Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (July 21, 1988)
Don't let new search end as last one did The search for a new chancellor is on again, and the Oregon State System of Higher Education apparently needs your help. The effort to replace former Chancellor William E. “Bud” Davis, who resigned June 30, is resuming after the first search failed to deliver a candidate of whom the board could approve The search process itself seemed rather chaotic, with finalists dropping out at the last moment and several search committee members not participating in the final vote. There is every indication that this new search could be as frustrating as the first. In order not to frighten off quality candidates, the Executive Committee was being pressured to delay the next search until the perceived turmoil in Oregon’s education system subsided. No such luck, but it does appear that the board is taking the search a little more seriously. The committee is planning a more aggressive strategy that will seek out and pursue can didates, including those previously considered untouchable or out of Oregon’s reach. Also, search committee chairman George Richardson Jr. has encouraged faculty and administration members from the state schools to become actively involved in the search process by finding and nominating potential candidates. Allowing administrators and faculty to participate in the search is both a wonderful and necessary idea. Failure to select a chancellor after this dragnet could further damage the reputation of Oregon’s education system. A fiasco must be avoided. The call to get others involved in the search is also an unusual admission of failure from the state board. We en courage University members to take up this opportunity, both to select a chancellor that we can live with, and to begin a constructive dialogue that the board cannot simply ignore, as it has done in the past. City council must face nuke free zone vote again It looks as though the Eugene City Council’s disappoin ting rejection of Nuclear Free Zone (NFZ) Option A, and its betrayal of the majority of voters who twice approved this measure, will not go unchecked after all. Members of the Committee to Keep Eugene Nuclear Free are confident that they have gathered enough signatures to take the matter before the voters — again. If they are suc cessful, in November the NFZ measure could appear as an amendment to the city charter. The petition with its 5,000 signatures is due July 29. Opponents of Option A charge that its more stringent anti-nuclear stance will hurt Eugene business opportunities. Option B, the one adopted by the City Council in a 5-4 vote last month, is more symbolic gesture than activist stance. The question of whether Option A does damage business interests can only be answered once the measure is in practice. If the tougher nuclear free zone is harmful, it can be rescinded later. Until then, it remains the job of the City Council to enact the measure that the majority of voters ap proved, not the one that Eugene’s business leaders feel com fortable with. If you have not already done so, we encourage you to sign the Nuclear Free Eugene committee’s petition. Carry the message to the city’s leaders that the will of Eugene’s citizens will not be denied. P.O. Box 315V, F utit iu . Oregon V7403 The Oregon Daily Emerald is published Tuesday and Thursday during the sum mer by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co., at the University of Oregon, Eugene. Oregon, 97403. Daily publication resumes with the fall term. The Emerald operates independently of the University with offices at 300 Erb Memorial Union. The Emerald is a member of the Associated Press The Emerald is private property The unauthorized removal or use of papers is prosecutable by law Editor Aaron Knox News Editor Carolyn Lamberson Managing Editor Kelvin Wee Editorial Page Editor Tom Prowell Sports Editor Gary Henley Photo Editor James Marks Night Editor Carolyn Lamberson Associate Editors Politics/Higher Ed/Admin Paula Green Student Govt/Activities Tom Prowell General Staff Newsroom. 686-5511 Advertising Director Susan Thelen Display Advertising.686-3712 Classified Manager Kelli Mason Classified Advertising.686 4343 Production Manager Michele Ross Production...,,,..,...,...686-4381 Advertising Coordinator Sandra Daller Letter Perfect Graphics.686-4381 Assistant to the Publisher Jean Ownbey Business. 686-5511 sisgsaas&r:... “The main event? Really? You two? I’ve been waiting all night for this?!” 1 Commentary Japan could teach family lessons Japan and the United States meet at an important crossroads on issues of women and work. We have much to learn from each other. Commentary by Linda Tarr-Whelan For historical and philosophical reasons, the United States has approached equality for women workers through the development of equal employment opportunity. Recently we have begun to develop the systems necessary to provide an adequate support structure for families. Japan, on the other hand, has approached equality from a feminist perspective which is rooted in the protection of motherhood as the dues which society should pay in apprecia tion for the unique role of women. Now they are im plementing equal employment opportunity. Two wage-earner families are becoming commonplace. In 1984, close to half of all Japanese women — only three percent less than in the United States — worked. During the 10 years from 1975 to 1985, 4.12 million Japanese women joined the labor force. The occupations showing the greatest growth for women in Japan cluster in the areas where competition with the United States has been most intense. In the last decade, the employ ment of Japanese women in in formation, science, technical and professional careers has doubled. But when Japanese women enter the workforce, they do so with a comprehensive system of family supports already in force — programs the United States is only now debating. • Mothers are entitled to paid maternity leave — up to 16 weeks at 60 percent of their the school. Such policies, we hear in the debate over these issues in this country, are bad for business. The Japanese don't see it that way. Over and over, in lectures, in interviews and in conversa tion, they asked me the same questions: "Isn’t a lack of family policies bad for the children? isn’t is bad for workers and the economy?” A statistical comparison of some important indices of social and economic health sug ‘But when Japanese women enter the workforce, they do so with a comprehen sive system of family supports already in force — programs the United States is only now debating.’ — Linda Tarr-Whelan salaries, paid by the government. • Day care centers are funded by national and local govern ments. Parents’ share of day care costs is never more than half. Some special facilities ex ist for babies, disabled children and extended day care. • Families have access to na tional health coverage, in cluding excellent maternal and infant health care. • Kindergartens are within the public school system and take children from the age of three, if parents make an application to Letters Policy The Emerald will attempt to print all letters con taining comments on topics of interest to the Universi ty community. Comments must be factually accurate and refrain from personal attacks on the character of others. Letters to the editor must be limited to no more than 250 words, legible, signed and the identification of the writer must be verified when the letter is submitted. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length or style. Letters should be turned into the Emerald office, Suite 300, EMU. gests that they have a point. How many infants din before their first birthday? Japan’s infant mortality rate is six per 1,000 births, tied with Finland and Sweden for lowest in the world. Our rate is 11 deaths per 1,000 births — the 19th worst — while the mortali ty rate for black infants is 19 per 1,000 births — tied with with Costa Rica, Poland and Portugal for 28th place. How many young people complete high school? In Japan, 90 percent. In the United States, the range by state goes from a high of 92 percent in Minnesota, down to a low of 54 percent in Louisiana. Our workforce, one of our greatest resources, is handicap ped by lack of family support. And our economy will fall fur ther behind unless we act firmly and expeditiously to develop family policies. We can't afford not to. Linda Tarr-Wlielan is presi dent and executive director of the National Center for Policy Alternatives, a nonpartisan, nonprofit public policy center focusing on innovation at the state and local level.
