Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 23, 1998)
CONTACTING US NEWSROOM: (541)346-5511 E-MAIL: ode@oregon uoregon.ed ADORESS: Oregon Daily Emerald P.0.80X3159 j Eugene, Oregon 97403 ONLINE EDITION: www.uoregon.edu/~ode Perspectives EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarah Kickler EDITORIAL EDITOR Mike Schmierbach NIGHT EDITOR Mike Schmierbach The price of politics jjpT CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Etnerara AW EMERALD EDITORIAL Despite concluding needle exchange programs work, the federal government still won’t provide funding for them Perhaps Ann Hinds, HIV pro gram manager for Outside In, a social service agency in Port land, put it best: “Politics makes me sick.” Hinds, quoted in Tuesday’s Oregon ian, was speaking metaphorically about the White House’s decision to continue a ban on federal funding for needle ex change programs. But she might as well have been speaking literally. Because of political fears, thousands of Americans may contract HIV, the virus that leads to AIDS, through the use of contaminated needles. This is sick in deed. Two issues have historically hindered federal support for needle exchange pro grams. In 1989, when the ban was im posed, funding was made illegal until the government could demonstrate that such programs reduced the spread of HIV and did not increase drug use. According to The New York Times, the government certified in February that exchange programs are effective. This comes after years of empirical evi dence to that effect. Questions about the impact programs have on drug use re mained, however. The Times quoted Harold Varmus, di rector of the National Institutes of Health, as saying a review of assorted studies produced “increasingly strong evidence” that needle exchange pro grams worked well in not only stopping the spread of HTV but also helping draw addicts into treatment. In fact, according to the story in The Oregonian, at least six literature re views, including one by the NIH, had demonstrated that exchange programs did not increase drug use. For his part, Varmus pointed to a Baltimore study in which half of the 3,000 addicts evaluat ed had sought treatment after participat ing in a needle exchange program. Nevertheless, despite piles of over whelming evidence, the federal govern ment waited until Monday to answer the two questions raised about needle programs. According to Peter Lurie, a doctor and research associate quoted in the Times story, Clinton could have saved 17,000 lives during his time in of fice by funding needle exchange pro grams. It gets worse, of course. Despite Mon day's announcement, the government will continue to ban funding; hence the illness felt by Hinds and the inevitable deaths of thousands more. According to the Times, Surgeon General David Satcher announced that 40 percent of new HIV infections in the United States are attributable, directly or indirectly, to contaminated needles. Needle exchanges won’t save all those people, and federal funding won’t pre vent needle exchanges, but if federal in action affects even 5 percent of HIV in fections, it is reprehensible. How can Clinton justify not trying to prevent the deaths of thousands? Hinds has a clear understanding of the prob lem — politics. Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence, conservative GOP leaders still lambasted the administration’s an nouncement and vowed to never let fed eral money go to needle programs. In The New York Times, Republican Sen. John Ashcroft called the scientific declaration “an intolerable message that it’s time to accept drug use as a way of life.” Ashcroft and others worry that needle programs send the message to children that drug use is acceptable. This is so profoundly irrational as to be amusing — except that lives are threatened by the GOP’s comical igno rance. Not only did the NIH’s literature review determine that needle programs help decrease drug use, but the reality of needle programs is that they explicitly target existing users and are not widely publicized or romanticized, thus mak ing it inconceivable that such programs would promote drug use. The real “reasoning” behind the op position to needle exchanges is the same as that behind opposition to med ical marijuana and assisted suicide — any violation of the law by a common citizen must be punished without un derstanding or logic. This determined obedience to law for law’s sake ignores the point of legal codes — to reasonably protect the rights of citizens. It isn’t the law that needs protection; it is the basis for the law. Needle exchange programs save lives. Anti-drug laws are at least intended to save lives. Therefore, anyone who hon estly supports anti-drug laws ought to support needle exchanges. If politicians aren't smart enough to realize that a preponderance of scientif ic evidence has rendered obsolete their archaic aversion to recognizing that anti-drug laws cannot be absolute, it is time to remove those obsolete politi cians from power. But of course, the shortage of smart politicians is affecting more than the spread of HTV. Politics is making a lot of people sick, and this is but one small ex ample. