Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 13, 1985)
editorial Military grows as higher ed. shrinks First, President Ronald Reagan announces budget cuts in federal student financial aid programs: no grants, work study jobs, and other aid for those whose families make $25,000 a year or more, a $4,000 a year limit in total finan cial aid that a student can receive, and no loans to students with family incomes of $32,000 or above. Then along comes William Bennett, Reagan’s new secretary of education, who announces (as some kind of justification for the aid cuts) that a college education is not worth much anyway. The entire episode is disgusting. While the United States sinks billions of dollars into developing weapons of mass destruction, it tells its young people that they must “tighten their belts” when it comes to meeting the ever rising costs of higher education in America. What the government is really saying behind its shrewd propaganda is, “sorry folks, but after funding the military with $310 billion, we just don’t have enough to go around for assisting students in their efforts to obtain higher educa tion.” The result is that in 1985-86, over one million students will be eliminated from federal financial aid pro grams. But according to Bennett, for some students that simply means having to give up their stereo sets and three week beach vacations. Supporters of Reagan’s budget cuts argue that families with $32,000 a year are not in need of student financial aid anyway. In reality, the new limit on aid will mean that many families who make just over $32,000 a year will face the dif ficult situation of deciding which of their children will be able to go to college. Other supporters of Reagan’s aid cuts equate student financial aid with government handouts to students who have become habituated beggers. People with such opinions ought to take the time to learn who the real beggars are in this society: the military industry. Every year, the military industry cries out for federal tax breaks and sub sidies and every year the government gives billions of dollars to weapons manufacturers. The problem isn’t college curriculums or students who are unable to afford a college education. The problem is a government that makes building weapons its highest priori ty, while the educational, social and economic needs of the general public remain unfulfilled. In game ofpower politics there are no limitations Anyone who has seen the film “The Killing Fields” will have an idea of the horror Cambodia suffered under the blood-stained rule of Pol Pot. Over five million Cambodians are believed to have been murdered by Pol Pot’s regime bet ween 1975 and 1979. With this in mind, we must ask ourselves why the United States is now supporting Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in their fight against the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia? The United States has been a key figure in getting the non-communist Cambodian liberation forces to team up with Pol Pot to fight the Vietnamese. It is the United States and its ASEAN allies that have insisted from the start that Cambodian non-communist forces must join up with Pol Pot so that the latter could retain his seat in the United Nations. Is this another example of America following a “lesser of two evils,” foreign policy {ie. Pol Pot over the Vietnamese)? The Vietnamese occupation can hard ly be called justifiable, but neither is suppporting Pol Pot. What it boils down to is power politics, and this time America has chosen to stand behind a political alliance that includes the military forces of a geonocidal madman. 'PICK !TUP,Mfc660rS-'W(S HEffSTUE NEW IfottUfflON jbo'R€ IN!/ letter Turning away Most of us have read stories of people turning their backs or closing their windows while someone was being raped or beaten on a city sidewalk. We’ve been appalled when reading that someone at the scene was quoted as saying *‘I didn’t want to get involved.” Well, concerning the letter ti tled “Let’s Forget It” (ODE, Feb. 5), let’s ask Charles Knechtel if he would close his window? The starving Ethiopians are, in a sense, being raped on a sidewalk in our neighborhood. Because we’re on a bountiful corner of one small planet, many Americans feel secure. But Americans have starved and may starve again eventually. Would Mr. Knechtel want other countries’ media to bury our story if we were to starve? Like street crime, starvation won’t go away if we ignore it, and like crime, it may someday get us. One could surmise that if Mr. Knechtel has ever read a crime story such as I mentioned, he has said to himself “If I’d been there I would have. Steve Lundgren Journalism Walked on The least powerful members of any society usually get dumped on. They have the least voice in decisions that affect their lives, usually for their “own good.” But the good always seems to go to someone else. Why is the Emerald treating the students of the University in this manner? Oregon daily emerald The Oregon Dally 