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
i nursaay
Frebruary 17,2000
Volume 101, Issue 99
Emerald
///».
gl ^ made it through the tech
| MkMnocrat propaganda prophe
In cy of Y2K Armageddon.
* * All appeared safe and tran
quil on the horizon. Yet, in the first
third of the new year, we find our
selves at the dawn of a new barrage
of political hype and harrowing
hypocrisy. Brace yourselves, the
ASUO elections are less than a
week away.
Harbored in a cut-and-paste work
of grievances, campaign promises,
baby-kissing and international
house coffee-breaks are six candi
dates for this year’s ASUO Execu
tive. Unless you belong to the micro
cosm of small world squabbles
known as the Associated Students o
the University of Oregon, you proba
bly don’t care.
At the national level, elections
are also underway. Even at the na
tional level, you are probably far
overcome the po
litical failures of his
father. The other is si
dates is at
tempting to
thralled.
One of the
major candi
from en
multaneously attempting to
break away from the scandal of
his boss and shine in the light of
his prosperity. Lurking in the shad
ows are a few mavericks vying for
center stage in the world’s seediest
arena.
If presidential elections are the
Montage restaurant, ASUO elections
are the Hammy’s special. Swipe
your student ID card, and see how
far five points will take you.
This year, you need not leave the
confines of your own comfortable
home to participate. Voting will take
place entirely on-line, via the Duck
[ Web voting system. You can point
and click for the next representative
who will allocate your student dol
lars and fill vacancies left by depart
ing student senators. Perhaps this
revolution of unprecedented acces
sibility will push voter turnout
f through the roof to a dreamy level of
say, 15 percent. Dare we dream?
On a brighter note, this year’s bal
lot brings us a real choice in candi
dates, instead of the usual collage of
rich kids and snot-nosed, wannabe
Opinion
Eric
political demagogues.
First, I’ll look at the two tickets
who are actually running full-scale
campaigns. Those with crazy addi
tions like a vice-presidential candi
date. You have Jay Breslow and his
running mate Holly Magner, against
Autumn DePoe and her companion
Caitlin Upshaw. Both tickets bring a
level of credibility and dedication
that is often lacking in student gov
ernment. DePoe has long been
known as a rebel and reformer with
in the ASUO playhouse, often times
being the sole voice of discontent
against a concrete wall of slated
power players. Breslow seems com
mitted to diversity and effective
communication within the ASUO,
another trait that would serve stu
dents well.
All said and done, it’s a Coke vs.
Pepsi dilemma. Do you want the
sharp-but-sweet classic DePoe Coke
or the smooth and soothing choice
of-a-new-generation Breslow? Either
way, the age of accountability and
actually doing your job, established
by this year’s executives, Wylie
Chen and Mitra Anoushiravani,
should continue.
Of course, if you’re not a fan of
soft drinks, you could always go for
the Antifreeze flavor of recently re
moved candidates or the madness
inducing mercury of Scott Austin.
Then, we would need only to elect
an aspiring Alice to accompany his
Mad Hatter.
For yet another perspective, you
could compare our ASUO candi
dates to some national figures. De
Poe has been branded as the John
McCain of the ASUO. She hasn’t
spent a dime and wants to eliminate
the pork from student government.
Not a bad idea, since the U.S.
Supreme Court is likely to run our
fee system through the grinder in the
next few months. Someone needs to
protect student programs. Breslow
might be a Bill Bradley of sorts. He
seems to have a genuine interest in
improving campus diversity, and he
has the savvy to work within the
system.
Even if you hate politics. Even if
you’d rather snuggle up to a bed of
nails than get involved in the sys
tem. Even if you just don’t care. Take
a moment to examine this year’s
candidates both at. the local and na
tional level. Take a Coke or a Pepsi
out of the fridge and make yourself
comfortable. Next year’s leaders are
only a click away.
Eric Pfeiffer is the freelance editor for the
Emerald. His views do not necessarily repre
sent those of the Emerald. He can be reached
via e-mail at epfeiffe@gladstone.uoregon.
edu.
Letters to the ed itor
Gabbe, Larson campaign
reaches out
So what exactly is going on
here? The elections board has re
moved C.J. Gabbe and Peter Lar
son from the ballot for serving
coffee to 20 people — I’m not
quite seeing the reason for re
moval. Gabbe and Larson were
trying to reach out to a group of
students who tend to be over
looked. Why is this a bad thing?
Isn't that what democracy is all
about — advertising your self and
your issues? Gabbe and Larson
were the first of the candidates to
reach out to the International Stu
dents Association; they found a
platform to speak about their
campaigns and then they get
punished. The inexperience of
the elections board has lead them
to make this unjust decision.
Gabbe and Larson are the best
candidates for the job. Let’s put
them back on the ballot and allow
the students to choose.
Courtney Hight
environmental studies
Friends don’t
make friends drink
As a “drier than a forsaken
desert’’ student, I wish to thank
you for the insightful article about
the debate regarding a campus
“beer garden” (ODE, Feb. 7). Al
though I am strictly against alco
hol consumption, I would not
force my beliefs on others by peti
tioning for a law against alcohol
consumption. However, I beg the
same respect from those who do
drink. I don’t want a part in it,
however small. I will not be forced
into supporting that which I be
lieve to be wrong. I am now look
ing forward to better acquainting
myself with our student govern
ment and regret that it has taken
an attack on my personal values to
get me involved. Thank you for
providing my motivation.
Sara Vogelsberg
pre-major, journalism
PFC explains reasoning
Many questions have been
brought up concerning decisions
Programs Finance Committee has
made. We’d like to take a few mo
ments to explain PFC’s reasoning.
The PFC was given a 0-percent
benchmark for student groups,
which was approved not only by
the PFC itself, but also by the
ASUO Executive and the ASUO
Student Senate.
The Emerald reported that Des
ignated Driver Shuttle was grant
ed $50,876, a negative 30 percent.
This was true as of Jan. 27, but as
of Feb. 8, DDS was granted almost
$13,000 more, giving them a total
budget of $63,157, a negative 12
percent. The Emerald failed to
mention DDS appealed to PFC
and part of their appeal, for wages,
was granted.
The Student Bar Association
did ask for a budget increase,
which was hard for PFC to grant,
considering that last year, the
group didn’t use $3,739 of their
$11,00 budget.
And many conferences were
not granted an increase this year,
simply because last year confer
ences received increases of up to
66 percent.
The order in which groups ap
pear before PFC doesn’t matter.
The numbers speak for them
selves. Whether the group goes
first or last, their numbers don’t
change. Furthermore, groups are
responsible for scheduling the
date of their hearing.
We encourage students to be
come active in the PFC process.
Come to office hours and look at
ledger sheets and post-closes,
which indicate individual groups’
spending. Decide for yourself
whether or not you believe a
group efficiently and effectively
spends your incidental fee dollars.
Shantell Rice
ASUO PFC Chair
Emily Owens Sedgwick
ASUO PFC Vice-Chair