Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 1, 1996)
▼ THIS WEEK MONDAY: Opinion TUESDAY: Poltcs WEDNESDAY: Option THURSDAY: Polite FRIDAY: Opm »n Jj J editorials, letters, commentary and perspective BY MAIL: P.O.Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 BY PHONE: (541)346-5511 BY E-MAIL ode@oregon. uoregon. edu IN PERSON: Suite 300, EMU TORREY for mayor * 66 [Jim] Torrey knows the city and its citizens. He knot’s what people want and care about. And he appears committed to students’ needs. 55 CHRIS HUTCHiNSONtemeratt ■ OUR OPINION: Eugene needs practical solutions, not tiresome criticism of the past ■he innumerable debates, advertise JL. community still doesn’t care who becomes Eugene’s next mayor — and maybe never will. But it should. While city relations with the University and its 20,000 total occupants have not been a defining issue in the mayoral campaign between Jim Weaver and Jim Torrey, they should be. Most citizens feel the mayor can’t directly affect anything the city or University does in the future anyway. And this may be true. But by using the position's ample influence in the City Council as well as its obvious sway as a figurehead, the next mayor’s ideas and vision for the future could make all the difference. One candidate has the ideas and vision we’re looking for and that is Jim Torrey. A local business owner and City Council man since 1994, Torrey knows the city and its citizens. He knows what people want and care about. And he appears Besides vowing to fight tuition in creases in Salem whenever possi ble, Torrey hopes to join together ments, slogans and signs haven’t made a difference. The University committed to students’ needs. wiui ouier college mayors in the state to form a collective voice on be half of higher educa tion. He wants the University to be a part of the commu nity, and encour ages students to at tend City Council meetings and voice their concerns. Weaver, on the other hand, doesn t have any tangible plans on behalf of the University. He recognizes its importance, but has no ideas on how to help students or the institu tion’s future. Serving in the U.S. House of Representatives for 12 years hasn’t helped Weaver’s knowledge of local politics, it’s ir reversibly broadened his own beliefs. Weaver, who’s enjoyed a lifetime in the political arena, lists his career motivations as a strong opposition to war and a belief in protecting the environment, civil liberties and human rights. He said he came out of retirement to run for mayor only to stop the "growth run amok” he observed in the city. But while Weaver's lifelong stands on the environment and other causes are indeed gallant, none of these beliefs transfer to real life solutions in Eugene’s local government. His accomplished congressional career shows he can get things done but without any practical ideas to act on, Weaver will do nothing. Toney, instead, has realistic solutions to the complicated problems plaguing this city. While some police tactics have been questionable, Torrey’s leadership during the recent dog and skateboard ban in the West University district demonstrates his ability to take action on the local level — no easy task. He knows business owners and citizens from all areas of the community and has an unparalleled beat on the pulse of the city. He believes in increased spending for public safety, including the police depart ment’s Rapid Deployment Unit and a new training facility for firefighters. He knows the small problems law enforcement has to deal with, such as vehicle maintenance, and helps provide answers. Weaver’s stands on public safety and spending issues are once again gallant, but conspicuously impractical. He wrants police to use bikes or walk, but ignores the conse quences of such a far-reaching tactic. He wants police to respect all citizens, but is vague on just whom to leave alone — cham pioning “civility and decorum” without providing concrete definitions for such causes. Economically, Torrey is prepared and un afraid to make cuts, especially if Measure 47 passes. Weaver said “he’d rather not think about [the measure]” and appeared more ea ger to criticize current spending patterns. Torrey is willing to stop all hiring in city government and cut all “discretionary” spending after the measure, two unattrac tive but necessary solutions. Weaver and Torrey both know the city of Eugene isn’t perfect. In fact, it’s in dire need of help in many areas. And they both know the next mayor will have a profound impact on how the city deals with these problems. But only Torrey knows how to solve these problems with ideas that will work, not just broad aspirations and criticism. The future cannot be made better simply by tearing apart the past. The present must be analyzed while slowly stepping into the future. Jim Torrey will lead us down this road. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. The Oregon Dad/ Emerald ts pubishea daily Monday through Fri day dumg Ihe school year and Tuesday and Thursday during die sum met by me Oregon Daly Emerald Pubishmg Co. me., a 8* Unrrersily ol Oregon, Eugene, Oregon A member of the Associated Press, the Emerald operates ndependenUy of me Unrversffy with offices at Suite 300 of me Erti Memorial Ureon. The Emerald is private property The unlawhd removal or use ot papers ts prosecutable by law Editor HO-CMef; Steven Asbury Manajtoj Editor Jennrter Carter (light Edita: Thom Schoenbom Community: Jennrter Srdimitt editor Jean Bond, Christen Hi Entertainment. (hade Kreuger editor Jesse Stephenson Higher Education: Tarnyra Howser in-depfti Laura Cate 8enjamm Kwasney Opinio* Ashley aach editor Chns Huichmson *rs»ata Bran Damond, Larry Ham, Sonja Sherwood Politics: Shara Cohn, editor Doug Irving Student Acthnties: Knstfi Bade/ ednor Ang* Socfy. Tom Potter Spottr Mare McTyre editor Andrea DeYoong assoanteditor Chris Hansen, Ryan Frank, Ryan Hatrorsen Copy Detfc Thom ScnoenOom , copy chef. Sarah (fielder M*e Schmertach. Kendra Smdh, Presentation: Genres Boil editor Man Gartai Photography: Mamew Strffter editor Andrew Brackens** JoeBurtecAmanoaEnckson. Shannon Kdduff Chad Panes* Freelance: cara PCman. add* On-Line: tankas Sdffier General Manager Judy Radi Advertisjag 8ecky Merchant, director Arne Amador Lee Yen Beh, MarcoCreng YuynCti ManJonnson AmeMMer TnraShaaman Rose Sol. Man Solomon. Greg Walsh Classified 'ara Sloan manager Natasha Lumptat, Debtee Levy. Heather Mo/e Production: 'Mere Ross manager mgnd White coordnator StawraAtele Laura Dareel Susan Head Trerct Kearney T*a Khkpit. Mefssa LeBahn Mody McCanta, A*son Stormo MrkeYourq kusinea Kaffiy Carbone supervisor Judy Conno*/ Qictnbution John Long Yancey De Ycwig, Ferenc Rakoczi ----(541)146-5511 Display Advertising...(541)346-3712 Business Office.(541)346-5512 Classified Advertising.(541) 346-4343 LETTERS Policy is a start In response to your editorial about the proposed student sex policy, I think the policy is a start in the right direction [ODE, Oct. 28). Sexual assault occurs ever}' day on university cam puses across the nation. It is ex tremely emotionally and spiritu ally damaging to the victim and to society. It can cause a person to isolate themselves, drop out of college and struggle with self esteem and negative feelings. The purpose of the new poli cy is to empower victims of sexual assault so perpetrators should not be free to assault again. We have to start some where, and stressing communi cation between partners is a start. Just because you think “no one will follow it” is no ex cuse for not improving the Stu dent Conduct Code. Do you think just because no one would stop at a traffic light, that we shouldn’t implement traffic signals? While the proposed policy might not be perfect, clarifying consent and responsibility is "displaying some levelhead ness” and common sense. Jill Warner Psychology Broad consent While I think it is great that the Emerald editorial hoard ac knowledged the importance of a new conduct code for sexual assault and rape, 1 had prob lems with the reasons offered for why the proposed change will not work. When defining “explicit con sent,” the editorial stated that this must be “communicated verbally, perhaps even on pa per." I am very' curious as to where in the proposed changes this is inferred. What the changes do include is “explicit consent, verbal or otherwise.” This could mean but is not lim ited to anything verbal, non verbal, a gesture or I suppose, a written note. What explicit consent does provide for, how ever, is that instead of asking a survivor what he or she did to say no, the alleged perpetrator would need to explain what he or she did to obtain consent. Hopefully, this will result in more survivors feeling safe and comfortable reporting an inci dent because it will no longer be their responsibility to prove they resisted. Yes, I agree that sexual as sault and rape include a lot of grey areas, but until the Univer sity as a public institution is willing to take a strong and dis ciplinary stance against assault and rape, we as a community will not see a decrease in these "extremely terrible and confus ing" crimes. Rebecca Peatow Political Science Problem solvable In response to your editorial on the proposed sexual mis conduct language, I feel com pelled to ask, “What’s wrong with consent?” Your idea that "asking for permission just doesn't happen” disturbs me. Seeking consent is simply an extension of the mutual respect on which adult relationships are based. It is not unrealistic to expect students to practice pru dence and simply ask when in doubt. If it is unrealistic, then that attitude is exactly what this language is targeting. Furthermore, the policy will only come into play in a situa tion where someone feels vio lated. In the vast majority of sexual encounters, where those involved have reached a certain comfort level, the nature of the consent — explicit or implicit — will not be an issue. The lan guage is intended to serve as a guideline for determining if misconduct has taken place in situations where complaints are raised, not as a means for policing the sexual activities of students. Finally, I am disappointed in your conclusion that “the world of sexual assault is an ex tremely terrible and confusing one...[and] some aspects of it, like prosecution, may never be solved.” This defeatist conclu sion is not only disheartening, but a slap in the face to the nu merous students who organize around campus safety issues, not to mention those who put a year and a half of their time and energy into drafting this policy. Yes, sexual assault is a daunt ing problem, but to dismiss ef forts to curtail it as ineffective and "extreme" does a disser vice to the survivors and their plight. I urge any and all of you who have an opinion on this issue to voice it at the public hearing to day in the EMU Walnut Room at 2 p.m. Matthew Scotten ASUO President
