Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 1, 1994)
EDITORIAL Child support law pays off for kids Finally, a new Oregon law is making dead-beat par ents accountable to their children. The law, whit h went into effect July 1. allows the state to suspend the occupational vehicle licenses of plumbers, electricians, truckers and other workers if they fall behind in child support payments. So far, the stale has threatened to take away the licenses of 900 workers. Ninety percent of them have agreed to begin making full child support payments. Any law that results in more support for Oregon's chil dren should be considered a godsend For too many years, children have suffered tin? most when parents split up. when Dad "forgets'' to mail his monthly check and when Mom and Dad declare war over child support. Parents, not children, should be punished when they don't take responsibility for their sons and / or daugh ters This law aims to do just that. Child support money belongs to children, and the state should make every possible effort to make sure children don't pay for the mistakes of their parents. The new law provides an overdue answer for delin quent child support payments. For years, state officials have been debating ways to make parents accountable. Although it's impossible to legislate accountability, any measure that forces people to put their children first is crucial. The threat of losing one's license to work is a power ful incentive for repaying child support. However, more needs to bo done to protect children and punish dead beat parents. The law shouldn't stop at blue-collar workers. Doctors, lawyers, businesspeople and other professionals have the same responsibility to their children as truckers ami plumbers do. In the next legislative session, the state will consider expanding the law to include alt driver's licenses and all state-licensed occupations. The revisions ant necessary to make the law applicable to all parents, resolving any problems of discrimination that may result from a law that punishes only blue-collar workers. Maine passed a law similar to Oregon's but gave state officials the authority to revoke the driver's licenses of any parent who does not pay court-ordered child sup port. Maine also was given the power to revoke the pro fessional licenses of doctors and lawyers. Warning let ters to affected parents resulted in $11.5 million in back child support payments. Oregon should follow Maine's example and take this new law further. All child support-paying parents should face penalties if they do not pay. Oregon also needs to makes sure this new law is care fully implemented Don’t let it bocome just another warning that people will start to ignore Exact the threat ened punishment. Making sure Oregon’s children have a chance at a docent future is the least we can do. Oregon Daily *0 too* lift* tOGChC 0»f GO* tr«U O*V-vn * WIW <• {Xrf^shed tJA-'y Monday through f '<iay OumQ tt*j echoo* y«Af and Tuetday end Thursday during the summer by the Oregon 0*'y Emeiid PutA*h»ng Co i*k a? ?fv« Orwvervty ot Oregon Eugene. Oregon . • • . Id' MrOnon end •« a member 0* th# AaaocM*ted P>Mi T N» i 'mmwkt % prrwafe properly The un4***u! remove! or ufce of paper» <s proa*CUteb*tt Editor-In-CMel: Kafy Soto Managing Editor Editorial Editor Graphic* Editor Fraalanc# Editor iivDaptft Editor 0«v«J Thorn fri&rwood M# P*stay Aian' n Bturn td tflopteftittin Now» Editor Sport* Editor Photo Editor Supplement* Editor Night Editor Hat***.» Mfif-n Mr«2 Wfe *■'*»" Sfw»dk* Tn*la Nocn K&fy So<0 Associate tditors f ■■t&totcn von Carp, MMfenf i*»v merrj V? vfxw **rr->e { dward*. GyTvn*</Vf> T ftany SrtVtn Hghf»r f dUC400rVAdm*V9frjO0n News Staff: l - ■ Betties* W son Chan. Amy C O'umbo Tasha E >ch*n •ten©? Arxj f shniada. Pnmo Fontana. Ga>*e Forman. Chr»sttKph«er f-o*. M*»r. Gan on. Gary G» ass Sarah Hmtafion Ml Henry. T/m** Kearney. Adam Kmc#**. Mark MeTyre. Ban Moofru* Anne Maser KomleM. Sherry Ramey. Robbie Reaves. Ua Satocoa. P*J Van Sckta, Kim Wees. Oa-'^e* VV»*%! (Vw> Womac* General Manager Judy Rted Advertising Director: Ma t Wafter Production Manager M- nefe Rosa Advertising M<vtO Ch*ng, Tony Fo*. inn Her*h<v N*co>e H#r*m*r* Jeremy M.iv Mchae* M. nne Sarah Muhe*. Tom MRteistaedt Ke*s«» W«fc#fl Classified iir**y Mercbent. iage J-ofc So&on. Jod WaJ Distribution: John long, f <■*«*> RaAocv Reg-n* /supr>* Business Kathy Carbone. Sviewxv Judy C©rmo#y ProrkrcUon Othta Ml Cobb. Production Co<y&n*tQr Shewn* Abeta Greg Desmond Tea Gaulney Brad Joss Jenifer Roland. Nett Thengv^rt, Clayton Yoe Nowvoom OffVc# 34*5511 34*5512 D<*pi«y AcJv*rti*mg 346-3712 Ctt—Mid ACtv»ftiding .346-4343 11 1*1 rv«jP *»t>ms rm 'M A w>(£ St^AK £J)OM \ jj GoAfiOiHC OUH OLO WA«J/M/)S , ■ OPINION Free speech includes