editorial
Reagan’s priority is
not with higher ed.
It didn’t take long. Less than two weeks into his second
term in office, President Ronald Reagan has renewed his ef
forts to cut back on government financial aid programs
designed to help low-income students meet the rising costs
of higher education in the United States.
On February 4, Reagan will send his new budget recom
mendations to Congress, outlining, among other things, his
desire to cut federally funded student financial aid pro
grams. Reagan is requesting that Guaranteed Student Loans
be denied to all college students with family incomes above
$32,(KM). He is also requesting that students be limited to
$4,000 a year in the amount of total federal aid, including
loans and grants, that they are able to receive. Reagan also
recommends that student eligibility for Pell Grants be
limited to those whose families make $25,000 or less.
If passed by Congress, the results of these cuts will be
devastating. Last year, more than 5 million college students
depended on some form of federal aid to help them meet the
costs of their education. According to Patricia A. Smith,
director of legislative analysis for the American Council on
Education, approximately 500,000 students will lose their
eligibility for the GSL program. She also estimates that about
150,000 students will lose their eligibility to receive Pell
Grants. Graduate students who rely on the current $5,000
federal aid available to them will suffer a $1,000 per year
loss.
The Reagan administration has tried to meet criticism of
its planned cut-backs on student financial aid by declaring
that those'barred from receiving GSL’s will be eligible for a
new auxiliary loan program. If a student is unable to get a
GSL, his or her parents will be able to borrow money through
the auxiliary loan program. But the parents won’t get such a
good deal. Auxiliary loans will have a 12 percent interest
rate (three percent higher than the GSL rate) and repayments
will begin immediately. In short, the proposed auxiliary
loan program answers financial need with an offer of more
debt and higher interest rates for those parents already
unable to meet the educational costs of their children.
Is this the Reagan plan for building the better America
that we so often heard about during his campaign speeches?
Is this how a government with a crippling national deficit
paves the way towards a "brighter future” for the younger
generation? Certainly not. It is another attempt to put the
burden of the national deficit onto the backs of low-income
groups who are least able to bear the added financial
pressure.
Perhaps those students who are being asked to sacrifice
their education would feel better about it if they knew that
$12 million dollars of needed government money was not
spent to entertain Reagan and his friends during the recent
Inaugural celebrations in Washington D.C. Perhaps those
families who make just over $32,000 a year, and are likely to
face a choice over which of their children will be able to go
to college, would feel better if they knew that the govern
ment’s proposed 1986 Pentagon budget was not 16 times
higher than the proposed 1986 education budget.
What kind of a government is it that seeks to cut back on
the miniscule $17.9 billion currently allocated to the Depart
ment of Education, while fighting to maintain a $286 billion
Pentagon budget, the largest peace-time military budget in
the nation’s history? It is a government that offers full
tuition scholarships to those who promise to serve the
military industry (ROTC), and cuts back on scholarships and
financial aid to those who don’t. It seems military growth
ranks higher than a college education in Reagan’s view.
r
letters
Fight it
Brian Moore’s letter (ODE
Jan.21) raises a number of
specious issues which I would
fain refute.
1) The notion of free speech
which Mr. Moore raises. The
First Amendment to the con
stitution (presumably the
source of Mr. Moore’s notion)
contains only injunctions of
governmental restrictions.
Nowhere does it proscribe the
private violations of such
speech (which occur quite fre
quently at shopping malls all
over America). Ironically, the
First Amendment contains a
provision which protects the
right of the people to peaceably
assemble, and to petition the
government for a redress of
grievances, which was, given
the clearly articulated statement
read by the blockaders, the
ostensible purpose of the
protest.
2) Mr. Moore’s moral fables
may serve well for training
children: they have never pro
ven effective in international
relations. Was the European
resistance to fascism just
another wrong to be dismissed
by a child’s morality tale?
3) Mr. Moore's final concern
reveals his basic approach to
issues — divide and conquer.
To question the reading of the
Emerald by non-students is to
assume the University’s separa
tion from the community at
large, and the isolation of
students such as Mr. Moore and
real people such as James
Phillips. Perhaps this accounts
1
Oregon daily _ _
emerald
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published Monday
through Friday except during exam week and vacations
by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co., at the
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 97403.
The Emerald operates independently of the Universi
ty with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial
Union and is a member of the Associated Press.
General Staff
Advertising Director
Production Manager
Classified Advertising
Controller
Susan Thelen
Russell Steele
Vince Adams
Jean Ownbey
Advertising Seles: Laura Buckley, Tim Clevenger, Jen
nifer Fox, Marcia Leonard, Rick Martz, Nancy Nielsen,
Laurie Nobel, Roberta Oliver, Brett Pickman - Intern,
David Wood.
