WHO
WANTS
TO SEE
GONZO?
page 5
Oregon daily
y ■ ’
emerald
Thursday, May 24, 1984
Eugene, Oregon
Volume 85, Number 162
IFC doesn't challenge Hotchkiss' veto
By Paul Ertelt
Of the Emerald
The Incidental Fee Committee
Wednesday chose not to override ASUO
Pres. Mary Hotchkiss' veto of funding for
the Oregon Commentator. And they re
jected a request for a lower level of fun
ding from Commentator publisher Dane
Claussen.
The IFC voted Friday to fund the
publication with $5,000, but that vote was
vetoed by Hotchkiss on Monday. In a
memo to the IFC Monday, Hotchkiss call
ed the funding “extraordinary" for a
group that has only been in existence for
seven months.
But Claussen called this a "Catch-22."
“We need to be around for a certain
time to receive funding, but we need
funding in order to be around,"
Claussen said.
Claussen also rejected Hochkiss'
allegation that the only purpose of the
Commentator was to "expound a conser
vative viewpoint to a liberal campus."
The Commentator, like the Emerald,
reflects the political views of a staff
which changes from year to year,
Claussen said, and there is no reason to
believe next years staff will necessarily
be conservative.
Claussen alluded to the Commen
tator's tongue-in-cheek ad for next year's
staff to back his contention that the Com
mentator is not tied to a rigid political
ideology. “Applicants need not be
politically correct" the ad says.
Claussen also attacked Hotchkiss'
charge that the Commentator "con
sistently bordered on violating ethical
practices."
“Most of the people on our staff are
Incidental Fees Committee members
Mary Shrauger and Mark Spence heard
testimony at Wednesday's IFC
meeting.
journalism students and are well aware
of journalistic ethics," Claussen said.
But voting to fund the Commentator
would "damage people's notion of what
the right to vote means," maintained IFC
Chair Julie Davis, newly-elected ASUO
president. A ballot measure to allocate
$10,000 to the Commentator was
defeated by students, 1,715 to 790.
Though the ballot was non-binding,
many students did not realize this, Davis
said, and to ignore their vote would give
rise to student cynicism.
Giving $5,000 to the Commentator
would be "special treatment" that other
campus groups do not enjoy, said Tim
Jordan, co-editor of Ott the Record.
“We had to fight for an additional $200
for a publication that has been on cam
pus for 18 years," Jordan said.
“I appreciate what Dane is doing, his
entrepreneural spirit, but I don't believe
he deserves this level of funding," he
said.
“I think the Commentator should have
more time to prove its worth funding,"
added Joern Wettern. He said there are
other groups doing important work that
do not receive such generous funding,
such as the Student Campaign for Disar
mament which only receives $1,300.
"Five thousand dollars is too much for
the Commentator," he said.
But two students said they thought the
paper should be funded, since it provid
ed a service to students by bringing out
viewpoints not expressd in other campus
publications.
"I disagree with the Commentator as
often as I agree with it," said law student
Chuck Sparks, "but I believe the Com
mentator provides a balanced dialogue
among publications on campus.
“I like having the Commentator
perspective coming in from the right to
help me make better decisions," he said.
"The Commentator reflects well on the
student body as it tends to be well writ
ten while the Emerald is poorly written
and sloppily edited," said math student
Brian Tannahill.
This year, the Commentator had been
funded in part by a $6,000 grant from a
conservative foundation, but Claussen
said he would prefer not having to de
pend on outside funding.
In other business, the IFC came closer
to reaching a contract agreement with
the Athletic Department. Both parties
have agreed on the main points of the
contract, such as the level of IFC fun
ding, but other points need to be ironed
out.
Bill Hallmark said men's football and
basketball are self supporting, but this
contract provides an incentive for the
department to develop minor sports.
Prices for student tickets for men's
basketball will be raised from $2 to $3.
The Athletic department and IFC must
come to an agreement today, Davis said,
and the IFC will meet at 4:30 p.m. to work
out the final details of the contract.
IFC Chair Julie Davis said that funding
the Commentator would "damage
people's notion of what the right to
vote means."
They give
their all
It now costs only 87
cents to go to college —
for a mouse that is.
That is the cost of buy
ing a mouse for a cancer
research lab, but the
money also goes for
general cancer research,
according to Wynn
Fischer of the American
Cancer Society in Eugene.
This year 450,000
Americans will die of
cancer, but nearly one
third of them might have
been saved with earlier
diagnosis and prompt
treatment, according to
Fischer. Continued
research is needed to
discover early causes and
effective treatment.
