Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012, February 14, 2000, Image 2

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Editor in chief: Laura Cadiz
Editorial Editors: Bret Jacobson, Laura Lucas
Newsroom: (541)346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
Monday
February 14,2000
Volume 101, Issue 96
Rule #1:
1
n the wake of the International Student
Association Coffee Hour sponsorship,
C.J. Gabbe and Peter Larson must have a
■JL. bitter taste in their mouths. Now their
judgment has to be questioned whrle their
ASUO Executive candidacy rightly has
been thrown out of the race because of
vague ASUO Elections Board rules, pend
ing appeal at the ASUO Constitution Court.
Gabbe and Larson paid $40 to sponsor the
event at which they spoke promoting their
campaign, and many may believe such a
small sum isn’t even worth the attention it
has been getting. That notion, however, ig
nores the role of the college experience,
which is to provide a precursor to the real
world on a smaller and safer scale. A smaller
scale in this case may be a seemingly minor
campaign violation that should have real
consequences and be examined just as thor
oughly as we’d all like to believe infractions
on the national level are scrutinized.
Even if one was to assume in good faith
that Gabbe and Larson acted with good in
tentions, the abilities and judgment of the
two must be examined before they should
be elected. Both have a wealth of experience
in student government politics. Gabbe is a
student senator, regional director of the
USSA, was president of summer senate,
among many other positions. Lar
son has been co-director of
the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual
and TYansgender Al
liance and ASUO
outreach director.
Both know the
ins and outs
Giovanni Salirnena Emerald
of local politics, and for them not to have
foreseen these problems is cause for serious
concern about their fitness to govern.
The fact that the incident happened at all
suggests a few conclusions about their deci
sion making, none of them very good. Gabbe
has said the campaign constantly checked
the legality of campaign tactics and was sur
prised by the grievance. One possibility is
that they at some point came across the rule
but didn’t understand how it affected them
in the coffee hour speech. The other likely
possibility is that they understood the coffee
sponsorship was a violation but thought the
indiscretion was small enough that it
wouldn’t ruffle any feathers. The ramifica
tions of any of these scenarios bode poorly
on the Gabbe/Larson ticket right now.
If they didn’t study the rules enough they
may be prone to only partially researching
the projects they wish to undertake. If they
came across the rule and didn’t understand
it, that would suggest an incapability to
grasp tough, important subjects that certain
ly pop up for the ASUO executive. If they
believed the violation was small enough not
to grab attention they might be willing to cut
other comers, a very distasteful idea for a
student government that will file a griev
ance over the difference between gray and
grey.
To decide the punishment for elections vi
olations, this situation included, is a very
tricky conundrum. On the one hand, of
course the mles must be obeyed and en
forced; while on the other hand punishment
has to be proportional, measured and lawful.
Because the mles of the elections board
are ambiguous at best in their listed sanc
tions, there really is not much wiggle room
for deciding the fate of Gabbe and Larson.
The two could have been fined, limited in
how much they could campaign or they
could have been removed from the election
all together, including a write-in campaign.
A fine would have been too little punish
ment for the action and limiting how much
campaigning is allowed is a grotesquely in
appropriate slippery slope. That only leaves
removal as the best current sanction.
While it seems rather harsh to kick the
two out for this particular indiscretion, that
punishment is the best decision until a more
Appropriate and clarified version of elec
tions mles are fleshed out for future elec
tions. Gabbe and Larson have been removed
from the ballot but can still be written in at
election time and can campaign just as they
normally would have with posters and but
tons. The two still have a chance to be on the
ballot pending a constitution court decision
on the elections board ruling, which is a
very important function in the machinery of
student government.
This entire situation is unfortunate for
everyone involved. The functioning of stu
dent government has hit an ugly public rela
tions bump, and students may not get their
full choice of possible executive candidates.
The elections board needs clearer mles and
accompanied sanctions for the future, but
for now the removal of Gabbe and Larson
from the ballot is the best possible action out
of the limited options.
This editorial represents the view of the Emerald edi
torial board. Responses may be sent to ode@ore
gon.uoregon.edu
Letters to the editor
Executive coordinator needed
I would like to express my concern with the out
come of the recent ASUO budget appeal hearing.
The result will indirectly affect every member of
the campus community. The Programs Finance
Committee chose to deny a request allocating fund
ing for the position of executive coordinator in the
ASUO office.
The position, which has existed in the past, im
proves the effectiveness of student representatives
by minimizing technical paperwork that would
otherwise become the responsibility of our elected
officials. The position would cost each student
only 42 cents per term. This is a small price to en
sure the efficiency of the ASUO and consequently
all other campus programing. What is the purpose
of electing officials if they are only going to be con
sumed by endless amounts of paperwork? Would
n’t the students of this University prefer that their
representatives occupy their time addressing the is
sues that we are most concerned about? I would.
I find it hard to understand why the committee
chose to grant the appeal in the first place. The jus
tification of the decision on the basis of a bench
mark and/or threat of too much administrative in
fluence was illogical and contradictory. The only
genuine protection students have against over
whelming administrative control are our student
representatives, but who will represent us while
our they are busy doing paperwork?
Heather Mitchell
environmental science
Candidate misquoted
In your recent article on the decision of several
ASUO Executive candidates to limit campaign
spending (ODE, Feb. 7), statements I made to my fel
low candidates were misrepresented.
I met Autumn DePoe’s challenge by saying “I re
fuse to spend a penny of Righty’s money! ” This is in
dicative of my refusal to cater to right-handed inter
ests in my campaign for left-handed rights.
Yet in your story, it was indicated that I “pledged
to not spend a dime” on my campaign. To the con
trary, I fully intend to spend money—just not mon
ey raised by whoring my principles out to well
heeled right people. My campaign is funded solely
by and for my sinistelateral brothers and sisters.
Daniel Atkinson
“"*■ ‘" * * “ * ~ *1 ‘ASUO Executive candidate
Thumbs
The NBAxom Slam
Dunk Contest re
turned this year af
ter a two-year hia
tus to dazzle
amazed onlook
ers, Toronto’s
Vince Carter won
the contest with
gravity-defying
dunks.
To the best cure,
prevention
Thanks toa grant
from the Oregon
Health Division,
Lane County Pub
lic Health Services
is recruiting clients
to pilot an HIV Pre
vention Case Man
agement program
that will last 18
months. The pro
gram will involve
one-on-one coun
seling for those
clients with risk-re
duction needs.
To the suspension
id cooperation
Only 72 days after
its inception, the
power-sharing of
Northern Ireland
has been suspend
ed. London sus
pended the
province’s govern
ment because of
concerns of
whether or notan
Irish Republican
Army disarma
ment offer is real.
To modi ado
about little
while students
can’t seem to get
together on a plan
to cover bike racks
around campus,
the University De
sign Review Sub
committeeap
praveda
recommendation
to increase cov
ered bike parking
for staff members.
The addition
would only add 13
spots. And® iill
dents can’tseem
to get any, *