opinion
‘Tiger of the Senate’
missed for a decade
When Wayne Morse died ten years ago next Sunday, an
era abruptly ended for Oregon and national politics.
“Abruptly” may sound odd. Morse was 73-years-old.
But he was still fighting. At the time of his death, the “Tiger
of the Senate” was waging a pitched battle for his old Senate
seat against the upstart who had set the political world on its
colective ear by nudging Morse out of the box six years
earlier.
Bob Packwood still represents Oregon in the Senate,
and well, some say, but without the fire and elan that Wayne
Morse brought to the national political scene. That’s a
mighty tall order, certainly one that won’t be filled for a
while.
It seems almost obscene to use the word politics when
talking about Wayne Morse. He was a statesman, one of a
rare breed at any time in American history and certainly a
rarity today.
“Wayne Morse never made a deal with anyone in 24
years in the Senate!” That was the Tiger’s own boast, and
one to which he was well entitled. The wheeling and deal
ing that is so much a part of congressional life was far from
his liking. Morse was a truly independent person, immune
to corruption or labeling.
And he belonged to the entire nation, not just Oregon.
It’s especially appropriate to remember his national legacy
this summer because of another key anniversary coming up.
In August 1964, Congress gave near-unanimous approval to
a Lyndon Johnson-spawned resolution that would mark the
beginning of another era in the Vietnam quagmire. Two lone
dissenting votes were cast.
Sen. Ernest Greuning of Alaska preceded Sen. Morse of
Oregon in death by one month. Neither lived to see the
tragic end of a 30-plus year conflict that, they both asserted,
the U.S. had no business entering.
Morse’s remonstrance against the Tonkin Gulf resolu
tion is one of the most chillingly, accurately prophetic
statements ever uttered. “We’re going to be bogged down in
Southeast Asia, and we’re going to kill thousands of
American boys until finally . . . the American people are go
ing to say what the French people finally said: they’ve had
enough. ’’
Morse was ousted from his Senate seat of 24 years by
Packwood, even as his earlier prophecies of doom were bear
ing fruit. But even after his defeat, Morse opted for con
tinued national activism against the war over what would
have been a well-deserved rest at his Crest Drive ranch in
Eugene.
He was an attorney and teacher of attorneys. He spent 15
years on the University law school faculty, 13 as dean.
Morse’s guidance helped build the modern school of law
that is the pride of today’s University.
He was a respected labor arbiter. In 1941, he helped set
tle a national railroad dispute, literally on the eve of Pearl
Harbor. Once again: Morse in the right place at the right
time.
Yet, he believed in the workers' right to strike against an
employer, calling it essential to a free society. Wayne Morse,
for all his national acclaim, was a true Oregon populist.
This populism, coupled with the seemingly opposite
role of national statesman, helped create the legacy that
Wayne Morse left ten years ago. Then-Gov. Tom McCall
(who better to say it?) observed, in his eulogy to Morse, that
while the senator’s politics weren’t always popular, the man
Morse was. “We could always depend on him to say what he
thought— the first lesson of integrity.”
The day after Morse died, the Emerald opined: “Were
Wayne Morse alive today, he’d be fighting to improve the
problems of this country, not sitting in a corner stewing
about them. . . We should follow his lead.”
We can pay no better tribute to Wayne Morse than to
reiterate our admonition of a decade ago. We need it more
today.
r
letters
What’s fair?
On June 12, the Supreme
Court handed down a ruling in
volving employee rights in the
context of “conflicts” between
the principles of job seniority
and affirmative action. In its 6-3
decision, the Court favored the
seniority principle over affir
mative action policies.
As Bean McFadden, Universi
ty affirmative action coor
dinator, indicated in an
Emerald article on June 21, this
curiously unimaginative inter
pretation once again leaves
American non-white minorities
and women in a “no win”
situation.
Affirmative action supports
the fairness of selecting — dur
ing a reasonable period —
qualified job applicants from
“under-represented groups”
(which have been systematical
ly discriminated against) over
white males, who historically
have been “favored” arbitrarily
in the competition of non
menial, salaried work. This is a
fully defensible, temporary,
ameliorative policy for redress
ing a serious wrong perpetrated
against American minorities
and women.
Accordingly, the recent
Supreme Court ruling which
flies in the face of this socially
just, compensatory mechanism
seems grossly unfair.
