Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 21, 1994)
EDITORIAL Student opinion sought for fees A basic course in economics teaches that there is an unlimited demand for scant and finite resources. In the micro marketplace of the University, student groups compete for limited program funds from the holder of the purse strings — the Student Senate. Student unions, associations, committees and councils funded by student incidental foes must go before the Senate on an annual basis to justify their slice of the bud getary pie. In past years, groups seeking funds pled their case to the Incidental Foe Committee, which was abol ished by a vote of the students in the spring of 1994. The Senate must weigh the competing demands of additional or continued funding of these groups against the increasing and burdensome incidental fees charger! students each term. rot tne academic year 1994-95, each student will pay $119 per term for an annual total of S357. This is a $7 50 Increase from last year, stemming mainly from a handful of ASUG ballot measures passed by students in the spring election. The total budget, including ballot measure funding, exceeds S5 million. The Senate controls about $4.5 mil lion of this budget, doting money for those groups meet- i ing specific criteria. On Nov. 17, the Senate held a forum to solicit student opinion on the allocation of student funds for student groups My seeking input from the "taxpayers" of this University, the Senate hoped to test the political waters before increasing or decreasing student fees We applaud the Senate's ac tion to encourage partici patory government on this campus. Unfortunately, the meeting was a i ha nee for many of the spot ial interest groups re< eiving student funds to fur ther embellish upon their respective tausrs, to once again show the Senate the value of their programs Only a few nun-affiliated (not memlxjrs of a funded group) stu dents showed up. These students voiced opposition against groups ranging from OSPlRCi to the USSA and the SI l million student-supported payment to tile Ath letii Department. These people claimed to be speaking for the silent majority of students who don’t speak out against student funds being used to lobby or to provide entertainment. 1'he anti-fee sentiment during the forum was refreshing in that it gave senators a taste of what non-involved stu dents think about the funding of student groups — espe cially those who engage in political activity. But students should remember that groups OSP1KG and Saforide received their funding via the ballot mea sure. that is, students voted to fund these programs in a fair and square election. If there is in fact a silent majority of students who want incidental foes decreased, these people need to get off their collective butts and lot the Senate know. It will hold one more forum, from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. in the EMU Walnut Room on Monday. It's a chance to speak up or continue to pay up. Oregon Daily Emerald PO bOt ; m luGtM C ft| vVO*t V IN* Onpun Omty f "x*mj it pUMttNKI (fcaty Monday through I nday n*a tcfwoi V « »' and I uatday *n,1 TNiifcday dining tba lumnti by th# Oragon 0» I E ma'am Pu«*tNng Co , Enc , at IN* Uruwtr**y ol Otgui fKpenti, Oagon IN* l mtaao nfmrrnm •ntiaperxttmfy o* *>• IJnwv*, «rth oMicm a* Su*a 300 ol INi E l Manxmal Union and it * morrow ol »*# a.vkk«»<k1 Piatt IN* f m«r*u a pmraia pioparty Tha uNaalul lomowd cn um ol papwt it proMcuutM by law (dnor tn-Chwf Kaly Solo M*n*g*rmF<#tor left tort*! Editor N*wi Art Fetitor Fr**4*r>c< Editor D#v»d T how Jotf ttftnvood JtflPmtoy fbMntafet Now* Editor Sport* tarot trvO*ptt> Editor Sopptomont* E<*tor HMaoct »*»■>« CIVW Uoli tO Klopfornton T nut Hat* N»ghl Editor Amy GoMnbO Aaaoclata Editor* f vOO Carp. $*M$«nt Government Aitrvtimx. f <9ww<3*, Comm^/Wy. T <!tany Sm«th Hgft#r i dUr**or» Adr*v*&ab&n N#w* Staft Am» C<*\.mtv Amy l. (Wear^po* T Aiha l c#w*iaha» Atxi fsbmidft, frwno Fontana. Gay** »qrman. Cbt %U***h fct. Matt Gorton Gary Gr»fc$ Sarah Mandaraon* Kn* M«r¥> Tmvcw K#sw^ry, Adam Kmcf>«r. Sutlfmi Marta M.v* McTyr*. Bern Moafeu*. Ami *U*’ *r*! Sh«**y PW*»> ft***# Rif*a* Ki'f SabOurwv f*aui van $<cfcm Mn;h«*« Thorn^v.:!. Midefc Tomaoka Kim Watt Oar*** Watt, Brian Momacti Qaoaral Manager xty JWJ Advarttfing Otractor M vfc WkWi*r production Manage' M ^ Mc%% A<Jy#rtt*ing M,» a Ch"^ t y I . •«, I t.r* it©>sh«* S > c IW*';■-* ,\•* Jarre"', U.»v W * a** M «ftn Sac ah M •• ’ 4^ . T>-» M *•*■'Krir, »S<r*t Cimidtd flacky M<r.:f'4 * Hi vv Jo* Sa8a«. Jod* VV» Distribution hi* i j F*r<nrx R&» H-.-» > • ■ * *’-. , * Butina*» ffltfty CrArtX^cHi. S..*n*v*. Judy C^.“;?y Production 0*rf’ .» M, X5t? /VhA* (\\ j ■ ‘vra*t«-4 Afta&e Tara (».i. i ■ -r> tv ad .