opinion_
Committee looks into
student-athlete
The Emerald supports the decision of the University Senate
to .set up a committee to investigate prohibiting first-year
students from athletic competition at the varsity level.
Right now the answer to the question of whether first-year
students should or should not compete isn't really clear cut.
We are cautious in this matter because there is a movement
afoot recommending to the National Collegiate Athletic Associa
tion that they lift the eligibilty of first-year students. There are as
many reasons to lift eligibility as there are to leave the rules as
they now exist. The more universities and colleges that ban com
petition by first-year students the greater is the pressure on the
NCAA to do the same nationally.
The question of the first-year student-athlete, and eligibility
for varsity competition, was first broached at the University of
California at Los Angeles in the spring. At that time UCLA's
Legislative Assembly adopted (without dissent) a resolution pro
posing to the NCAA that "only those students who have com
pleted at least 24 semester units or 36 quarter units of academic
credit are eligible for varsity competition in football." They also
resolved that "students who compete in football shall complete
their four seasons of competition within five years."
UCLA was seeking to strengthen their academic standards.
They viewed the current NCAA academic eligibility rules as do
ing little to ensure athletes gained full benefit of the university.
UCLA also deplored the minimum progress rule, saying it could
be "satisfied by a mish-mash of 'Mickey Mouse' courses."
While the point that a student, or student-athlete, is primari
ly at a university to succeed in an education, is beyond argument
— the UCLA resolution ignores the fact that collegiate athletics
is big business for universities. Exploiting first-year students in
competition at the expense of their education is a problem in
the system itself, not the individual athletes.
We hope the University Senate Committee investigating the
issue can provide more information to resolve the question. It's
easier to penalize the first-year athletes by prohibiting them
from competition — it's much more difficult to revamp the
whole system of collegiate athletics so that the business side
doesn't supersede a student's opportunity for an education.
C'mon out.. .just
for the heck of it
Today's University convocation is more than just an after
noon off — more than a chance to see your favorite and least
favorite professors parading around the Memorial Quadrangle
in the oddest of ceremonial garb.
The convocation is a time to prepare for the rigors of the
year ahead by putting things in perspective. Though — to put
things in perspective — not a few students will wisely spend the
free time reading and studying. Then again, not a few more
students will take the afternoon off to catch up on their sleep.
But, still more students, and more than a scurrilous few, will
take the suspension of afternoon classes as a time to test their
limits of endurance at any number of campus-area saloons.
For those not attending, the Emerald will attend and hear
Peter Pouncey, the newly named president of Amherst College,
speak on "Humanistic Imperatives in a Technological Society.”
Pouncey's topic kicks off an afternoon of seminars on topics
dear to those who wish to master a world of silicon chips, E
prongs and diodes (the devil you say).
While most students are away from classes doing heaven
knows-what, some interesting seminars on the technology
theme are to be held. The seminar titles have that rousing
techno-speak accent to them. The seminars range from "Robots
and Czech Literature," "Wilderness and Technology," to "The
Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility" and "Convivial
Technology for the Global Village."
It's ironic that the ceremonies, scheduled to be held in the
quadrangle in front of the library, will be moved to MacArthur
Court in the event of rain. There are some things this
technological age may never master.
'TOW'S WHAT WE GOUU> DO-O-IKKTHEIR BtOODY KEEL F* STEROIDS!'
letters
Not involved
I would like to make some
remarks concerning the lead
story, “Students Challenge
OSPIRG's Funding" (Emerald,
Sept. 28).
The first paragraph stated that
the present funding challenge
against OSPIRG "...strongly
resembles recent efforts by the
College Republicans, the group
that used "less than ethical" tac
tics in the 1972 presidential
campaign..."
First, the College Republicans at
the University are not, nor have
ever been, involved in any action
against OSPIRG or any other
PIRG. In fact immediate post cam
pus chairman, David Ridenour, is
presently an OSPIRG campus
board-member, duly elected to
that office in last spring's election.
Second, with regards to being
"less than ethical" in 1972, your
article strayed from both accuracy
and relevance. The insinuation
that the UOCR club has ever acted
in a "less than ethical" manner is
both insulting and false. The pre
sent UOCR club was founded in
1981 and registered with the EMU
in 1982. It has absolutely no rela
tionship or link with any of the
past in either membership,
charter or registration. During the
late '70's, to our knowledge, there
were no CR clubs on campus.
Moreover, our club is completely
new and independent. It has
never broken any code, ordinance
or law of this city, this state, or this
campus. Whatever you may feel
about our policies and our posi
tions, we have been fully ethical.
Finally, though not a journalism
or English student, I am at a com
plete toss as a reader to find the
pertinence of an election 11 years
ago and my club at present. At the
time of CR supposed wrongdoing,
I and most of my membership
were plodding our way through
the rigors of grade three, and con
spiring to watch Saturday morn
ing cartoons — in this, as far as I
know, we were not concerned
with college politics. At any rate,
the election of 1972 has no rela
tionship or significance concern
Oregon doily a .
emerald
The Oregon Daily Imer aid n published Monday through Fri
day fxrpt during rum week end vac ationt. by the Oregon Daily
Emerald Publishing Co., at the University ot Oregon, lugene. OR.