Production: Kelly Cornyn, Stormi Dykes, Julie Freeman,
Kathy Gallagher, Dean Guernsey, Susan Hawkins, Ross
Martin, Karin McKercher, Laud Neely, Ke:ly Neff, Curt
Penrod, Michele Ross, Alyson Simmo./S, Peg Solonika,
Tim Swillinger, Colleen Tremaine, Hank Trotter.
Page 2
Editor
Managing Editor
News Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Photo Editor
Sports Editor
Sidelines Editor
Entertainment Editor
Assistant Entertainment Editor
Night Editor
Michele Matassa
Mike Sims
Michael Kuiaga
Costas Christ
Michael Clapp
Brent De La Paz
Sheila Landry
Kim Carlson
Mike Duncan
Michael Ciapp
Associate Editors
Administration
Higher Education
Politics
ASUO
Student Activities
Community
Features
Jolayne Houtz
Michael Hosmar
Paul Ertelt
Julie Shippen
Stasia Scarborough
Cynthia Whitfield
Lori Steinhauer
Reporters: Sean Axmaker, Dave Bems, Robert Collias,
Diana Elliott, Thomas Henderson, Allan Lazo, Capi Lynn,
Scott McFetridge.
News and Editorial 686-5511
Display Advertising and Business 686-3712
Classified Advertising 686-4343
Production 686-4381
Circulation 686-5511
for the smug, solipsistic tone of
Mr. Moore’s logic. As President
Olum’s recent appearance on
Donahue attests, the University
is a vital part of the community,
and vice versa. Don’t deny real
repression, Brian, fight it.
Robert Taylor
English
Mundane
Thank you for the editorial
"Bookstores priority must be
educational material.’’ Our
bookstore is so poorly stocked
with so little variety in subject
matter that I've often found I
need to drive to the bookstore at
OSU in Corvallis, or to PSU or
Powells in Portland. Often very
common titles are not available,
and it takes weeks to order
them.
The latest bestsellers, the
average calendar, and the
mediocre cookbooks offered for
sale at the University bookstore
are also available at most
bookstores in the city. Rather
than competing for sales with
the bookstore down the street by
featuring "nickle and dime”
discounts to obtain minimal
profits, perhaps an attempt to
become a well-stocked, unique
bookstore featuring a variety of
titles would attract the needed
customers. The success of
Powells in Portland should be
enough to convice anyone of
this sales strategy. After all,
Eugene is the second largest ci
ty in Oregon, featuring two fine
campuses, LCC and UO, and it
has very little variety in
bookstores to serve that com
munity. The bookstore may
have claimed to have "a new
look” for fall, but its glossy new
cover is only a cheap facade for
a very mundane product.
Bjorn Ohou
Landscape Architecture
Real threat
The purpose of this letter is to
warn unwary bicycle riders of a
hazardous condition which ex
ists on campus. Ironically, 1
went skiing for the first time
this weekend, but the falls 1
took on the mountain were
nothing compared to the one I
suffered when I returned to
campus on Sunday night.
I was riding my bicycle on the
barricaded portion of 13th Ave.,
heading toward the EMU at
about 30 miles per hour. From
out of nowhere, with no signs to
warn of its existence, a curb ap
peared directly in my path. This
eight-inch concrete barrier ex
tends perpendicular to 13th
Ave., running about a third of
the distance across the street
and is virtually invisible at
night because the dark concrete
is the same color as the street,
When I hit this barrier I
shouted a four-letter expletive
as I went sailing into the air, do
ing a complete flip in the mid
dle of 13th Ave. The only in
juries I sustained were minor
bruises on my hand and elbow.
My bike, on the other hand, was
wasted.
This unpainted concrete bar
rier stands as a monument to
bureaucratic waste, just down
the street from Johnson Hall.
Originally it had been erected as
an enclosure for motorcycles.
But the day after its completion,
construction workers tore down
one of the walls leaving only the
barrier which extends perpen
dicular into the street. As such,
it stands as a very real threat to
the lives and limbs of unwary
students.
Steven Richkind
Law
letters policy
The Emerald will attempt to print all letters con
taining fair comment on topics of interest to the
University community.
Letters to the editor must be limited to 250
words, typed, signed and the identification of the
writer must be verified when the letter is turned in.
The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for
length, style or content.
Letters to the editor should be turned into the
Emerald office. Suite 300, EMU.
..
_
Mnnilav lannaou OO 1HDR