T EDITORIAL
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:
Steven Asbury
MANAGING EDITOR:
Thom Schoenbom
NIGHT EDITOR:
Jennifer Schmitt
EDITORIAL EDITORS:
Ashley Bach & Brian Diamond
editorials, letters, commentary and perspective
NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
DISPLAY ADVERTISING*
(541) 346-3712
(541) 346-5512
(541)346-4343
The ASUO fishbowl is a sight to be seen
Student government is a
fascinating circus complete
with bizarre sideshows
If it is possible, ASUO government
mediocrity has reached a new low.
Like episodes of Melrose Place, the
system manages to go beyond the
bottom of the barrel — weekly.
While trying to determine what to
write about for this column, I found
mvself with a new topic daily. Stu
OPINION
1 & * I
Amanda
Erickson
dent programs
have run amok;
the primary
elections are
riddled with
controversy;
corporations
want status
among the
incendiary
fee-receiving
groups and
an mrormat nearing with tne
ASUO Constitution Court turns
into five hours of wry laughter.
What’s going on here? I
think it is some sort of art-imi
tates-life thing. As in: “See your
government at work! Operates
like the real thing only in the mi
crocosm world of the University!
Just add water and your sea mon
keys will come to life!"
ao, 1 couldn t just pick one stone ot cor
ruption to examine when there is a whole
stream full of them. I’ll talk about them all.
■ Footnotes — poor Footnotes. I like
Footnotes. It is like one of those older sib
lings who gives you their quiz answers
from the same classes they took. No, not
like “Big Brother.” They hide in a surrepti
tious little corner of the EMU. They lurk in
your classes, unseen, all-knowing, taking
notes on small pieces of paper that they
hide in their clothing to disseminate to the
masses later, the ignorant masses.
Okay, so they are not quite spies, but
they do offer a really neat service for slack
ers everywhere. But — oh, it pains me to
say this — but I don't think they should be
funded by the students. There just cannot
be another “incidental” fee burden on the
students. However, the EMU Board has
made a grave error in attempting to make
things more difficult for Footnotes to oper
ate.
■ Lane Transit District provides a valu
able service but it should not be perma
nently funded by the students. It’s the
city’s bus system, for chrissakes. It already
receives fees from every student, so that all
students can ride “free.”
A lot of students don’t
CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald
need any more
kiiuw uiai ai me Deginning
of every term they can get that money back;
other students just don’t bother with get
ting the refund. For that reason alone, LTD
makes bucks on people that never use its
system.
Of course, we already know that corpo
rate influence is lurking in the ASUO; after
all, OSPIRG wins the incidental fee lottery
every year just for showing up. I was check
ing out the virtual meeting ground of
ASUO watchdogs at uo.asuo.org and one
individual felt that all students should be
required to pay the bus fee whether they
ride or not because it helped out all stu
dents. Communism is alive.
■ SETA — that is, Students for the Ethi
cal Treatment of Animals. They do not
money. I have a problem with
any political action group being supported
by the ASUO. My understanding of this
group is that it would like nothing better
than for the University to halt its animal re
search program.
By stopping this program, it would hurt
other students who have chosen animal re
search as their field of study. I won’t ram
ble on ad nauseum about all the animal re
search that has benefited the human race —
you know this — but I feel strongly that
SETA has no right to try to undermine oth
er students who are here for an education.
All I have seen from this group is a fake,
caged gorilla in front of Johnson Hall hand
ing out irrelevant literature. “Why, oh
why,” Dorothy asks Oz, “must I pay for
this?” The answer: a resounding silence.
■ The ASUO Primaries and Constitu
tion Court — a stunning example of our
student government at work. If you’ve been
on campus at all this week, you will have
smelled something rotten in the wind. It
hasn’t cleared up because no one can dis
cern exactly which vegetable down in
Suite 4 has gone bad.