everyone Freedom of s|«mm h is one of the most im|iortnnt civil lilxtrtte* m this countr> It is something most Americans take for granted until that free dotn is taken a wav While 1 was working on my fngh school newspaper. I dis i overed how crippling the loss of freedom of speech could be The problems began when the editorial board of the Tigard High School newspaper, the Hi Spots, endorsed the right to free dom of speech for an under ground newspaper The underground newspaper. Low Spots, published an issue that provided student criticism of various topics, including the school administration One arti cle criticized the principal and contained the phrase “Fuck the principal." This statement was considered obscene by the administration and, therefore, unfit for sj hoo! distribution The editorial by our school paper at knowledged that obscenities were not appropriate for the school paper, saying, “even though their mode is not appropriate for Hi Spots, we appreciate an underground newspaper's special opinion and angle ” This viewpoint was unat.i ept■ able to the school administra tion. The school distrii t adminis tration told the members of the newspaper that w e lost our right to freedom of speet h w hen we entered the school — meaning that the freedom of speet h was against school policy and that we couldn't endorse an under ground newspaper. The administration censored the editorial, saying that as an extension of the curriculum, we couldn't go against district poli cy. Several members of the paper thought the administration was trampling our freedom. I decided to call the American Civil Liberties Union to see what M arc hum Kdw ards we could do. 1 was told we could pursue legal action At that point we had to deter mine how important this issue was to us Four of us decided it was important enough to contact lawyers. We met with two lawyers who explained our rights to us They also told us what w'e could do to try to save our freedom of speech. We. along with three members of the underground newspaper, filed a c.is 11 suit m Washington County Circuit Court All of us spent hours in depositions telling our sides of the story Then we went into the court room to testify Meanwhile, the Tigard School District implemented stricter regulations concerning student publications. District adminis trators c ould now look, at any issue the students produced They could also pull any story they did not like At the c irc uit court level, the court said the Tigard School Dis trict violated our rights under the Oregon Constitution. How - ever. the court also ruled that the distric t could operate under the new guidelines Regarding the underground paper, the court said that the school dis trict had no right to censor the publication. The seven plaintiffs, along with the ACLU, appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals The appellate court overturned the case, claiming that it was moot because we (the students involved in the action) had graduated. The decision said that because we could no longer be harmed by the dis trict's regulations, the case should he dismissed. However, this ruling ignored the fact that other students could he harmed by the strict publications policy. Two years later we are still embedded in the legal system While the members of the group have gone our separate ways, we are still anxious to hear the out come of the next step. Two oth er University students also are involved in the case. Today the Oregon Supreme Court is hearing our appeal at the University's School of Law. The justices will decided how important the freedom of speech is for people who have not yet graduated from high school. The problem is that most peo ple sitting on the courts with which we have dealt are adults Some do not remember what it is like to be in high school and to he developing beliefs and ideas It is very disturbing that these students are not able to express their opinions just because they are in the public school system Article I, Section 8 of the Ore gon Constitution says that no law shall he passed restraining the free expression of opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write or print freely on any sub ject whatever. It is a shame that some people don't think that right applies to everyone. freedom of speech is extreme ly important to a Democratic society Mow would people on both sides of the political spec trum ho able to express their opinions if freedom of speech were not allowed? How would President Clinton know what the public felt about health care or gun control? it is absolutely essential that all people, at every age, in every place in the United States In* able to practice their freedom of speech. Marcrlrnr Edwards is the com munitv editor for the Emerald.
