EDITORIAL
Foster sacrificed
in political game
Pawn: The chessman of lowest value and the piece
most often sacrificed to win the game. See i)r. Henry
Poster |r.
In the always think two-moves-ahead world of pre
election-year politics, elected officials from both par
ties sacrificed a qualified candidate for the position of
U S surgeon general last week in preparation for a much
bigger move: the presidency.
After five-months of intense confirmation hearings
and congressional scrutiny. Foster's nomination was
withdrawn from the Republican-controlled Senate with
out a vote because 43 Republican senators refused to halt
the debate At issue foi Republicans was the 39 ebortkms
that Foster performed during his 38 years as a gynecol
ogist obstetrician As if setting the stage for next year's
political comedy of errors, presidential hopefuls Senate
Majority header Hob Dole and Son. Phil Gramm led the
opposition.
But abortion and Foster's qualifications never were the
real reasons for the opposition. Foster's nomination and
c onfirmation denial were little more than an opportu
nity to establish agendas and exert ise strategies.
White Dole end Gramm used Roster** nomination to
public ize their anti abortion platforms and entrenc h
themselves with powerful conservative lobbying groups.
Democratic senators and President Clinton manipulated
Poster’s re jet tlon into a 12 tissue appeal for relief from
Republic an bullies. With Foster out of the way, troth par
ties got to focus on the real enemy: each other.
Phil Gramm held tin- Assm iated . , ili.it if (ii;uT<■ 11
nominated people wit h "radical idi s mis
legal), ha should expect confrontation. Clinton coun
tered that Republic ans had c hosen to ' side with extrem
ists" who oppose a woman's right to choose.
And the game continues.
Fach side accuses the otla-r of.using Foster to it*,
advantage, while both claim they are acting in the best
interest of their constituents Contrary to what they say.
Dole. Gramm and Clinton will all benefit from this inci
dent. and all three have plat ed their quest for power
above the interests of the American people.
In tin* months ahead, with this fortuitous event behind
them. Dole and Gramm will use the pro-life/pro-family
rhetoric to garner support from the widening Bible bell,
while Clinton will position himself as a reasonable,
moderate loader in the face of freedom-crushing con
servatives.
The only losers arc1 Foster and the American people.
More than a year before the election, the players have
already established the* rules and set up the board So
as wo sit down to watch this spectator sport wo call rep
resentative1 democrat y. it's easy to forge! that wo have
already been excluded from the most important aspect:
deciding whit h game to play.
This election will explore the never-ending debates
over abortion, affirmative action and "family values.”
We ll hear about flag-burning and mandatory school
prayer. They'll all agree that we need smaller govern
ment and disagree on which parts to be cut. The right
moves to check the left, and the left counters.
And in the end. we will still be arguing over these
issues rather than finding common ground and moving
forward. By deciding for then people what is important,
the candidates ensure us that regardless of who wins, the
most we can expect in the next year is a scattering of
pawns and ultimately, a stalemate.
Oregon Daily
Emerald
nar
1 v.r l" a/..: >■’
Th© Oogon Emerald 9 fM3*s*>«d da*y Morxla> though F ftdfey Ouftftg !N» acNoo*
i«uv i*nd T i/Mday and Tfturtd*ty durvin the iumfn*r t>y fNft Oregon OtMy t me* afcl Put&tpfcng
Co Inc a*t*e l Jnfvarrtuffy of Dragon. u»g^yt Ongc^
Ts* f mor aAl OfWMllM *X**WV1diflftty O* 9*$ UnvargAy *rib c*fi*ce* at Su** 300 0* tfw» t 't)
Mom©f -ai Omon and Id a m&ntm at tNi A*a<x iab»j Ptom
Th^ Emerald r* prTvm* property th« ufttftwM r«mov« Of uM» 0* papers s* pfO*«CUta&«
CdllOMfvCMot 1 VvY.xS TK)-n
Attocialc Editor* Ma «-«n© t N*4fd». S-Mart-n SNrry fl.we» S«wr» S-- ,K
D»»*gn«f Steven Asftu* ■, Photographer Mr*-. dy Co . t
Night Editor DavxJ Thom
General Manage* .xty M«*:?
Adverting Director Ma?* W v’tv Production Manager M Rom
Advertising Ann# A.--.**.* l*e Vw fV* .u.^n Gofca*. itootho* John go* *«Sy i ,v T? n*
Classified 8*>y Me?; •
Buerneea Kafby C#rbon
Distribution j^n t
HfwVOOW
Ouvneu Office
i ' Ma\ag«v Production -a?a Go*.. ■'••■*«-* Jonnriar Roland
*. Suptfrvtjpr Judy Connofy
f'enerv RaAoc*>
346S51I Display Advertising 346-3712
346*6512 Oessihed Advertising 346-4343
T. tnrri.-v
NOT ^
IMF. FOSTER CHIU)
■ OPINION
‘Dave’s great’ but policy isn’t
KHT1I l t SMV.MVM
Gi' i*u Davtt Frohnmayer's
current popularity within
tin* University com mum -
ly- an editorial attack on his
credibility would lx* tanta
mount to making fun of tofu at n
vegetarian convention — it's
one of those things you just
don't do,
i.uc ky for me. 1 have no inten
tion of at tin king our new presi
dent It would lie journidistit
suicide to claim that
Frohnmayer is not qualified for
the challenges of his office.