-■>»». JacvHtar Horvd Ma** f ha- c**y *<•-•• v#*» He*»%*QC Ounrv«>*-i QHkv we 5sn Adv*fti*lng AcWefVvftg m*3712 MA4343 MV JOB, MV income MV wealth care Afc£ ALL INSBcokE /mv Place i*j the amddle | class is /w daajcea, a no 7*£ I <iOVfRNfAE>jr /J/s/T MElP/^6. X Jth V THEY SWoutD Cv/T 7WJ, guT aKJT M»OOC£ UASS S£WtCE<>. c twev shouldcurV the services a* Mjt TWE poor. «»It Be careful what \iou wish far departiv\«ntL vjivUti UK WfJu n £ w, ?xe t **+* *• X I THtV SMV ALSU AAy 8£ coaaiml, nut ■ COMMENTARY debate key to success Thai's ill This is ridicu lous' After many year* on this campus I should b«> ins mime In po! il it al[\ i nrrie ! blethering run amok, bul ihis lours it First lei me |m» i lear about my purpose '['his is not primarily a letter about any one issue, jier so. but about rational thought and argumentation Specifically, I deplore the fai t that rational analysis has l>een supplanted by emotionally charged accusations that people who are pro-Propo sition 187 are rotten desjarts. and a llead-in-the sand attitude that avoids aiTnowlodging problems or proposing realist si solutions In their letter (ODE Nov, IS) opposing Proposition 187, lowry and Bookslem pull out all of the stops, painting the legislation ami all supporters as racist, referring to a white supremacist agenda, and Big Brother-stylo informants Now I happen to support their conclusion (i n.. Proposition 187 is a t»ad move), but deplore their masoning Why do you have to start screaming racism and preaching moral indignation about "inherent rights” and the mjustu es of the colonial period? Get real! This is 1994 and no mat ter what happened before, we have to deal with REAL social problems with REAL solutions rather than wounded homilies about rights and injustice. Though currently very popu lar (used by conservatives and liberals alike), these "life, liber ty and the American way” ser mons are hopelessly' self-right ecus rtmi servo only to obscure the true issues Let’s talk about facts Then let's talk about solu tions. Proposition 1H7 is not inherently about race; it is about money and one idea of a solu tion Yes, true, since we are talk ing about California, it will affect Hispanic* more than oth ers Hut then 11 an think of a lot of tax laws that affect some peo ple more than others. I can even think of some that are not |ust Why insist on imagining a sin ister ni< is!'agenda behind this law rather than attm king it in an Whv do you have to start screaming rui ism ami preaching moral indignation about "inherrrent rights " and the in jus to r.v of the colonial period.' orderly rational wav' Lay out the problem the law seeks to address, c haracterize how the law proposes to address the problem, and then sav why you disagree Sure it makes a rotten sound bite, but it s much more productive For example, rational discus sion of Proposition 187 must focus on an exceedingly simple equation There is a high demand for government social services in California. and the tax base < an not support this demand If we start with the assumption that w« want to maintain (or increase) the cur rent level of services there are only two solutions Either you somehow decrease demand, or you increase the tax base (i.e . raise taxes). In advocating an open border policy and claiming that the problem is a "lack of services," Lowry and Bookstein implicitly advocate the latter; Proposition 187 takes the former approach Either way, you have to show that your approach can come up with enough dollars to cover proposed services because this is the REAL world. So, no matter which of the two above approaches you pre fer, let's stiil to the real issue — money. Hither come out and say. "I am for sharing what wealth we, as a mm iety. have with all comers" or state, "I feel that we should prioritize the distribu tion of this soi iety's resources and I also believe that citizen ship is good criteria for this " Don’t start screaming about racism and Nazis, don’t start i ailing people white supremn cisl, don't start planting si arc ta< tii s about Hig Brotherism Ad dross the facts, state your position, and suggest a solution. Not everything has to be painted in the day glow dramatics of grave injustice Let me give you an example, so we can have profitable dis cussion rather than politically i orrect or conservative invective in the future I do not believe that Proposi tion 187 is a solution to the financial crisis in California. Legally or otherwise, people immigrate for economic gain, not just for social services. Giv en that people will come regard less. we are much better off w ith a populace that is educated and generally healthy. The reasoning here is basic ally that if people have a shot at opportunity, they will be less likely to turn toward crime and are more likely to raise non-poor, non-social-ser vice-using kids. Furthermore, illegal immi grants have contributed substan tially, both in taxes and profits arising from cheap labor, to this country since its inception Since every single state in this union has directly or indirectly benefited from this economic boon, 1 txdieve it is the job of the federal government to help out hard-hit states like California. Texas, and Florida Yes, this might mean a tax increase, and yes. I would be willing to put my money where my mouth is by paying more taxes or selling the presidential yacht or doing without a similarly “essential" government outlay. Now look how easy that was' No si reams of inequality, no ( hnracter assassination, no implying people who disagree are Oregon Citizens Alliance members or Hitler, nothing! Of course, it's way too boringly rational to get on the evening news.... Fi k Doerry is it graduate student in computer and information science
