Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 1, 1989)
_Editorial— Wright tried, but he was no Rayburn For (i while, we were frightened. It looked as though he'd fillibuster until, .it least. President Hush lelt office He even compared himself to former House Speaker Sam Rayburn but that went over .is well as I Jan Quay le's comparison to Ja< k Kennedy He took a long time getting to the point, but House Speaker Jim Wright announced Wednesday he is sur rendering his leadership post and has offered to resign his congressional seat after a year of controversy over alleged ethics violations. On May 20. 1088. a formal complaint was filed v\itli the 1 louse Ethics (’ommitlee asking for .in investi gation to determine whether Wright violated House ethics rules On May 24 ot this year. Wright's lawyers broached the possibility of Wright resigning Ins leader ship post in exchange for dismissal ol some of the eth ic s charges against him. So now Wright who has "ached" to tell his side ot the sordid store for a year, spent an hour Wednesday answering the three basic questions the ethic s < ominit tee had raised against him. These questions dealt with the employment ol his wife Heltv (and alleged "gifts" she had lei eived while employed), the monetary influ em e ol his friend and business partner George Mallick and Wright s evasion of outside income limits through bulk sales of his book "Kellis lions ol a Public Man." Wright contended the ethics committee did not of fer evidenc e that his wife did not earn the approxi mately $18,000 she made while employed over a four yeai period although the committee accused her of not working, and inadvertently accused them both of being involved in subterfuge by accepting gifts from Ahl I I M .K Wright also faced the committee s charges that Mallick had direct influence in establishing legislation and in making Wright vote in Mallick's favor on legis lation. Hut apparently, the committee claimed Mallick didn't have direct interests in Wright's proceedings, and neither were any of his actions in violation of the direct interest rules Finally, in terms of his book. Wright said he did not "scam to exceed and violate the outside income limits rules." lie was just sorry his staff was so eager to sell his books. Hut Wright wasn't finished lie called for both par ties in Congress to "resolve to bring this period of mindless cannibalism to an end." No doubt relieved that Wright's emotional defense was over, his col leagues gave him a standing ovation. Or maybe they're as relieved as other Americ ans that the' ethics scandal is over, and House Majority header Thomas Foley. 13 Wash., likely will take his plac e and complete the shift to a new generation of leaders in Congress. 4 \ D O ETHICS _ COMM. . 0 o OKAY OKAY., I MIGHT CONSIDER LEAVING NOW.. | mJ I I 1 ' fys I'yrarri iSRi"iv'» Bush scores his first victory at summit Hoy. you think you got a guy pugged, .ind he goes off and does something that really surprises you. After four months of a do-nothing presi dency and a record of diplomatic waffling, (ieorge Bush did indeed go off and. seem ingly from out of nowhere, (lull off a surpris ing foreign policy achievement last week at the 4()th-anniversary summit meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. You've got to give tilt* guy some credit; the NATO summit was a tough challenge. Bush managed to walk a thin line between hawkish Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of Kngland and Chancellor Helmut kohl of West Oermany, who passes as Western Eu rope's version of a peace maverick. In forging for NATO a (wild yet tenuous conventional arms control agreement with the Soviet Union, Bush brought back an achievement where none was expected. Partly, Bush was under the gun, needing an initiative to counter Soviet President Mik hail (iorbachev's recent popular proposals. Bush's proposal calls for-a 20 percent cut in European combat troops and a 15 per cent reduction in aircraft, with a completion schedule of six to 12 months. While a call for "partial reduction" in short-range nucle ar missiles (the major source of contention between Kohl and Thatcher) was made, real plans on the missile issue have been delayed until progress is made in talks taking place in Vienna, Austria. Coming from a man who shuffled his feet in diplomatic situations in China and Panama and billed himself as "tough on defense" during the election, the conventional arms proposal is quite the bold initiative. While Bush managed to put together a difficult consensus between the l(i NATO members, there are still some things to be worked out. The language of the missile compromise was left intentionally vague, and Thatcher and kohl have already started taking potshots at each other over