It s difficult not to salivate on
a resume that includes adula
tion at Harvard, Berkeley and a
Rhodes Si holarship a! Ox fort!
lest 1 forget Frohnmayer'x it
years as Oregon attorney gener
al, where he sm»e&sfuily
argued six ol seven i uses lie fore
the U S Supreme Court It s
hard to imagine a person who
i ould be more qualified.
However, the dot ision made
by the State Board of Higher
Education to eliminate the
interim status from
Frohnmayer's president y is
troubling in the rationale the
Board cited for not undertaking
a national search Chant.ellor
Joseph Cox referred to the "high
confidence" the University
community has in Erohnmayer
and qualities like "openness"
ami "frankness" as reasons for
appointing Frohnmayer to an
indefinite tenure as University
president Although these qual
ities make Frohnmayer an
excellent candidate, they do not
justify ignoring a search process
that should lx* the benchmark of
any appointment to the
University's highest post
Twelve months ago
Frohnmayer accepted the posi
tion of interim president with
the understanding that he was
to govern the University for two
years while a %eart h was con
ducted for a permanent presi
dent. Neither Frohnmayer. Cox
nor any member of the Board
i tainted at that time thut the
appointment could become jmr
mnnent if Frohnmayer passed a
status-check 12 months into his
term.
This might lx- a non issue if
Frohnmayer'* earlier appoint
ment to the interim post had
itself been the result of a nation
al search However, the interim
decision vvas based primarily
on the recommendation of then
Ghancollor Thomas Bartlett,
without the i reation of any offi
cial seareti committee Thus, in
Ixith the interim and permanent
appointments, Frohnmayer
never faced the due process of a
national hunt
if there simply were no Ix-tter
person to be found, then
Frohnmayer could have easily
proved his superiority within
tile competition of u complete
search. One possible argument
for not undertaking a national
exploration is the high financial
burden involved However, the
Board never cited this as a rea
son for the permanent appoint
ment instead, the company line
was simply “Dave is great "
Albeit true. not even
Frohnmayer'* strengths should
have superseded the need for a
search that would have prov id
ed him the opportunity to prove
Ills excellence
While the discrepancies are
subtle, the idea of disregarding
a democratu search has much
greater implications Only a few
weeks ago the University was
honored by the presence of
Corazon Aquino at the com
mencement ceremony. Among
the topics she addressed was
the important* of democracy
and rational analysis in deter
mining public policy
What if after her tenure had
ended ns the Philippine*' presi
dent. Aquino declared “Cori is
great"? She could have simply
stated (a la Castro) that olet •
tions were unnecessary because
she was certain that the
Filipinos knew she was tile lies!
i andidate for the job.
Americans, being the lovers of
democracy thut we are, would
have Ixten outraged by Aquino's
action.
Just ns we demand that
damot rath elections govern tbs
rulers of the Philippine govern
ment. the state Board should
have endured the tedium of a
search despite how "obvious"
the Frohnmayer choice
appeared
What is particularly troubling
about this situation is the tim
ing and rushed nature of the
appointment. Chancellor Cox
stated that before he could
dot ida whether or not to recom
mend Frohnmayer to the Board,
he wanted to understand the
perceptions that the University
community and student body
had toward Frohnmayer. To
achieve this, a forum took place
on the VVednesdav night of
finals week
Let’s see now — if 1 wanted
to listen to the voices of
University students. I don’t
think I could imagine a more
effective time to do this than the
Wednesday night of finals
week Warning parts of this
column may contain levels of
sari asm that are dangerous to
your health Again, maybe the
students' love of Frohnmayer
was |ust too obvious to seek out
affirmation.
To top off that awkward tim
ing. the actual announcement of
Frohnmayer'* appointment was
made on the Friday of the week
after finals. Again, why choose
to announce this momentous
appointment during the qui
etest week of the year when
them are practically no faculty,
staff or students on campus?
However, like a Hollywood
movie, this storv has a happy
ending. We are now lucky
enough to have an abundantly
qualified president. 1 am posi
tive President Frohnmayer will
attack the $?>•» million shortfall
the University faces over the
next two years with the same
vigor and talent that he has
used in all his life's achieve
ments To put it succinctly,
Frohnmayer is a man with
unquestionable capabilities
who regrettably was appointed
under questionable circum
stances
Keith Cunningham is a
columnist for the Emerald.