Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (July 25, 2000)
Editor in chief: Jack Clifford Associate Editors: Rebecca Newell, Jeff Smith Newsroom: (541)346-5511 Room 300, Erb Memorial Union P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu Tuesday July 25,2000 Volume 102, Issue 10 Emerald Don'tpull the plug — WRC could turn out justfine “Doctor, is the patient going to live?” “Well, we’re not sure. The patient won’t allow us all the way in to find out what’s wrong and we’re not al lowed to use the ‘tools of the indus try,’ so to speak. Plus, this patient’s fi nancial status is questionable, so we hesitate to even get involved.” “But, doctor, what about the pa tient’s heart and soul? What about this patient’s dream to some day be something? Sure, it’s looking bad now, but doctor you can’t give up. You must help.” “Well, I can’t promise anything, but the diagnosis looks bad. You don’t happen to have $30 million to help out with payments do you?” OK, so that faux exchange is in tended as a humorous assessment of the Worker Rights Consortium, at least as it stands on this University campus. But there is a very serious side to the ramifications caused by the possibility of University officials backpedaling out of the student-driv en, labor-monifbring organization. First, however, does the University, especially administrators who are paid to do just that, administrate, have the right to question whether the time, money and effort needed to get it off the ground is going to be worth while? Absolutely. Are there legitimate concerns about this fledgling group that has snagged headlines around the coun try for the past several months? Yes. Sorry, but in this day and age, a budg et of $295,000 doesn’t go very far, es pecially in New York City, where the WRC office is to be located. Besides, approximately half of that is not even in the group’s bank account yet, but instead is just “hoped-for” funds in the form of grants and gifts. At the same time, student leaders and WRC officials are correct in their opinions that the organization’s goal is a good one, with designs — admit tedly long-range plans — on rooting out unfair labor practices at overseas apparel-industry factories. Even Uni versity officials agree that the desired goal of the WRC is an admirable one. And one of the University’s condi tions set at the beginning of this whole drama, more representation on the WRC governing board, was ad dressed and changed at Thursday’s meeting, if not necessarily to Presi dent Dave Frohnmayer’s and Vice President for Public Affairs Duncan McDonald’s complete satisfaction. And what about industry represen tation on the WRC board? Almost everyone involved with the WRC says that is not going to happen, al though the group’s treasurer, Marcella David, does say that she welcomes outreach and dialogue with the vari ous apparel industries that eventually will be monitored. The kind of rela tionship that is established will be crucial to the WRC’s success and longevity, however, because gaining access to the thousands of factories will depend on industry’s willing ness to open the doors. Demonizing the corporations in this case will not fly and shouldn’t be expected to work. Direct representa tion on the board isn’t necessary, but corporations need to be included in pertinent discussions surrounding the monitoring process. We’re in the year 2000 and there is little disagree ment among all parties that sweat shop conditions are unacceptable, but finding ways to eliminate the last vestiges of them needs to be a collabo rative effort. The University’s beef that WRC board meetings should be open to the public and the media is a very credi ble one. We’re not sure how things are done over on the East Coast, but here in Oregon meetings are generally open, as they should be. Open the doors and let the sun shine in, people. So, how can this “patient” survive? How does the WRC show that it can become something? With a little bit of patience. Nobody knows what is going through Frohnmayer’s mind concern ing the future status of a WRC-UO partnership except the president. His comments to the media are far from circuitous, however: He’s not im pressed at this juncture. The Univer sity Senate committee set up to regu larly review the WRC reads the newspapers and watches the TV news, if they aren’t getting direct in put from Frohnmayer himself. So, the plug could be pulled before next April, when the year commit ment evaporates. But, it shouldn’t be yanked just yet, no matter how loudly the University donors and alums howl or how “dis organized” the organization may seem. Give the WRC a chance to work out its problems, if for no other reason than to follow through on the commit ment that was made on April 12. Remember the last time someone broke a commitment over this issue, the scene wasn’t pretty. This editorial represents the view of the Emerald editorial board. Responses may be sent to ode@oregon.uoregon.edu. It’s time to lift the smoke screen from businesses In industrial workplaces around the nation, pollutants including tox ins and carcinogens are banned — unless they’re coming from the end of a lit cigarette. Smoking should be a cut and dry issue. The hard reality is that to ■■ bacco causes or contributes to I almost 25 per v cent of all « deaths in Ore i gon, according Kto an article written last No vember by Grant Higgison, Rebecca Newell a state Health ol ficer with the Oregon Health Division. Every one — with the exception of claims from those who recently won large settlements against the tobacco in dustry — starts smoking with the knowledge it’s unhealthy. However, that’s the benefit of free dom of choice — smokers have the right to make the decision whether or not to put a “death stick” in their mouth. But do the rest of us? If the Eugene City Council chooses to put to vote an ordinance which would ban smoking in all businesses of two or more employees, Eugene residents will have that choice. Corvallis passed a “smoke-free business” law in 1998, the same year that the Oregon Health Division kicked off it’s tobacco-use reduction program. During the last two years, Oregon tobacco consumption has been reduced by 11 percent, and the number of smokers fell by 6.4 per cent, a total of 35,000 smokers. That’s 500 million fewer cigarettes sold each year with a future savings of over $150 million — in Oregon alone. Impressive numbers and a clear indicator that the program and efforts on the part of cities such as Corvallis are working. As Eugene faces an attack from the anti-tobacco movement, City Council members are turning to Corvallis as an example for what worked and what didn’t. Though many agree that the idea of smoke-free businesses is a good one. criticism from bars has some claiming mixed views. Some smokers and bar owners argue that a part of bar tradi tion is the smoky atmosphere, and that bar patrons can choose not to vis it the bar if that’s a problem. How fair is that, considering 66 percent of bar patrons are non-smok ers? Don’t they deserve the clean air? After all, those with a drink can’t ex actly “step outside” to get out of the smoke in the way smokers can take a “step outside” to allow the rest of us to breathe uncontaminated air. Besides the customers, it doesn’t give the employees of businesses a choice, especially the bartenders or cocktail servers who are often burned by carelessly held cigarettes, and who are exposed to second-hand smoke. Speaking of second-hand smoke, what about the children in restau rants who are exposed to this health risk? According to the World Health Organization, second-hand smoke se riously damages the health of almost half the world’s children. And we’re worried about kids washing their hands to prevent germs and illness? However, old habits die hard. The question of concern is: Will isolating the one-third of bar patrons who do smoke irreparably damage the bar scene as we now know it? According the OHD, no. Sixty-five percent of Corvallis bar customers say they like the bar experience better now than when smoking was al lowed. Of course, it doesn’t take a ge nius to realize that those are likely the 65 percent of bar customers who don’t smoke. However, food and alcohol sales have not been affected, and nine of 10 customers in the Corvallis area are spending as much or more time in bars as they did before the ordinance went into effect. The numbers are in and it’s about common sense. If the Eugene ban is put into effect — which it should be — we’ll look back two years from now and wonder how we ever thought allowing smoking in public places was “no big deal.” Rebecca Newell is an associate editor for the Emerald. Her views do not necessarily repre sent those of the Emerald. She can be reached at rnewell@gladstone.uoregon.edu. Letters to the editor Give it some time Let me begin with some business terminology, the lingo common to both University administrators and corporate donors who instruct them. The University’s decision to join the WRC was an investment. Like all in vestments, time and careful guidance are necessary for fruition. Sometimes years are necessary before any profit or benefit can be acquired. Those who advocated for WRC membership were very clear and out spoken on the amount of time need ed for the WRC to become effective. This is why a five-year membership was requested. University administrators should be well aware of the long-term nature of projects involving large social change. A faculty, staff, student and administrative team has been work ing to increase diversity on campus for more than a year now without success. The Code of Conduct Com mittee, which voted unanimously to adopt the WRC, took more than a year to reach a decision. These tasks are nothing compared to that of glob al networking between human rights groups and monitoring corporations which do not want to be monitored. President Frohnmayer’s four issues are his alone. No democratic body at the University has ever voted for them to be enacted. Even then, one of his issues, that of university repre sentation, has already been addressed at the WRC meeting. That seems like rather quick work to me. In the Register-Guard article (July 21), University Professor Lynn Kahle referred to the WRC as being in an in fant state. No argument here. The question is: Should we nurture this infant or abandon it? Chad Sullivan Music Smoking ban an infringement on rights First, I’d like to say that I am not a smoker, but the arguments for the proposed ban on smoking in bars are ridiculous. The argument that second-hand smoke is bad and no one should be subjected to it is moot. Whether sec ond-hand smoke is harmful is still debated, but even if it (probably) is, no one is forced to enter these estab lishments. Even the employees at the bars could find other jobs in this time of record employment. Besides, they had to know people smoked there when they turned in their applica tion. The argument that people will spend more in a non-smoking bar does not stand up either. If it did, there would be no need to enact a ban — the bars would do it voluntarily. The biggest argument against this ban should be that these bars are pri vate businesses open to adults, and it should be left to the proprietors to de cide what legal activities go on in side. Taking away the freedoms of people to do what is legal because a group just doesn’t like it is un-Ameri can. Dustin Preuitt Computer and Information Science Quoted "It’s almost as though now guys will pick events to play in and play the Tiger-less tour to have a chance to win. The guy is simply in a differ ent league. ” —Nick Faldo, a professional goffer who became one of the many vic tims of Tiger Woods at last weekend’s British Open. The Oregon ian, July 24. “Poetry has the power to show you who you really are.” —Sarah Einowski, a 17-year-old Beaverton resident and one of 42 young people who are traveling around the coun try, teaching poet ry wo ikshops in conjunction with the Seattle-based Institute for Com munity Leader ship. The Oregon ian.July 24. “My friends, we have a chance to become Big Pub lishing's worst nightmare. Not only are we going glueless, look Ma, no e-Book! No tire some encryption!” —Stephen King, of his experiment of posting the first installment of a new novel on-line and asking readers to pay through the honor system. The Oregonian, July 24. “All Al Gore proves when he claims Texas has a budget shortfall when it really hasa$1.4 billion surplus is that Al Gore him self has a serious shortfall when it comes to telling the truth.” —George W. Bush, presidential candi date and Texas governor in re sponse to Gore’s blasting his budget policies. The Regis ter Guard, July 22.