Interestingly, two perceptive
American women, one black
and the other white — Eleanor
Holmes Norton (former chair of
the Elqual Employment Oppor
tunities Commission) and Pat
Schroeder (U.S. Con
Oregon daily
emerald
The summer edition of the Oregon Dally Emerald Is
published Tuesdays and Thursdays, except during ex
am week and vacations, by the Oregon Daily Emerald
Publishing Co at the University of Oregon. Eugene
Oregon, 97403
The Emerald operates independently of the Unlversi
ty with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial
Union and Is a member of the Associated Press
News and Editorial 686-5511
Display Advertising and Business 666 3712
Classified Advertising 666-4343
Production 666-4361
Circulation 666-5511
Phw 2
Editor Michele Matassa
Managing Editor/Editorial Page Editor Jim Moore
News Editor Michael Kulaga
Photo Editor Michael Clapp
Associate Editors
Higher Education
Administration
Politics/Community
ASUO/Student Activities
Night Editor
Reporters Diana Elliott, Sean Axmaker
Mike Sims
Mike Duncan
Paul Ertelt
Julie Shippen
Jim Moore
General Stall
Advertising Manager
Production Manager
Classified Advertising
Controller
Susan Thelen
Russell Steele
Carrie Greaves
Jean Ownbey
Ad Sales Rachel Bellamy, Richard Skeen, Julie
Bulrtce.
Production Sharia Cassidy, Kelly Cornyn, Kathy
Gallagher. Carrie Greaves, Kelly Neff, Michele Ross,
Colleen Tremaine, Hank Trotter.
gresswoman from Colorado) —
have suggested the ap
propriateness of a “shared
work-reduction plan’’ when job
layoffs seem imminent. How is
it that the elementary fairness of
this “sharing the pain" solution
was somehow overlooked by
the Burger Court majority?
I realize that affirmative ac
tion remains a decidedly con
troversial “patch" in the social
fabric of contemporary
American life. Nevertheless,
surely it deserves at least a
modicum of judicial protection
from the nation’s highest
tribunal.
Ron Kousseve
Professor of Counseling
Psychology
Agencies help
In your article on U.S.-Soviet
exchange programs (Thursday)
some inaccuracies slipped
through in quotes attributed to
me. 1 did not mean to suggest
that exchange programs func
tion chiefly “without govern
ment aid or intercession,” for,
in fact, the major programs are
negotiated (but not always
supervised) by the Department
of State and other government
agencies.
My main point was that the
exchanges ordinarily do not ex
cite the interest of the Chief Ex
ecutive, whose role in such mat
ters is not significant, except for
occasional dramatic acts of ge
nuine diplomacy.
The U.S.-U.S.S.R. scholary
exchange in most respects has
gone on smoothly since its in
ception in 1959, despite wars,
the Cuban crises, and even the
lapse of formal exchange
agreements (as in 1981). Even
without the treaty renewal, both
academic communities honored
each other as if agreements ex
isted. It is also true that some
American universitites have
direct institutional ties with
East European universities _
such as the University’s par
ticipation in the international
graduate center at Dubrovnik in
Yugoslavia (a spectacular city
on the Adriatic).
One might draw the parallel
of private initiatives to match
the city of Springfield with
Soviet Komsomolsk, for the
sake of cultural exchange bet
ween school children. Inciden
tally. the objection has recently
been raised that Komsomolsk
was a bad choice because it was
built mainly with Gulag slave
laborers. Considering the
history of America, though, that
seems more a point of rapport
than a point of insurmountable
difference.
lames L. Rice
Associate Professor of Russian
Registering flap
In reference to the July 5 arti
cle in the Emerald regarding a
proposal to give student
athletes an early registration
time, consideration about the
other students’ attitudes should
be taken. There is, indeed, a
particular attitude that the
student-athletes are a privileged
class. Giving student-athletes
an advantage during registra
tion time over non-student
athletes appears unjust.
A requirement for student
athletes to enroll in an average
of 12 hours per term (full time)
does not seem to be sufficient
grounds for considering such a
proposal. If it does, then other
students who are also required
to enroll full time, such as reci
pients of student loans, Pell
grants, and various scholar
ships, should be granted the
same opportunity. With this
just consideration, the whole
point seems quite circular,
since the majority of students
would be eligible and nothing
would be gained.
I would like to make clear that
I am not making any implica
tions that the athletes are not
appreciated. Their efforts and
achievements give the Universi
ty tremendous pride. The point
being made is that they should
be at this university to get an
education, and in that respect,
they are students, just as all
other individuals enrolled in
this institution. The price of an
education is too high to exclude
considerations of the student
population as a whole.
L.J. Fairclough
Business
l