Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (May 28, 1998)
CONTACTING US NEWSROOM: (541)346-5511 E-MAIL: ode@oregon. uoregon.edi ADDRESS: Oregon Daily Emerald P.0.80X3159 Eugene, Oregon 97403 (inline EDITION: www.uoregon.edu/~ode Perspectives .mmmmmmmmimmiigtmtm EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarah Kickler EDITORIAL EDITOR Mike Schmierbach NIGHT EDITOR Teri Meeuwsen IIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald Coffee choice should reflect student’s interests The criteria chosen by EMU Food Services are too narrow and don’t reflect taste and community concerns >-' In the old days, kings were chosen by the will of God and the law of succession (or brutish wars with big swords). The method by which the EMU is choosing a coffee vendor is de cidedly less rational. But there is one similarity between the two processes — the will of the people is pretty much irrelevant. EMU officials decided as much when they opted to include only two students on the six member coffee selection panel and to reject plans for a student taste test. This doesn’t make any sense. Students are the ones who will be stuck drinking whatever brown swill the EMU committee selects. If we make the wrong choice, we have only ourselves to blame, but if administrators make the wrong choice, it’s a another indication that the needs of students are not a factor in the way this University is run. The controversy started when the EMU made its initial coffee selection. Seattle Coffee Co. won the bidding battle despite having neither the best tasting coffee nor the best price. They did, how ever, wow the selection committee with the best presentation. That’s right — your coffee drinking habits ntil the EMU starts deliberating which microbrewery it will contract with, cof fee is king in the student union. were determined by full-color overheads and professionally trained marketing personnel. Too bad for all those local companies that provide better coffee and a boost to the Eugene commu nity — they forgot to send someone to Harvard to get an MBA. Justifiably, this left a few people steamed. There were a number of problems with the selection process, both in the criteria used and the less-than objective way the companies were evaluated. So, the University’s Office of Business Affairs tossed out the whole selection process and or dered the EMU selection committee to have an other go at it. This also upset a few companies who felt there was nothing wrong with the existing criteria, just the outcome of the process. Given the mess EMU Food Services made out of the whole process, however, we think redoing the selection process makes sense. Unfortunately, the way the folks at food services have proposed redoing it doesn’t make a lot of sense. As we mentioned before, the new selection process doesn’t include a taste test and involves a minimal amount of student involvement. Instead of fixing the flaws with the initial selec tion criteria, the EMU has increased the likelihood that the selection committee will make a bad coffee choice. Worse, by delaying the final decision, the committee has ensured minimal student protest by making its announcement in the summer. The EMU Food Services people are right to wor ry about the objectivity and reliability of a taste test, but that doesn't mean taste shouldn’t be a fac tor. Apparently, even the selection committee doesn’t intend to sample the product of the compa nies they interview. While taste has taken on a smaller role in the selection process, that ever-vital interview has become even more important as all applicants will be invited to make formal presentations. As before, the professional “polish” of a coffee ven dor doesn’t seem closely tied to their ability to provide a good product. In their rush to reward companies who are skilled at the business side of things, the commit tee members are ignoring what ought to be more significant factors. Not only has taste received little emphasis in the latest criteria, but labor and envi ronmental records are practically ignored. So, too, is the company’s location — the University should support local industry when possible. This isn’t to say that cost and professionalism shouldn’t be considered, but taste should be more important and a company’s social conscience should be weighed as well. The University as a whole and EMU Food Ser vices in particular seem too keen on rewarding com panies that follow the typical business pattern when they should be interested in helping companies re ject that pattern by helping the community and the planet and providing a high quality product. Let s not name another king who is already used to sitting on a throne. