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