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 Sales: 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, Rob Kraft, Ross Martin, Karin McKercher, Lauri Neely, Kelly Neff, Kara Oberst, Curt Penrod, Michele Ross, Alyson Simmons, Peg Solonika, Tim Swillinger, Colleen Tre maine, Hank Trotter. Page 2A Editor Managing Editor News Editor Editorial Page Editor Photo Editor Sports Editor Sidelines Editor Friday Edition Editor Entertainment Editor Night Editor Associate Editors Administration Higher Education Politics ASUO Student Activities Community Features Michele Matassa Mike Sims Michael Kulaga Costas Christ Michael Clapp Brent De La Paz Sheila Landry Kim Carlson Michael Duncan Michael Kutaga Jolayne Houtz Michael Hosmar Paul Ertelt Julie Shippen Diana Elliott Cynthia Whitfield Lori Steinhauer Reporters: Sean Axmaker, Dave Berns, Kirsten Bolin, Michelle Brence, Dave Carlson, Robert Collias, Thomas Henderson, Robin Joannides, Allan Lazo, Capi Lynn, Scott McFetridge, Stasia Scarborough. News and Editorial 68*5511 Display Advertising and Business 686-3712 Classified Advertising 686-4343 Production 686-4381 Circulation 886-5611 Our newspaper has. in con junction with the powers of the University, levied a tax on all students. This tax is to pay for the portion of the Emerald's budget that they can’t earn themselves through advertis ing. The rationale for this is that students should support a stu dent paper. But students are not the only ones who read and use the Emerald to express their views. Why don’t community members or the faculty at the University also pay a tax for the right to read the Emerald? Because the Emerald knows there is no way they could get away with such a tax. Only the students are compliant enough to be walked on by a troup of “journalists.” The loophole the Emerald hides behind is the real kicker. If we as students don’t want to pay, all we have to do is ask for our $1.78 back. But the catch is that we have to promise not to read the Emerald for three months. So students are forbid den to read their own paper. Democracy in action. If the Emerald really wants to test the support of its reader ship, ask for voluntary contribu tions of those who really want to stuff your coffers. As for the rest of us, just leave our pocket books alone. Ronald Harper Marketing Beef-up The following questions are offered in hopes they'll serve to beef-up the fare in your letters column. 1) Does the federal Constitu tion guarantee Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expres sion, or both? 2) Is it significant that when he wrote “Lady Chatterly's Lover,” D.H. Lawrence was im potent? Is the fact interpreted by the proverb about where the greener grass grows? Is there an even more telling maxim applicable? 3) Is there really a letters editor on the Emerald staff? If so, what has he been doing so far this year? 4) In the declining decades of the Roman Empire, after gorg ing themselves, the decadent gourmandise elite among the citizenry retired to their vomitoriums. What principles could relate this to the rise of bulimia today? 5) Finally, in four parts: a. Why is religion flourishing amidst oppression in Soviet ruled nations, but spineless and atrophied in the West? b. By what stratagem did Ceasar Augustus break the will of the Roman people, to con quer them? c. What does it mean, in either Daniel or the Apocalypse, where the Scripture says “By prosperity he shall destroy many”? d. Why does Alexander Solzhenitsyn bless his years of incarceration in Soviet labor camps? For the last question, there ought to be bonus points to whomever can answer all four parts employing only a single principle of moral theology. For myself. I apologize if the ques tions seem posed in arrogance or condescension, or if they seem merely “clever." And, of course. I do not know all of the answers. Roch Steinbach Law Some more Since there has been so much about the abortion issue lately, it seems that there is more to be said. I believe in pro-choice — that is, choice to take the risk of pregnancy, choice of methods of birth control, choice of being responsible. These choices should be both the male and female’s responsibility. It takes two people to cause a pregnan cy, so two people should share in the decision of what form of birth control to use; if not, then plan on a pregnancy. Abortion is no choice, a life is already on the way. Life is precious, not to be taken lightly. As a young mother, I had my fourth baby when I was not yet 24. Having been pregnant for 36 months out of 6 years, I cried for the entire length of my final pregnancy. When I look back on those years, they were short — even though they seemed long at the time. But today I have a beautiful 25-year-old daughter that has given me nothing but blessings her entire life. My life would have missed the wonder ful mother-daughter relation ship if abortion would have been legal at the time. No, abor tion is no choice — birth control is. Joy Halliwell Library Staff Wednesday. February 13, 1985
