Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 17, 1996)
s MONDAY: Opinion TUESDAY: Politics WEDNESDAY: Opinion THURSDAY: Politics FRIDAY: Opinion a voter’s guide to the 1996 election and life on the campaign trail What did you think of the final presidential debate between President Clinton and Bob Dole? ISSUE: AMTRAK JJ ij iJ JjJl) JlJ Question: Would you increase, decrease, eliminate or leave unchanged the amount of federal money supporting the national passenger railway? “The administration is working to transform Amtrak into a commer cially focused and cost effective provider of quality transportation service. To accomplish our goal of eliminating Amtrak’s dependence on reaerai operating subsidies by 2002, we are proposing a stable level of capital investment to permit Amtrak to modernize its equipment and facilities. The administration is also proposing a decreas ing level of operating assistance." —President Bill Clinton, Democratic candidate “I was among the earli est advocates of Amtrak privatization. We have reached the point where each Amtrak passenger costs the federal gov ernment—which is to say, the American tax payer — more than $400 for each trip he or she takes. We can no longer afford to subsi dize Amtrak at these levels. As president, I would propose that my secretary of trans portation review these plans and present me with a privatization plan that can be imple mented. " —Bob Dole, Republican candidate “Every government pro gram must pass a cost benefit analysis. Amtrak needs to demonstrate that it provides enough benefits to the public to warrant its cost to the taxpayers." —Ross Perot, Reform Party candidate SOURCE: Associated Press The Oregon Daily Emerald is published daily Monday through Fri day during the school year and Tuesday and Thursday during the summer by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co. Inc., at the University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon A member of the Associated Press, the Emerald operates independently of the University with of fices at Suite 300 of the Erb Memorial Union. The Emerald is private property The unlawful removal or use of papers is prosecutable by law. Editor-in-Chief: Steven Asbury Managing Editor Jennifer Carter Night Editor: Mark McTyre Community: Jennifer Schmitt, editor. Jean Bond Entertainment: Nicole Kreuger, editor. Jesse Stephenson Higher Education: Kristine Sohnrey, editor. Tamyra Howser, in depth. Benjamin Kwasney Opinion: Ashley Bach, editor. Chris Hutchinson, illustrator. Politics: Shana Cohn, editor. Doug Irving Special Projects: Tiffany Smith Student Activities: Kristin Bailey, editor. Angie Suchy, Tom Potter Sports: Mark McTyre, editor. Andrea DeYoung, assistant editor. Chris Hansen, Ryan Frank, Ryan Halvorsen Copy Desk: Thom Schoenborn, copy chief. Trevor Kearney, Sarah Kickler, Mike Schmierbach, Kendra Smith Presentation: Dennis Bolt, editor. Cosmos Corbin, Matt Garton Photography: Mathew Stiffier, editor. Andrew Brackensick, Joe Bunik, Amanda Erickson, Shannon Kilduff, Chad Patteson Freelance: Lara Pittman, editor On-Line: Nicholas Stiffier, direc tor. General Manager Judy Riedl Advertising Becky Merchant, director. Anne Amador, Lee Yen Beh, Marco Ching, Yujin Chi, Matt Johnson, Anne Miller, Trina Sha naman. Rose Soil, Matt Solomon, Greg Walsh Classified: Tara Sloan, manager. Natasha Lumpkin. Debbie Levy, Heather Moye Production: Michele Ross, manager. Ingrid White, coordinator. Shawna Abele, Laura Daniel. Susan Head,Trevor Kearney,Tara Knight, Melissa Lebahn, Molly McCanta, Allison Stormo, Mike Young Business: Kathy Carbone, supervisor Judy Connolly Distribution: John Long, David Lee Newsroom...(541)346-5511 Display Advertising.(541)346-3712 Business Office.(541) 346-5512 Students speak out on debate ■ ELECTION DEBATE: Student supporters oj each candidate believe the two accomplished their goals By Doug Irving Community Reporter President Clinton and Bob Dole spoke to America last night from the University of San Diego. An audience of about 20 University stu dents listened intently from Carson Resi dence Hall’s television room. “I just felt I needed to watch,” said stu dent Bryan Orthel. “All the issues that are actively being discussed will affect us.” This debate featured a town hall format that allowed the candidates to answer ques tions from ordinary people, said David Wade, the president of College Democrats of America. “We as students really care about issues,” he said. "We really want to see a real dia logue and that's what a town hall meeting is.” This format also attracted students be cause it forced the candidates to focus on real issues, Wade said. "This is about students coming together,” he said. “It was about us listening to ideas. 