CONTACTING US
NEWSROOM: ADDRESS:
(541)346-5511 Oregon Daily Emerald
E-MAIL: P.O.80X3159
ode@oregon uoregon.edu Eugene, Oregon 97403
ONLINE EDITION: www.uoregon.edu/-ode
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Sarah Kickler
EDITORIAL EDITOR
Mike Schmierbach
NIGHT EDITOR
Mike Schmierbach
AN EMERALD EDITORIAL
Voting may seem tedious or irrelevant, but the ASUO
has power over your wallet and your interests
OTE HERE
CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald
They’ve assailed you from street
barriers, shouted at you
through megaphones and
grabbed you on the street cor
ner. You might know some of them. You
might wish you’d never met any of
them.
They are the ASUO candidates, and
now is their time.
Despite the bright yellow shirts and
lime green balloons, you probably
haven’t voted. Last year, less than 10
percent of students voted — a pattern
that has held true in previous years.
In fact, the street-comer shouting and
vigorous sticker application may have
driven you away from the ballot table.
Well, it’s time to go back.
The ASUO workers may occasionally
be irritating, but they aren’t irrelevant.
During the year, the assorted offices that
fall under the title Associated Students
of the University of Oregon allocate
massive sums of money. That money
comes from incidental fees paid by stu
dents — fees totaling hundreds of dol
lars per person.
Simply casting a ballot won’t save
you from paying the fees nor will it
drastically alter the way in which
money is allocated or collected. But it
can create a shift in government, and
even minor shifts have a significant
impact on most students.
Despite the noisy spotlight currently
being cast upon the ASUO Executive
candidates, the president and vice presi
dent are not the most important people
on campus for most students. The key
figures in most of our lives are the peo
ple who run the programs and partici
pate in the groups we're interested in.
The ASUO as a whole and the Execu
tive in particular may not seem very
connected to these groups.
But the complexity of University poli
tics means the Senate, the Programs Fi
nance Committee and the Executive all
have an effect upon the on-campus ac
tivities of students. Those programs that
are at the core of so many students’ lives
are funded through the incidental fee
and the ASUO officials who allocate it.
Equally significant for students are
the ballot measures that will be decided
next week. Allocations for Lane Transit
District service, the Designated Driver
Shuttle and OSPIRG are among the is
sues on the ballot. Even students whose
primary concern is getting to and from
the bar and knowing what pesticides
might be in their food once they arrive
ought to have some interest in voting.
Even so, unfortunately, students will
probably avoid the ballot tables once
again this year. It doesn’t make a lot of
sense.
Students who don’t vote aren’t neces
sarily apathetic. But they are foolish. You
don’t have to think the ASUO is the most
important group on campus to think vot
ing is important. In fact, the more you
care about the things you do and the ac
tivities you participate in, the more you
should worry about the elections.
The future of your group’s funding —
or the funding of a group you rely upon
— may rest with that ballot. If the only
way the ASUO affects you is by taking
your money, you’re probably a pretty
boring person.
And if you’re a boring person, you
probably have plenty of time to worry
about where your money goes — the
most fundamental reason of all to vote.
Being frightened away from the
EMU by the fliers and festivities is un
derstandable. Fortunately, there are
nice quiet tables all over campus
where you can tell the people you
might not care about the things you do
care about.
This editorial represents the opinion of the
Emerald editorial board. Responses may be
sent to ode@oregon.uoregon.edu.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Fliers patronizing
I don’t understand the purpose of all
the campaign fliers I see around campus.
Do candidates think if 1 see “Vote for X” a
million times I will vote for them? I find
that attitude rather patronizing.
Instead, I propose candidates engage
my intellect. The fliers could present a
cogent summary of their platform and in
formation where 1 could find a complete
description of their plans. This summary
hopefully would avoid catch phrases
such as “progressive” or “diversity” and
contain meaningful and specific state
ments. Maybe they could even put the
date of the election, which would be
much more informative than most of
what I have seen on the fliers.
1 would like to think that student poli
tics have a higher intellectual standard
than public politics, but I have yet to see
this.
