EDITORIAL
White House kills
conservation plan
President Bush end top Whito House officials have
eliminated key conservation provisions in a proposed
energy plan. That conies as no surprise.
The Energy Department wanted tougher conserva
tion standards, including higher car mileage stan
dards. But Chief of Staff John Sununu. budget Director
Richard Darman and economic adviser Michael Boskin
forced the Energy Department to rewrite its original en
ergy plan.
Tough mileage standards, along with emission
control regulations, have been debated for years. But
every time Congress sets a deadline for these controls,
car and oil companies scream bankruptcy or poverty
If all else fails, the oil companies send covert mes
sages to elected officials Informing them that if the
PAC money is to continue rolling in. they better sue
things differently.
in reality, car ana oil companies nave mucn more
to do with establishing energy policy than any repre
sentative. Money talks In this great land, and with the
investment this country has in oil and cars, big busi
ness only has to cry “recession!'' and Congress sweats.
How can the president be persuaded to put money
into alternative energy sources when he used to run an
oil company? No wonder he is willing to let Americans
die in the Persian Gulf. He has plenty of friends and
donators in the oil business. He wants their money
when he runs in 1992.
We found out in 1973 what it feels like to be held
hostage as a nation because of our dependence on oil.
Oil companies don’t feel any real pressure because
they )ust pass the higher costs on to addicted consum
ers.
Gas (unkies are willing to do anything for their fix
— even support a president who pledges in one breath
to keep California's coast off-limits to new drilling
while warning that it is inevitable.
The United States must base its energy plans for
the future on alternative sources, such as the wind and
the sun. Instead of bailing car companies out of proba
ble bankruptcy, like Congress did for Chrysler in the
early 1980s, the government needs to put our tax mon
ey into safe energy sources.
Bush wants to reduce our dependence on foreign
oil. He should be working to reduce dependence on
oil. period. But as long as our leader has personal ties
to the oil business, we'll never get a pertinent alterna
tive energy plan.
/
5OM.M0UR GRADES
5U0UJ A LACK OF
(MTERE5T IM scmool
WORK,AMD...(rOJ,RE
BDXKIMSTUETV.SOM.
Channel One can be useful if used nght
Television lias slowly been making its
way into the education system for some
time, beginning years ago with the old
35mm projection movies that students used
to sit through in grade school.
With the advent of video tape, televi
sions finally began appearing in classrooms
Recently, a further step has been taken in
the electronic education field.
Channel One. a 10-minute-a-day educa
tional program has made its way into Ore
gon classrooms. The satellite-transmitted
program examines current events as report
ed by school-aged children.
While the introduction of a current
events program in schools is good and. in
some places, long overdue, the trend toward
dependence on electronic media to teach
children is frightening.
American children watch too much tele
vision as it is. Making TV the center of at
tention in the classroom has the potential to
be abused. Teaching kids to rely on one
source for their news and information must
also be guarded against.
It is tmt likely that televisions will be
banished from classrooms anytime soon. If
Channel One is going to be a part of educa
tion, it should be used as a tool by teachers
rather than a substitute for them.
Channel One could open up class dis
cussion about current events and help Amer
ica’s youth catch up with their counterparts
in other countries in knowledge of geogra
phy and global politics. Channel One may
be a great way to get them more interested in
what’s going on in the world.
However, having a teacher turn on the
television and letting students stare at the
tube for 10 minutes without discussion be
fore or after the show would be a complete
waste — of technology, of class time and of
children’s minds.
LETTERS
Music makers
I am writing in response to
the letter titled "Parley. (Juack"
written by two former Oregon
Man:hing Hand members
(OOB. Dec. 3).
The fact that the subject of
the Stanford Band is still re
turning to the Enwrald disturbs
me. Aside from the publicity
that the band is still getting for
its controversial performance. 1
am offended by the continuous
remarks insulting our own
marching band.
The OMH has played little
role in the criticism of the Stan
ford Hand The criticisms that
were recorded were for the
most part misquoted. I actually
found their performance hu
morous.
I don't understand what the
OMH has done to warrant the
criticisms against it. Kverytime
the issue of the Stanford Hand
comes up. it is followed by re
marks Ix'littling our own band.
We don't expect everyone to
enjoy our halftime show, but
many people do.
We work extremely hard to
play our music well, practic mg
several hours a week on the
music alone. I am most of
fended by the statement imply
ing that marching hands have
nothing to do with music. Per
haps other marching bands do
not. but the current OMH has
everything to do with music.
The OMH hasn't done any
thing to offend anyone: all I ask
is the same courtesy.
Matt Hoekstra
OMB member
Accountable
Regarding Russel Barnett's
letter (()l)t■. Jan 7):
I am neither anti-research nor
anti-education. I am also not an
active member of SKTA. I do.
however, have a deep respect
for animal life
We must not forget that we,
ton. are animals. No. I do not
expect to have a constitution
written for non-human ani
mals. hut I do expect us to al
low them to lead dignified, un
disturbed lives.
Kvery fa< ulty member is ai
countable to the students and
their animal subjects for their
research. They should, and are
expected by me. to lake a brief
period of class time to defend
the ways they, more often than
not, exploit non-human ani
mals and rack up quite an ex
pensive bill doing so.
Hurley Huffman
Eugene
Loan reform
Supporters of education
should lie glad to hear that the
Hush Administration is propos
ing to overhaul student loan
programs. administered by
banks, that have ripped off stu
dents legally for years
Under this proposal. both
students and the government
save money. The savings can
then provide more aid to the
neediest college students.
Students deal exclusively
with their college under the
new plan The middle men
(lianks) are out of the picture.
The banking industry is pre
dictably outraged because they
will lost* spec ml allowance
profits Hut it's time the banks
stopped making money off the
backs of students
Certainly, there is more the
administration must do for edu
ration; yet this plan is a step in
the right direction for educa
tion which will either make or
break us in the years to come.
Michael Colson
Political Science
Confusion
In answer to Jane Strieker's
response [ODE. I)ec. t>} to my
letter [ODE. Nov. 2‘1). 1 would
like to say. yes, Jane did raise
questions and confusion about
a number of things. On the his
tory issue, suffice it to say that
quoting history with a slant to
ward legitimizing particular
political goals is a widespread
practice, and Starhawk is no
exception with her Karth-cen
tered political agenda. The is
sue of truth remains an open
question.
Considering that her appear
ance was a fund-raiser for a
campus peace group. my
thoughts turned to some basic
questions Why are we for
peace and against war? Is it lie
cause war is a nuisance and a
bother and interrupts our busy
sc hedules? Because it is a
waste of money?
It seems that Starhawk anil
company oppose war because
it's bad for the land, but I sub
mit (fiat most people who op
pose war do so because they
feel killing is wrong. Why? Is it
not because we hold life sa
cred?
Starhawk glowingly de
scribed the sacred cyclical pro
cesses of birth, growth, death
and regeneration in discussing
"eco-feminist" ideology. She
portrayed women as honoring
these sacred life cycles, being
an integral part of them, each
individual having inherent val
ue without having to earn it.
This sounds good, if one were
not aware that many, if not
most, feminists place an even
higher value on their power to
interrupt the lifecycle.
So much for the inherent val
ue of individuals who happen
to Ih> at a different phase than
we in their life cycles.
So what's all this got to do
with peace anyway? Yes. Jane,
it seems that confusion
abounds.
(^arla Moser
Eugene