1 think it’s going to get students to the polls.” Dole had promised to focus on Clinton’s ethical problems as part of his debate strate gy. For Clinton-supporter Cora Bennett, this tactic did not help Dole. “I think he did come out stronger but his attack approach undermined his ideas,” she said. Dole supporters agreed that he did come out stronger in this debate, but avoided per sonal attacks and focused on issues that matter to the country. “He did raise questions on public issues,” said Gail Johnson, the southern chair woman of the College Republican Federa tion of Oregon. “He called the president on a lot of things. I think it’s so important that people examine the record.” The format also allowed Dole to discuss MATHEW STIFFLER/Emerald Students in the Carson Television room watch the debates on Thursday night. his issues and bring out important points that may not have come out in a different debate format, said Liz Bobek, a member of the University College Republicans. “I think he represented his positions real ly well,” she said. "We’re very proud of him.” Wade said Clinton reacted well to the for mat by staying positive and answering ques tions about the issues. Because of this, his approach is more attractive to college stu dents, he said. “Young people get turned off by harsh partisan attacks,” he said. “I think [Clinton] covered the issues that matter to this gener ation and I was very happy that he stayed positive.” Despite some overly-broad questions, the candidates dealt with the questions well and were able to use them to answer larger issues, Bennett said. “I think they both did a good job bringing out their policies and their ideas,” she said. Debates can have marginal effects on un decided voters, said Jim Lemert, a Universi ty professor who has studied presidential campaigns. However, debates tend to have a greater effect on people who already have an idea of whom they will vote for. “[A debate] can swing the result of an election simply by reinforcing those who have doubts,” he said. “It’s a little naive to look for extensive attitude change.” However, all sides agreed that students must get out and vote, regardless of whom they cast their vote for. They must examine issues that will affect them, make educated choices and participate. “We have more invested in this country in the next 50 years than anyone else,” Wade said. A look at some of the 23 ballot measures in the November 5 election THE MEASURE 29 WHAT IT WOULD DO Would require Governor’s ap pointees to vacate office if the suc cessor was not confirmed within 90 days. Currently, an official appointed by the Governor and subject to Sen ate confirmation may continue in of fice until the official’s successor is appointed or confirmed. The mea sure could cause an appointed office to be vacant, possibly resulting in some state agencies from issuing or ders or conducting other business during the vacancy. ARGUMENTS FOR The current process allows prior ap pointees to continue to serve when the Governor delays naming a re placement, or when the Senate refus es to confirm the name submitted. This means that controversial ap pointees can continue to serve longer than their specified term. ARGUMENTS AGAINST Leaving terms ot these executive appointees vacant could leave an agency, board or commission po sition unfilled and inoperable. In some cases this could lead to the federal government stepping in to make decisions on such things as air quality and water standards. The state constitution is not the place to specify the make up of boards and commissioners, the constitution is about fundamental rights. THE MEASURE 36 WHAT IT WOULD DO This measure would increase the minimum hourly wage in three steps from the present level of $4.75. For calendar year 1997, the wage would be $5.50, and for cal endar year 1998, the wage would be $6. For calendar year 1999 and the years following, the wage would be $6.50. ARGUMENTS FOR The minimum wage in Oregon has not been increased for five years. The current $4.75 per hour translates into an income of just over $800 a month or $9,880 per year. Many minimum wage workers and their families live below the poverty level and are in need of public assistance. According to Labor Department studies, in creasing the minimum wage will re duce the poverty rate, especially in female headed households. ARGUMENTS AGAINST The increase to $6.50 is too steep. It will place Oregon well above the federal level of $5.15, effective September 1997. The increase will cause job-loss, inflation, or both. Job-loss will start with youth and unskilled workers. In stead of reducing poverty or get ting people off welfare, raising the minimum wage will hurt very poor workers and the unemployed who will have to compete for fewer jobs. SOURC£:The league ol Women Voters