*>7 tttt
The Emerald operates independentty ot the University with
offices on the third floor of the Crb Memorial Union Mid it a
member ot the A»*oc lated Press
Mb-iSII
U4-J7I2
UMM1
MMe4M1
eSSl«
Editor
Managing Editor
Non Editor
Assistant News Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Photo Editor
Sports Editor
Sideline* Editor
Entertainment Editor
Assistant Entertainment Editor
Night Editor
Associate Editors
Higher Education
Departments and School*
Student Government
Feature*
Politics
Communriy
General Stall
Advertising Manager
Classified Advertising
Production Manager
Controller
Debbie Howlett
Sandy (ohnstone
Frank Shaw
Brenda Thornton
Cort Eernald
Dave Kao
Doug levy
lohn Healy
Angela Allen Morgan
Kim Carlson
Frank Shaw
Doug Nash
Melissa Martin
Jim Moore
loan Herman
Brooks Dareii
Michele Maiassa
Darlene Gore
Sally OI(ar
Victoria Koch
Jean Ownbey
ing Richard Burr's individual
actions.
I would humbly suggest that Jim
Moore, Emerald ASUO associate
editor, attempt to remain more on
topic when reporting news. Ad
hominas arguments, subtle slurs
and the ghosts of Watergate's
past, though nifty political tools,
really have no place in objective
reporting.
Douglas Green
chairperson, college Republicans
Hail him
I disagree with Christopher
Gore (Sept. 30), that Kouns'
speech at the Sept. 19 inaugural
was "totally out of the context
with the spirit of NSHP." While it
is true that Kouns "seized upon
this opportunity" to present his
viewpoints, I would rather hail
him for this act than recoil to
customary disdain.
American college students com
prise one of the most ignorant and
apathetic sectors in contemporary
society. In fact, European ex
change students are usually
shocked to discover in American
students such an alarming lack of
insight into foreign affairs. And
too often, those that manage to
keep abreast of current affairs, do
so only with the aid of a slanted
media.
It is clear that the American
university's main function is to
render service to the corporate
system. Here, you will find a con
veyor belt churning out tomor
row's technicians, managers, and
briefcase toters, all of whom are
trained to grease the wheels in the
machine we call America.
The American university is fail
ing in its original purpose
however, which is to produce
critical thinkers who delve into
current social, political, and
ethical problems and develop a
composite solution only after
weighing a variety of possibilities.
Furthermore, business and pro
fessional students have too often
chosen their academic focus
because of some vague promise
of a lucrative career waiting for
them upon graduation. These
students are basing their financial
prospects on naively optimistic
, forecasts which promise upsw
ings in the economy and
unlimited growth, despite such in
significant factors as social discon
tent at home and abroad, world
starvation, environmental
degredation, and the threat of
global war.
Finally, American universities
have failed to produce students
who have the courage to take
moral positions on any given vital
issue-positions which would more
often than not cause them to
deviate from the status quo and
set standards of individual leader
ship.
However flawed Kouns' ap
proach was, I applaud him for
shaking students out of their shell
of comfort. Shall we coddle and
hand-hold students for four years?
As for those who think that his
speech was not hopeful, let me re
mind readers that hope isn't a
doorbell that one can ring when a
crisis appears. Rather, hope is the
gift of peserverence for those with
the courage to work for change.
Sarah Barton
senior, English
Right agenda
In response to Dan Goulet's let
ter, Emerald Sept. 28, here are
some of the plans for the nation
Watt and his New Right cohorts
have on their agenda, just in case
we were too distracted by their
ludicrously hypocritical and
moronic personal beliefs (such as
Watt's bigotry and the White
House's cynical sexism):
Watt would like to radically
reduce restraints on mining and
industrial development in the U.S.
in order for industry to have free
rein in the exploitation of our en
vironment. With this greater
freedom, more uranium could be
mined for overly expensive and
dangerous nuclear power plants
and for use in thermonuclear
weapons research and develop
ment. In addition, oil companies
could drill off the California coast
without “cumbersome" safety
precautions, eventually leading to
oil spills which would indeliby
mar the beauty of our coastlines
and destroy a plentiful food
source.
With the greater freedom, com
panies like Union Carbide,
General Dynamics and United
Technologies (mammoth defense
contractors, supported by tax
dollars for building huge,
needless amounts of weaponry at
the expense of funding for hous
ing, food production and educa
tion for Americans and the poor
around the world) could dump
carcinogenic chemicals in dense
population areas and watersheds,
causing disease and death. Coal
from strip-mines near national
parks could be burned for more
electricity (most of which
everybody wastes) and the
resulting smoke could be
liberated from pollution-control
devices, defoliating our forests
and causing health problems
because of the resulting acid rain.
It's pretty clear what the New
Right's agenda for the interior
holds: Escalation of the already
suicidal arms race, poisoned
oceans and scarred countrysides,
destruction of food supplies,
disease and death.
Watt and his friends' tactless
*and plainly idiotic behavior is
simply symptomatic of the fact
that their beliefs are formed in
twisted minds. When the truth of
reactionaries' inner beliefs are ex
posed, their demise is inevitable.
Rolf Sjogren
junior,history