Sigma Nu fraternity
members will be collec
ting these "Send a Mouse
to College" envelopes in
the EMU main lobby
Thursday from 11 a.m. to 3
p.m. on behalf of the
Society.
"With the help of Sigma
Nu members and the rest
of the University of
Oregon student body, we
hope to collect about
1,000 of these envelopes,"
Fischer says. Last year $2.2
million was raised.
CIA head linked to 'Debateeate'
WASHINGTON (AP) — CIA Director
William Casey played a major role in an
organized, possibly illegal political es
pionage effort that obtained Carter ad
ministration documents for Ronald
Reagan's 1980 presidential campaign, a
House subcommittee concluded
Wednesday.
The panel said in a 2,400-page report that
its investigation begun last June found "no
evidence" that Pres. Ronald Reagan was in
volved in the operation, which acquired
briefing materials prepared to tutor then
Pres. Jimmy Carter for a pivotal campaign
debate with Reagan. Casey was Reagan's
campaign director.
"The subcommittee finds that persons in
the Reagan-Bush campaign organization
engaged in organized efforts to obtain... in
formation and materials that were not
publicly available," the report said.
It also said that contrary to Casey's
repeated assertions that he could not recall
ever seeing any Carter documents in 1980,
"the subcommittee finds that the better
evidence indicates that Carter debate brief
ing materials entered the 1980 Reagan-Bush
campaign through. . .Casey."
Reagan refused to comment on the com
mittee's report. House Republicans,
however, blasted the investigation as "a
series of bungling missteps," and GOP
members of the panel dissented from the
majority Democrats' conclusions.
"Mr. Casey will have no comment until he
has read the report," said Dale Peterson, a
spokesman for the CIA chief.
The Post Office and Civil Service subcom
mittee on human resources said it was
unable to identify who in the Carter camp
provided the materials because people from
both sides were "not candid" during the
probe. But it said that at least one uniden
tified Reagan campaign aide "provided un
truthful answers."
The subcommittee, headed by Rep.
Donald Albosta, D-Mich., urged the Justice
Department to seek a court-appointed
special prosecutor to review the case, par
ticularly "the questionable and flatly con
tradictory statements made to the
subcommittee."
The Justice Department has said its in
vestigation turned up no "specific credible
evidence" of a crime and is now appealing a
U.S. District Court ruling ordering Attorney
General William French Smith to seek ap
pointment of an independent counsel.
The subcommittee, noting that the Carter
debate papers were used to help prepare
Reagan for the nationally televised en
counter, said it disagreed with the Justice
Department's "surprising conclusion."
"Use of these materials in the Reagan
Bush campaign is itself 'specific credible
evidence' that some crime has occurred,"
the report said.
The report said Casey handed the debate
materials over to James Baker III, the White
House chief of staff who has told the sub
committee that he received the documents
from Casey. The report said that a "credible
witness" corroborated Baker, despite
Casey's denials that he had seen such
documents.
The subcommittee said it also disagreed
with the Justice Department's contention
that there is "no specific, credible evidence
of a federal crime."
Today's report said that "use of these
materials by the Reagan-Bush campaign is
itself 'specific, credible evidence' that some
crime has occurred."
The report, which stated that the Carter
people provided "insufficient protection"
for their materials, said that investigators
believe the documents "likely were taken
from the offices of the National Security
Council."
The report added that "persons in the
Reagan-Bush campaign organization engag
ed in organized efforts to obtain from the
Carter administration and from the Carter
Mondal£ campaign information and
materials that were not publicly available."
"The subcommittee believes that this ac
ceptance and use would have occurred only
if the source or sources of the briefing
materials were known and considered
trustworthy," the report said.
Baker, now White House chief of staff,
told the subcommittee last year that he had
received the debate papers from Casey.
The report said the Democratic-controlled
subcommittee does not agree with the
justice Department's "surprising conclu
sion" earlier this year that "any seeming in
consistencies (in witness statements) could
be explained by differences in recollection
and interpretation."
Attorney General William French Smith
said then that he did not feel available
evidence warranted appointment of a
special prosecutor.
But U.S. District Judge Harold Greene —
in an order later stayed pending department
appeals — ruled May 14 that Smith should
seek a special prosecutor.
Earlier Wednesday, House Speaker
Thomas O'Neill, who has said he doubted
that Congress had the authority to conduct
the briefing papers probe, joined the
chorus calling for a special prosecutor.