it. Also, now tilt; technical experts must put the pres ident's proposal down on paper, deciding how and where to start dismantling and de stroying tanks and warplanes. But for now, Bush can savor his victory we won't begrudge him that. And we also hope he has learned the confidence in this summit that will allow him to make other bold, crucial foreign policy decisions in the future. -Letters Low blow I was honestIv shocked to read the editorial about the (laffney Hoyt administration (ODE, May 25) I really think ( (aiming their leadership was invisible is harsh and unfound ed. The people that worked in the ASUO this year worked hard and were extremely dedi cated. For the Emerald to sim ply attack this administration tor doing nothing is a low blow to these people When I went to the Emerald to inquire about this editorial's harshness, the response I got was "we actually had fun writ ing it " The Emerald ought to be ashamed of having a good time cutting people down in such a manner and remember its responsibility of writing constructive editorials rather than destructive Along with objecting to the tone of the editorial. 1 have to point out that it is unfounded Head you own newspaper, folks. The Emerald has report ed the ASUO’s involvement in registering 2,000 voters, griev ances on the semester issue, and advocacy for child care na tionally. state-wide, and at the University The Kmorald reported the ASUO fought fee increases on user fees, tuition increases, building fees and financial aid The ASUO was in the Kmerald for informing students on elec tion issues It fought for ten ants' rights, according to the Kmerald I think the Kmerald ought to think more clearly about what it says before it simply prints such a vicious attack bet ause it brings some kind of personal entertainment. The ('.aft neyiloyt administration has been a verv strong representa tive for the student body and ought to be recognized for that |. Lauren Norris Former Incidental Fee Committee Chair Waiting I'm writing in support of Steve Hanson's stance (ODE, May 25) on the Emerald's letter policy, as 1 was frustrated by a similar problem After a full scale arti cle interview with Pam Daener appeared in the Emerald focus ing on “one side" of the ani mal rights issue. I wrote a letter in response. I was aware that my letter was over the 250 word limit, but considering the fact that the Emerald had made no attempt to feature an article presenting the "other side," I thought the least they could do was publish my letter There were no other letters regarding the article submitted. Meanwhile, nunurrous letters have appeared concerning is sues such as abortion and fra ternity practices Is the Emerald teetering so precariously over the abyss of biased journalism that it can refuse to print one letter in response to a full-scale article and instead print multi ple letters on another subject again and again? I welcome the Emerald to in terview anyone from Students for the Ethical Treatment of An imals to write an article like that about Pam Daener and even the score. If they aren’t in terested, they could still print my letter. Still waiting (ill Freidberg Anthropology Not all right In reply to Dan Hawkins (OllF. May 15) You claim to be for the peace movement, and attempt to prove that graffiti perverts the cause. You are actually pervert ed perverted into false reali ty. insulated from the brutality of life in other parts of the world or the brutalities of hun ger. homelessness and the rav aged ecosystem. Whet you fail to grasp is that there's a war being waged in HI Salvador by the government against the people. We don't live with the trauma of a mili tary state Graffiti gets noticed; some how the war doesn't Graffiti forces you to think. Graffiti is a reaction to the smug complacency of a country’ responsible, but never account able. for crimes against human ity and the planet. I won't condone graffiti of hate. However hate is commu nicated. it’s reprehensible. fust because graffiti is illegal, does that mean it’s wrong? Outlawing graffiti does enable us to apprehend messengers of hate, but also suppresses truths, truths which when hid den ease the conscience. You complain that graffiti is "an eyesore." Should all eye sores be removed? Should the United States follow the totali tarian example of creating an artificial surface to convince the public that "everything is really all right." It reminds me of l*OVV camps in Germany. Iraq or Cambodia doctored up for the Red Gross examinations "Everything is fine here,” they would tell observers. Well, everything is not all right. You missed the cause. Can’t we sacrifice the clean side of buildings for the home less, the people of El Salvador, our ancient forests? |onah Bookstein Philosophy