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald ed itorial board. Responses may he sent to ode@oregon. uoregon .edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Court within power There are just some days when I fee! like thanking God for being an atheist. First, Barry Williams. And then, Spencer Hamlin’s brief protest of a Constitution Court decision and Mike Running’s call for impeach ment. I’m not sure that Hamlin or Running read the decisions. Having lost my faith a long time ago, I just as sume they haven’t. If they had read the decisions, they would realize that Ben Unger, ASUO vice president, was cen sured because he broke rules. Unger tried to make the case that unless he was acting “simultane ously” for the elections board and the Wortman/Cowling campaign, he was not violating rules govern ing conflict of interest. The court made specific provisions in this case, stating that assisting the elec tions board with tasks such as putting up a poll booth was not a conflict of interest, but picking up the fliers of an opposing campaign or working in a poll booth (in this case, asKing me to votej did pose a conflict of interest. To me, that ruling seems like a logical conclusion based on the facts. As far as the court overstep ping its bounds in censuring Unger, a quick reading of the ASUO Con stitution leaves us with, “10.2: The Constitution Court shall have supreme and final authority on all questions of interpretation of this Constitution and any rules promul gated under it, including elections rules and complaints.” If Running thinks that the Constitution gives too broad of powers to the Consti tution Court, perhaps he should sponsor a ballot measure to change the Constitution. Finally, the court cannot make rulings on events that were not re ported as grievances. It is not the police, and unless witnesses come forward, the court’s hands are-tied. In the case that alleged that poll workers told people to vote no on OSPIRG, neither grievant would or could identify the poll workers re sponsible. The elections board did everything in its power to correct the problem, but they could not control every word that came out of every poll worker’s mouth. Selena Brewington Grievant in Brewington et al. vs. Unger et al. Christian confusion Whew! Barry Williams certainly trotted out a wealth of statistical data (ODE, May 20) and from such schol arly and/or unbiased publications as Parade magazine and Christian American, too, all apparently in an effort to refute my claim that Chris tianity in the United States is in de cline. Yet rather than a declaration of “victory over biblical morality,” my letter to which he refers (ODE, May 11) was actually meant to be more of a comment on the ethical myopia of many who call themselves “Christ ian,” particularly regarding the stub born tenacity with which they cling to their interpretation of the mythos in the face of any and all conflicting evidence and with little or no regard for the sincere sentiments of others. In fact, it was Gordon Melby (ODE, May 4), and not I, who bemoaned what he [Melby] seems to believe to be the erosion of Christian (read: the only true) morality — as indeed has Williams himself over the years in multitudinous encyclicals to we hea then, all dutifully printed by the ODE, The Register-Guard and others. So ... schizoid doublethink or cyn ical sophistry? Whatever the case, these devout gentlemen simply can’t have it both ways. As for “[the] minnow with little feet is about to be devoured by the gi ant Christian fish,” what a dis turbingly violent yet ironic image to be made by someone professing to re vere “the Prince of Peace.” Incidentally, although I don't have the exact counts myself, I can’t help but notice that Williams failed to mention the millions upon millions of Americans who also believe in UFOs, Elvis sightings and Ollie North’s integrity. Bill Smee University Staff Thumbs TO PRESIDENT CLINTON: In a change of policy, Clinton agreed to sign on to the global treaty to eliminate land mines. While this is admirable, the restrictions Clinton put on U.S. adher ence to the ban were numerous and troublesome —-the use of mines will be grad ually ended over at least eight years, and the Army is still working to de velop an alterna tive anti-personnel device. 1/ TO THE FAILURE OF MEASURE 53: Once again, Oregon voters have indicated that community is unimportantto them. In an act of ignorance and self ishness, Oregoni ans rejected a pro posal that would have repealed pro visions requiring^ majority turnout at elections to pass funding measures. If we stop paving roads, buying books, repairing streetlights and educating children, will people finally accept that gov ernment has a vital role to play? TO THE U S. SUPREME COURT: The Court de cided 6-3 that pub lic television sta tions are not obligated to in clude third-party candidates deemed "not newsworthy” in station-sponsored debates. In other words, your tax dollars are now be ing used to help shape the outcome of elections and maintain the two party system, all without any choice on your part. Sounds like a pe culiar sort of democracy.
