©regonWCmeralfc
NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
E-MAIL
ode@oregpn. uoregon.edu
ON-LINE EDITION:
www.uoregon.edu/~ode
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Ryan Frank
EDITORIAL EDITOR
KameronCole
How much
is too much?
Although visions of John Glenn in space gives us a
sense of pride, we need to question NASA's spending
Some are calling it histori
cal, others claim it pro
duced valuable informa
tion in aging, and still
others are calling it a chance to re
live a proud American moment
and an opportunity to instill that
pride in future generations. Presi
dent Clinton claims it ushered in
the new era of space exploration.
It is hard not to have a sense of
awe when you think of John
Glenn, the first American to orbit
the earth, in space again. It brings
back memories for
Opinion
Stefan ie t
Knowlton
hose who were
here watching
JASA take those
irst baby steps to
ward putting man
n space. It also
ives future gener
tionsa sense of
listory and how
ar the space pro
ram has come.
However, now
—— that trie celebrating
is over and John
Glenn has safely returned home it
is time to start asking some im
portant questions about NASA
and the future of space travel.
Although NASA was able to
rally national support by includ
ing an American hero in its recent
space mission, it continues to run
over budget and behind schedule
on plans for the International
space station. Sixteen countries
including United States, Russia,
Canada, Japan, Brazil and 11 Eu
ropean countries are collectively
sharing the responsibility of
building and operating an inter
national space station. Supporters
claim that the space station
would make it possible to con
duct ground-breaking experi
merits in space and that
knowledge may lead to fu
ture trips to Mars.
Yet this information will
come with a huge price tag.
According to ABC online
the space station itself will
hold together for a little
over fifteen years and cost
over $40 billion. It is hard
to justify spending that
much money on a station
that will only yield a fif
teen year window to con
duct experiments.
In addition it is not even
certain if the station will be
completed. Russia, a re
cent addition to the inter
national space station pro
gram, is having a hard time
keeping up with its end of
the bargain. They continue
to postpone launch dates
which puts the whole pro
ject behind schedule.
Claiming that they need
more money, Russia asks
the United States to help
fund its part of the mis
sion.
This would add to the
costs that NASA has al
ready set aside for this
huge project. They plan to
give $60 million in aid to
Russia for the completion
ot the initial phases ot the
project. In addition they will give
them $600 million over the next
four years to keep the intended
schedule. NASA will also spend
$500 million on back-up plans in
case the Russians are unable to
fulfill their responsibility for the
space station.
This is way too much money to
spend on a project that may not
even leave the ground. Even if the
W WAT is
THIS FoR.?
X THIWK rr^
RuaJs Bill Gores'
MlcRovMVE.
project is successful, will the
knowledge gained be worth the
money the government has spent?
It is amazing to think that the
United States would spend bil
lions of dollars on its current
questionable endeavor while it
trails most industrialized coun
tries in including comprehensive
health insurance for its citizens.
Issues like education, health care
and overall public welfare should
come before the space program.
Although John Glenn’s mission
has sparked new interest in the
space program, we need more
carefully analyze how much our
government is spending and de
mand an outline of the goals of
NASA and its current endeavor.
Are manned missions the future
of NASA such as suggested by the
new space station or are un
manned probes a better and
cheaper way to explore space?
NASA needs to justify its spend
ing to the American public, in
stead of trying to court them with
visions of John Glenn and
NASA’s glorious past.
Stefanie Knowlton is an editorial
editor for the Emerald. Her views do
not necessarily represent those of the
newspaper.
Letters to the Editor
Emerald coverage unfair
It is incredible that in such a progressive,
forward thinking community such as this
that our own student newspaper can still be
so blindly accepting of the information
handed to them by the authorities.
In your “Student arrested” article (ODE,
Nov. 3), you leave out the key details as to
why the confrontation happened in the first
place. The student was in fact only talking
to his friend through the window of his Col
lier dorm room. When Public Safety ar
rived, you didn’t mention that the student
was quickly maced without much discus
sion. This is the key reason he was verbally
harassing the officers and why the crowd
gathered the further taunt the police.
The police in this town and the public
safety officers on this campus are out of
control. They are biased, unthinking and on
a power trip. I have seen it many times, liv
ing in Eugene for 20 years and being apart
of the University community for three.
What they are doing is not justice and not
what we are paying them for. They’re sup
posed to be protecting all of us, and instead
they are the ones who initiate the harass
ment. Why do you think there was a mea
sure on the city ballot this year to form a cit
izen review board of their actions?
Next time, try interviewing actual partici
pants and witnesses instead of unquestion
ingly accepting what the authorities hand
you as the truth. Please, do your student
body some justice.
David Nelson
Community Education Program
Students and Police
Residents in the campus area are tired of
EPD officers abusing their rights, persons
and property. 1 refer to warrantless home
entries, illegal searches of pockets and back
packs, officers kicking in doors or threaten
ing to, false arrest for non-criminal offenses
and physical abuse and damage to property
after entry. Recurring tales of bad police be
havior form unacquainted students ring
true. Grievances against police get white
washed.
Students respond to respect with respect.
They respond badly when they are treated
badly. An EPD visit is often a student’s first
contact with any police authority. When
initial police contact is unprofessional,
rude, unnecessarily threatening and verbal
ly abusive, the situation deteriorates. Stu
dents learn to expect the worst form police.
Word spreads.
Group reactions to police presence reflect
growing frustration with police behavior.
EPD routinely dispenses multiple canisters
of noxious tear gas before the group- most
people merely standing around-compre
hends any warning and can leave. One
minute is not enough. I have not heard of
another municipal police force which uses
tear gas so causally.
How might 250 people wind up in an in
tersection setting the stage for a “riot”? Each
30 person party police empty displaces all
but tenants. EPD’s practice is to clear the
premises-even those over twenty-one must
leave. Those displaced move to the next
premises which the police empty, now dis
persing sixty, and so on. Soon there are 250
displaced people in the street. Much of this
is within police control.
Calling on courts to impose swifter,
harsher action without curing police abuse
trains another student generation to detest
police. Students are realizing this “whatev
er-means-necessary,” police conduct is con
doned by university administrators. Bad
police behavior escalates anti-police con
duct and feeds the dilemma. Police behav
ior is within police control.
I do not suggest students bear no respon
sibility for the current problems but that
ample room exists for attitude and behavior
adjustment by students and police.
Ilona E. Koleszar
ASUO Student Legal Services