Derek Schutt
Graduate student
OSPIRG enthusiasm
For winter term, we were barraged
with students seeking to register for an in
ternship with OSPIRG. The enthusiasm
was quite remarkable considering that
OSPIRG is nothing new on campus. Stu
dents essentially relayed to us that they
saw OSPIRG as an opportunity to get in
volved with the promotion of environ
mental awareness and public account
ability. Students have updated us on
their reactions to their experiences with
OSPIRG and the great majority have spo
ken of learning very valuable skills and
insights to complement their studies or
career ambitions. A few offered construc
tive suggestions, as do most interns with
other sponsors, but almost all supported
OSPERG’s mission on campus. Based on
the response of the environmental stud
ies interns, we hope that students will
support the continuation of OSPIRG’s
presence on campus at the University of
Oregon.
Alan Dickman
Coordinator of Internships
Environmental Studies
Andy Peara
GTF, Co-coordinator of Internships
Environmental Studies
OSPIRG not democratic
Let me start this letter by emphasizing
that I have been and always will be a
strong supporter of students controlling
student fees. It is a ridiculous notion for
me to consider anybody but students
controlling a fund that they pay into ex
clusively.
OSPIRG is not the “democratic, stu
dent-oriented organization" that our
ASUO president would have us believe.
OSPIRG is not run by students but is
run by a “campus organizer” instead.
This is a professional staff person paid
to come here and run this “student”
program. Every other year OSPIRG be
comes extremely visible, through
posters and phone calls, so they can re
new their funding through the ballot.
They are only “vital” if you consider
posters and phone calls a sign of vitali
ty. The reason they go to the ballot
every other year is because they know
that with an 8 percent turnout, it
shouldn’t be that hard to get enough
votes to win.
In relative terms to the amount of mon
ey they receive, vital is not a word that
immediately comes to mind. Please con
sider that there are several student-run
groups on campus that receive a tenth of
what OSPIRG gets, and yet they do twice
as much and often more. Those are
groups run by students, not professional
staff.
I support what OSPIRG does but I don’t
want them, or anyone else, to represent
OSPIRG as a group that is continually
fighting the good fight for students’ au
tonomy. OSPIRG primarily works on
streamwalks, homelessness awareness
and pesticide campaigns. While these are
important issues, they have nothing to do
with lobbying Salem and/or Washington
about students’ rights, and I can’t see any
one mistaking these things.
Finally, if OSPIRG is so pro students’
rights, then why did they vehemently op
pose an initiative which would have al
lowed students to vote on whether
groups receiving students’ money should
have itemized budgets? Instead of argu
ing the issue, they personally attacked
senators in favor of referring the measure
and used scare tactics to convince the
other senators to vote that measure down.
Where was students’ power in OSPIRG’s
agenda then? Without an itemized bud
get that is controlled by students on this
campus, I can’t see giving them our mon
ey, and I would urge all of you to vote NO
on OSPIRG’s measure.
Robert L. Wasson
ASUO Multicultural Advocate
OSPIRG key voice
Driven by the ideals of students, OS
PIRG has become one of Oregon’s lead
ing voices on consumer and environ
mental issues. The unique joining of
student energy and leadership with pro
fessional continuity and expertise has
enabled OSPIRG to have a profound im
pact on issues that affect our quality of
life today and for future generations to
come.
OSPIRG protects the environment: For
more than a decade, OSPIRG has released
landmark reports about recycling and the
potential risks to human and ecological
health from toxic chemicals released into
Oregon’s environment.
OSPIRG fights for consumers: For 23
years, publications and outreach efforts
such as the OSPIRG Renter’s Handbook,
ATM fees reports, annual bank surveys
and the dangerous toys surveys have
been important resources for University
students and other consumers.
OSPIRG serves the community: For the
past 13 years, students and staff have or
ganized the Hunger Cleanup Work-a
thon and other service events, raising re
sources for local, national and
international relief agencies.
Every two years, students are asked to
continue funding your OSPIRG chapter
at the University through the student in
cidental fee on the ASUO ballot. On elec
tion day, keep your chapter strong—vote
yes for OSPIRG.
David Koch
Programs Finance Committee Chair