Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 9, 1987)
Editorial Optional drug testing a step backwards The Athletic Department's decision to begin voluntary drug testing of University athletes is a loss to the rights of student-athletes and a violation of trust for all involved. Cloaked in anonymity behind Associate Athletic Direc tior Chris Voelz, an undisclosed number of student-athletes are reported to have come forward, asking “what can we do if we want to be tested" for drug use. in an attempt to set an example for others to follow. Still others. Voelz claimed “didn't like the bud rap the press put on athletes because some use drugs" and wanted to correct the image. The Athletic Department responded by implementing a voluntary drug-testing policy Oct. 30 that would rely on athlete and team peer pressure to persuade the more than 350 student-athletes to consent. Coaches are forbidden from attempting to influence player consent in drug testing. The result pits the individual athlete against team goals, which often override individual concerns for the betterment of tho team. The result — if voluntary consent proves suc cessful — also circumvents the suspended Athletic Depart ment mandatory drug testing program. Part of protocol for specimen collection in drug testing requires the removal of all clothing from the student athlete's waist to ankles and the raising of all abdominal clothing to at least the chest. The athlete also is asked to urinate in the direct presence of an observer, who under no circumstances is to take his or her eyes off the process. Although the intentions of the anonymous student athletes may be to increase the likelihood of drug-free athletics, it does not outweigh the humiliating process of drug testing and warrant the enactment of large-scale, voluntary Athletic Department drug testing. Any form of testing detracts from the idea of the coaches’ trust in his or her team and the athlete's promise to abstain from drugs, und it discounts the athletes' team-first attitude to deter from drug use. Those already committed to drug testing should accom modate their individual drug-testing needs on their own. While it is legally acceptable to have voluntary drug testing, it is important to remember the Oregon attorney general currently is reviewing the constitutionality of man datory drug testing. If student-athletes, whether through peer pressure or team spirit, are persuaded to consent against their will, the policy no longer remains voluntary. Ginsburg withdrawal result of idealism President Reagan's now nominee to the Supreme Court. Douglas Ginsburg. withdrew himself from consideration Saturday after he admitted to smoking marijuana as a law school professor eight years ago. Although Ginsburg may not have been the best choice for a Supremo Court justice, he should not have bowed out. Me should have gone through the confirmation process and been judged on his capabilities as a legal interpreter. Ginsburg's withdrawl is a direct response to the Reagan's anti-drug campaign. He should not have given up so easily. If he had not withdrawn, he would have forced the Senate and the White Mouse to review his actions as a judge and not judge his personal life. r cum K>\X)UHT0C4V WW NO UNEXPECTED TIE-UP'b Commentary_ To preserve quality, keep Olum As students, we are puzzled by the State Board of Highar Mutation's forced early retire ment of University President Dr. Paul Olum In its issued statement, the board praised him as a president, yet gave no reason for the early dismissal. Commentary by Steve Nelson Taking into account Dr. Olum's forthright advocacy on behalf of the University, we are left with only ugly rumors to fill in the gaps. Is he being released because the leadership of higher education fears him. or because the board has found a replace ment who would not challenge it? We may never know what the reasons are. Even if the Ex ecutive Committee's process should eventually be shown to be legal, it was certainly not well planned or orchestrated with the best interests of higher education. We are left with no alternative but to question the 1 Oregon Daily The Oregon Only Emerald It published Monday through Friday except during exam week and vacation* by the Oregon Dally Emerald Publishing Co. at the University ol Oregon. Eugene. Oregon. 