The Con Court’s informal hearing on
allegations of serious negligence and
misconduct surrounding the pri
maries and the campaigns that pre
- v ceded it can be summed up as five
\ \ hours of wry laughter and
lionnVitir 1 rvrvl' r>
They have still not made up
their minds but, if you’ve no
ticed, the General Elections are
proceeding. After waiting this
long, I feel the Con Court has
no choice but to let things
slide. If you procrastinate long
enough, things tend to take
care of themselves, unfortu
nately, to the disservice of the
students.
, ■ The Commentator — how
I sometimes miss my old
haunt. Throughout this elec
tion’s brew-ha-ha (resulting par
tially from a petition filed by Far
rah Bostic and Chris Kantrowitz,
both associated with the rag we love
to hate, the Oregon Commentator), the
ASUO and the Con Court have sought
to dismiss the allegations by insisting
that some sort of personal vendetta was in
volved.
I love it! Just because the Commentator is
the only group on campus that actively re
ports on and scrutinizes the University and
all its entities, anything that comes from
that direction is viewed with fear and de
fensiveness. As it should; the watchdog
bites. I’m afraid, though, that their claims
are sound and valid. Just as valid as Judah
Eckenberg, who emphatically denies any «•
association with anybody except himself.
So, darlin’ academics, why should you
care? Because the ASUO is you. It stands t
for Associated Students of the University
of Oregon, and every tuition and fee-paying
student belongs to it. Everything they do,
they do on behalf of you. Apathy is a hu
man right, but money isn’t free, and you are
giving bundles away every term to ludi
crous causes and overripe bureaucracy.
That is all.
Amanda Erickson, a senior majoring in
journalism, is a columnist for the Emerald.
Her views do not necessarily reflect those
of the newspaper. E-mail: aericks@glad
stone.uoregon.edu
LETTERS
Responsible democracy
In the April 25 issue of the Emerald, Ben
Unger was quoted as saying “This [the law
suit against the elections] makes the whole
system look bad, and my real fear is that
we’re going to lose [House Bill 3644 which
calls for the removal of the incidental fee] in
Salem because of these people’s attacks.”
This is the most irresponsible and antag
onistic statement a public official (elect)
could make in this regard. To connect the
process of enforcing the law with a potential
loss of student rights is misleading and false.
In response to Mr. Unger’s antagonism, I
say this: by taking action against this elec
tion, we (students) have shown that we
have a very effective system of checks and
balances. We are able to police ourselves
and since students have called attention to
recent improprieties, we have made a
strong case to those in Salem that we are in
fact very capable of managing the inciden
tal fee.
We are asking for student government to
be made accountable for their actions and
they have been made so. If those who are
named in the lawsuit feel that this display
of democracy makes us look bad as a stu
dent body. I shudder to think what example
they expect us to follow.
Chris Kantrowitz
Political Science
Who cares?
“The ASUO plans to target students who
historically do not vote” was the headline
in the April 17 Emerald. We’re told that “if
the ASUO Elections Board has its way,
more than 20 percent of the student body
will cast its vote [for campus leaders].”
How will the ASUO achieve this impres
sive goal? Dave Whipple (Elections Board
Publicity Coordinator) suggests getting peo
ple who normally don’t vote to do so. With
this powerful strategy firmly in hand, the
ASUO brings us to election day.
Eight percent of the student body casts a
vote.
The April 18 Emerald brings us choice,
controversial, quotes from the two leading
tickets: “We support programs.” Miner
says, “We’ll fight harder than anybody else
if we are elected,” counters Oberriter force
fully.
What programs? Fight who? I wonder.
And now the scandal: (this where it gets
exciting) Miner and Unger might have put
up some illegal posters. “Kick 'em out” the
losers cry. Oh yeah, and someone is going
to get fired.
In the Emerald’s April 21 editorial, the
editor sums it up for us: “It will be interest
ing to see the fallout from all the infighting
and miscoxnmunication.”
Let me make a prediction: next year, the
students will be subjected once again to lu
dicrous campaign promises, a voter turnout
goal that won’t be met, the losers will cry
foul, there will be some scandal, it will all be
covered in painful detail in the drama queen
that is the Emerald and the winners will dis
appear, never to be heard form again.
And next year, once again, 92 percent of
the student body won’t give a shit.
Kevin Prentiss
Russian