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial Ixxird. Responses may be sent to ode@oregon. uoregon edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Credit Progressives Despite their carelessness with a few scheduling rules, their al leged “scare tactics” and their ability to piss a few people off, the Progressive slate deserves some credit for, if anything, cre ativity, unmatchable endurance and sincere commitment. Are there any other candidates that organized a riverfront cleanup? Are there any other candidates that had a team of volunteers at the hunger cleanup? Are there any other non-presidential can didates with a strong platform and real issues? Not really. No other candidates have commit ted to protecting financial aid, saving green space on the river bank, promoting more aware ness of sexual misconduct on campus and student control of student fees. In truth, no other candidates have shown more commitment to their issues and willingness to haul ass than the Progressive slate. I believe in the slate, and I am impressed with their desire to be the best representatives of “the people” in student govern ment. Support a revolution; support the student movement. Vote Progressive. Jessica Timpa ny, Corrie Nichols, Jereme Grzy bowski, Spencer Hamlin and Matt Swanson will rock your world once elected into student government. They are your best choice, unquestionably. Em power yourself. Empower your school. Vote for student rights. Vote Progressive. Claudia Villena Sociology Slate platform solid Recently there have been asi nine grievances filed against the Progressive Slate. The slate has been penalized for having an unscheduled table with posters on it. The Constitution Court feels that just compensation for an unscheduled table is to make all the Progressive slate winners of the primary go back to the ballot, even if victory was in triple digits. I ask that you as a student don't get discouraged by this de cision that was motivated by a politically biased grievance. The slate is the only group of candi dates (outside of Wortman and Cowling) that have committed themselves to a solid platform of issues. Slate members are working to preserve green space on campus. By working with the City Coun cil, administrators, faculty and students, the Progressive slate will fight to preserve the green space north of the train tracks from development of the River front Research Park. There is no need to develop the area north of the tracks, which is on the Willamette River, when there is an ample amount of land to uti lize south of the tracks. The slate sponsored a river front cleanup north of the tracks and invited all the ASUO candi dates to attend. The people who pitched in were concerned stu dents: Geneva and Morgan and the Progressive slate. I feel this is a good indicator as to where the other candidates stand on this is sue. You can count on the slate to be responsive to the student body. All members on the slate have vowed to work toward four key issues: 1) Stopping northern develop ment of the Riverfront Research Park. 2) Increased support for sur vivors of sexual assault. 3) Access to higher education (more grants, not loans). 4) Student control of student fees. The slate will be out all week to answer any questions you may have. You will know who we are. We are the candidates with issues and soul. Your vote will make a difference in the general election. Vote student rights. Vote Progressive! Michael Olson Student Senator OSPIRG helps campus The “honesty” campaign against OSPIRG is one of the most dishonest attempts at stran gulating student activism on this campus I've ever seen. Student groups, including OSPIRG, work on a wide range of issues vital to the public such as pesticides. Toxics Right to Know legislation, excessive banking fees and sur charges, as well as campaign fi nance reform. It shouldn’t sur prise anyone to learn that the University College Republicans have been actively taking part in the anti-OSPIRG campaign. While the Republicans rant and rave about nonexistent welfare queens and say not a peep about the $350 billion in annual tax breaks and military-industrial boondoggles our government forks over to big business each year, last weekend OSPIRG raised over $2,000 the good, old fashioned way — dollar by do nated dollar — to fund shelters and help the thousands of home less and hungry in Oregon. All the OSPIRG ballot ques tion asks is if you’re willing to give $2.88 per quarter to fund work on accountable govern ment, protecting the environ ment, consumer rights, water way restoration and fighting hunger and homelessness. That’s a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the $500 students pay in incidental fees, but stu dents get paid their money many, many, many times over in terms of improved environmen tal laws, better consumer protec tion and a more caring and civi lized society. The bottom line is, for the price of a cappuccino and a muf fin, we students can do some very practical things that will benefit the entire society. No oth er student group represents such a wide range of self-evidently public interests on a statewide level. The real reason OSPIRG is under attack is because it’s ac tive, effective and really does represent the public interest, in stead of the narrow priorities of the Wall Street money lords. Don’t listen to the special inter ests of the rich — vote for the public interest of us all. Vote yes for OSPIRG! Dennis Redmond Campus Green Party