97403 The Emerald operates independently of the University with offices on the third floor ol the Erb Memorial Union and It a member of the Associated Press The Emerald It private properly The unlawful removal or use of papers Is prosecutable by law Oeneral Staff Advertising Director Susan Theten Production Manager Michele Ross Advertising Sales Ten Boring. Gary DeLossa, Tom Leech. Catherine Lil|a. Rick Marti. Laura McKinney. Heather Mull. Joann Nelson, Julte Paul. Barbara Rogers. Scott Thorkildson, Joan Wildermuth Classified Manager Assistant to the Publisher Kelli Mason Jean Ownbey Newt and Editorial MS SS11 Display Advertising and Business Classified Advertising Letter Perfect Graphics Production Circulation 689-3713 686 4343 686-SS11 688-4361 668SS11 run? t Editor Managing Editor Newt Editor Editorial Paga Editors Sports Editor Photo Editor Graphic Design Editor Special Issues Editor Entertainment/Sports Segment Editor Night Editor Stanley Nelson Scott Maban Eden God bey Angela Muniz/Steven Hoentsch Aaron Knox Shu Shlng Chan Lorraine Rath Kelly Kortekaaa HC Hutto Stanley Nelson Associate Editors Community Higher Education Administration Student Government Activities General Assignment /Entertainment Stephen Maher Michael Drummond Carolyn Lamberson Will Hoi ben Reporters: Craig Harris. Gary Henley. Andrew LaMar. Jett Morgan. Ingrid Petersen, Cami Swanson. Kelvin Wee Photographers: Sherlyn Bjorkgren, Christophe Chabeudte. Andy Cnpe. Clift Etzel. John Gtustma. Bobbie Lo, Gregor Okorn, Andre Raniert. Ted Shepler. Michael Templeton, Dan Wheeler Production: Sandra Dailer / Ad Coordinator Kelly Alexandre. Ronwln Nicole Ashton, Virginia Baniaga. Laura Carhan. Eva Cohen. Stephanie Drynan. Dolores Far rero. Shannon Gaither. Lisa Haggeny. Stephanie Holland, Deirdre Kelly. Eliot Knight. Chris Knox. Jung Lee. Bobble Lo. James Mason. Angie Muniz. Ted Shepler. Linda Sped ing. Lisa Svanevik. Ingrid White. Kelly Williams, Serena Williams. X Kang Xte intentions of the State System leadership. The loss of our president could be compounded if faculty leave, losing confidence in the leadership of higher education. After five years of constant disappointments in pay and working conditions, this deci sion by the board could tie the final insult. Students fear the board's hasty decision. Once more we are forced to bear the brunt of an action over which we had absolutely no control. !)r. Olutn's retirement is a fact the University will have to face eventually, but the date propos ed by the board fails to consider the fate of existing projects. The University will b« left with at least four serious projects en dangered by his loss By far the most important of these projects is the 1990 conversion from a quater to a semester system. The board's sudden decision to con vert has made coordinating a smooth transition extremely dif ficult for all of the schools in the in the state system. Without ex perienced leadership. Universi ty students should be extremely concerned. Desperately needed acquisi tions and physical im provements to the University Library, which were to be fund ed through the capital cam paign. could be seriously jeopardized. Proposed scholar ships. endowed chairs and visting scholars will be serious Letters Policy The Emerald will etlempl to print *11 letter* containing tom ments on topic* of interest to the University community Com' menu must be factually accurate and refrain from personal attacks on the character of other* Letters to the editor must be limited to no more than 2S0 words, legible, signed and the Identification of the writer must be verified when the letter is submitted ly curtailed with a shortening of the campaign. With the board’s announce ment the entire provost search process has been halted. No provost worth having will take the job with the president leav ing in a year. This new person to the University would have to act as president after Dr. Olum's departure, then try to nurture the new president when one is appointed, even though the pro vost would have little ex perience on our campus. This assumes, of course, the new president even likes and keeps the new provost. At best, the University would have two in experienced people leading the University. Finally, a controversial pro ject begun few years ago, the Riverfront Research Park, could become a powder keg. Dr. Olum has been the binding force in this project, using his creativity and skills as a mediator to mold contrary ideas into workable form. As students who have come to accept the research park as a reality, the thought of Dr. Olum leaving is frightening. I feel a sense of personal loss. No institution in the state, perhaps the country, is as open and caring for students and their rights. Personally. I find him to be a rare authority figure who does not get defensive in the face of sharp differences of opinion and who fosters discus sion from all sides of an issue or decision. He encourages students always to speak their minds and empower themselves. When the person who per sonifies higher education for students is removed by the system for the very qualities he has taught us — questioning authority and standing up for our beliefs — we lose con fidence and respect for higher education as a whole. To preserve the quality of our in stitution during the next five years, 1 believe the board must reverse this decision. Mnnrlnu \lnvamkar Q 10ft*7