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