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