proposals too seriously, perhaps there are a few basic facts we should keep in mind. Let’s not forget who scrapped SALT II. Let’s not forget who was and still is bent on deploying the MX missle system. Let's not forget who ordered the stock piling of the neutron bomb. Let's not forget who has publicly condoned the possibility of a “limited” nuclear exchange. And lastly, let’s not forget who proposed the deployment of the Pershing cruise missile in Western Europe in the first place. Now say, for example, that we were in Reagan’s shoes, and had all these statements (not to mention a million people marching in the street of Europe) under our belts, wouldn’t we try to brush up a little bit on our public relations? Sure we would. In fact, we might even call in the foreign journalists, go on television to do it; just like Reagan did on the morning of Nov. 18th. Face it folks, Reagan is not serious about arms control. His appearance Nov. 18 was just a last ditch attempt to improve his rapidly deteriorating im age abroad. Why else would half the disarma ment groups in Western Europe be laughing it off as a joke? Christian Gunther Junior, sociology Rude Show I enjoyed my first light show presentation on Thursday night when I at tended the Laserock 2 con cert. I would have enjoyed it more but I was unfor tunate enough to sit behind two groups of ill-mannered louts who were sitting in the second row of the mid dle section of seats. Ex pressions of enjoyment would have been fine but such was not their typical behavior. One pair evidently con sidered themselves self appointed critics and repeatedly made loud smart aleck remarks and snide cracks. When I quiet ly asked them to refrain so I could enjoy the show, one responded with his glands instead of his microce phalic brain and threatened to “punch me out.” I then went for an usher but at the usher’s inquiry, they lied and said they had not open ed their mouths. The other group beside them evidently thought they were at home wat ching TV During the quieter, more subtle parts of the music/light show, they indulged in idle chit chat, as though these parts of the show were like the commercials on TV which everyone ignores. Or perhaps they thought they were in their favorite bar and the show was just background music for idle conversation. I would suggest that such rude, inconsiderate slobs stay away from such events if they can’t behave decently. Or, if they find the show not to their taste, leave quietly so that those of us who want to enjoy it without such ill-mannered disruptions, can do so. Ruth Alsworth Senior, CSPA/Psychology Law library use A December 1 article in the Emerald identified the School of Law Library as a study area for general use. This is clearly erroneous, as demonstrated by the regulations posted at the law library entrance. The posted notice provides that: “The Law Library is not available for use as a general study hall Persons not affiliated with the School of Law are welcome to use the facility. Space is insufficient, however, to allow use beyond these limited purposes." There are compelling reasons for this regulation Law Library space is limited: the library has only 264 seats to accomodate more than 500 law students. Use of the library as a non-law general study area thus interferes with the legitimate use of the facility by those in need of the library's special resources. Because of the special resources available in the Law Library, law students are required to pay an annual resource fee of $400. This burden is not shared by non-law students. This extraor dinary cost to law students justifies their exclusive use of the Law Library. Use of Law School facilities by non-law students creates particular problems at this time of year. The Law School operates on a semester system, with final exams running from Dec. 7 through 18. Exams are ad ministered in the library as well as in classrooms. For this reason, the Law School building is closed to non-law students during exams. For these reasons, we would appreciate it if the Emerald would correct any misconceptions created by its initial article, and urge University-wide coopera tion in respecting the rules governing non-law student use of our facilities. Seri Wilpone and Allison Blakiey Students, School of Law
