Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 3, 2000)
Friday Editor in chief: Jack Clifford Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard Newsroom: (541) 346-5511 Room 300, Erb Memorial Union P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com Clashing views electrify candidate debates Guest Commentary Kitty Piercy The real truth about what is at stake in this election is much more important than a personality contest. It is about our lives, our rights and our future. I have had the opportunity to meet Vice President Al Gore on three different occa sions. I found him to be an accessible, principled person with a good sense of hu mor. He is committed to creating public policy that will benefit our county and all its people. He has worked diligently and successfully on our behalf as vice presi dent. We can believe with assurance that he will build on this record as our presi dent. It simply does make a crucial difference who wins this election. If George Bush wins, we will lose environmental regula tions that protect us and reproductive rights that enable women to fully partici pate in our society. Our public schools will be further undercut by the move to ward vouchers. Affirmative action will be at great risk, access to high-quality health care will be eroded and Social Security will be jeopardized. These are just a few of the policies at stake, and yet some of our most concerned citizens are willing to risk all because Gore is not as appealing to them as Ralph Nader. I am under no illusion that Gore is perfect, but I have yet to meet someone who is. Everyone in political office is constrained by the views of those they work with and the power of those they oppose. In spite of these constraints, good public figures keep working to improve policy and to ensure that the rights of others are upheld. I be lieve Gore to be a good public figure and deserving of your vote. Here in Oregon, if you disliked the divi sive, partisan, anti-public education lead ership in the last legislative session, then you will want to be sure that Lynn Snod grass does not become our next secretary of state. Bill Bradbury is known for his ability to work across party lines. My ex perience as House minority leader in the last session was that Lynn Snodgrass did her utmost to undermine Gov. John Kitzhaber, to punish moderation in the Re publican ranks and to avoid working with those she disagreed with. Bill Bradbury will be a secretary of state who wi 11 rise above partisan policies and keep his eye on serving all of us. Kitty Piercy isfinishing her last term as state repre sentative from District 39, which covers North and West Eugene. Guest Commentary Tony Chichi All right, you buncha doe eyed, namby-pamby, fair weather liberals, listen up. I’m done smoothing your ruf fled feathers and calming you, trying to convince you it’s OK to vote for Ralphie. I’m sick of hearing about how you want to vote for Nader but are scared to death of George II. Yes, there is a lot at stake. Yes, this is probably the most important ballot you will ever cast. And yes, it’s agonizing. But the stakes are higher than Al Gore’s surrogate at tack dogs let on. They show EKGs of the liberal Supreme Court justices and shivers run through the room. They show photos of Dick Cheney and children cry. They try to leverage our own values against us but fail to mention what is really on the line: our democracy and the future of the left. I freely admit the differ ences between Gore and Bush. They are different dogs — on the same leash. But the distinction between Neo- and Non-Neo-Democrats cannot be overemphasized. That tiny, Orwellian prefix threat ens to change forever the par ty it modifies. You cannot influence a party to do right if you % support it when it does Giovanni Salimena Emerald wrong. Gloria Steinem suggests we elect Gore, whom she admits is no great shakes on women’s issues, and then pressure him once he is in office. Pressure him with what? A nasty let ter? Politicians only under stand a loss of votes. I know that by voting for Ralph Nad er, I am taking a vote away from Gore. Why swap votes? Denying Gore my vote is half the point. The other half is that I many never again have a chance to vote for a citizen such as Nader. I want my kids to be interested enough in politics to ask about the 2000 election, and I don’t want them to kick me in the shins when I tell them I voted against Bush. Nader has dedicated his life to reclaiming the citizen power inherent in a true * democracy and he represents my values better than any candidate to ever seek the of fice. Call me naive, idealistic ^ or just old-fashioned, but I’m voting for Nader because I be lieve he’s the best man for the job. For me to vote for anyone other than Ralph Nader is for me to throw in the towel on democracy, and I am not pre pared to do that just yet. Bal lots are still bullets, and to vote against your conscience is to shoot yourself in the head. Tony Chiotti is a journalism major. Vote not out of obligation, but out of good judgment LONE VOICE IN THE WOODS BRET JACOBSON Contrary to what you may hear, it is not every citizen’s duty to vote, unless he or she has the men tal faculties and are informed on the issues and the candidates up for election. People should not feel inclined to vote simply based on a misplaced sense or duty and the is sue of possible voter-means testing should be examined. The notion that it is every citi zen’s duty to vote is interesting. Most take that to mean that every few years they should take an hour off work and go pull levers for is sues they haven’t mastered. If this is, as it seems for too many Ameri cans, the sense of duty they feel, forget it. The real duty is to do the re search and cast an informed vote. That doesn’t seem to happen all that often, when one examines how many measures passed by the public are thrown out by the courts, or if one looks at the num ber of undecided or “don’t know” answers given to polls. It is not the place of the unin formed to decide elections just be cause they were taught in third grade that they must. At some point, the question of whether it is appropriate to institute some form of voter testing will have to be ad dressed. America’s founding fathers did not intend for everyone to vote. While their criteria for voting eiigi bility were wrong — using race, gender and land ownership is not acceptable — the principle for some sort of means testing has a precedent. Some like to argue that it is the death of a democracy when the majority of its citizens don’t turn out to have a say in the running of the state. But that simply doesn’t hold true when one realizes that there are widely varying levels of knowledge and wisdom that make some opinions more valuable than others. While every individual has the same innate value under the law, their opinions do not, as evi denced by the fact that America elects representatives to use their wisdom on a daily basis for the betterment of the country. In conclusion, elections are very important and shouldn’t be taken lightly, as it often seems many do. It is your duty to cast an informed ballot or none at all. Make the right choice this year. Bret Jacobson is a columnist for the Ore gon Daily Emerald. His views do not neces sarily represent those of the Emerald. He can be reached at bjacobso@gladstone.uoregon.edu. Letters to the editor Seeing the real enemy As election season winds into its 11th hour, desperation hangs in the air around the issue of whether those of us who actually vote our principles will be en abling “the enemy.” It amazes me how readily Americans give away their natural power. We pretend that we only have a shot at real power every four years; that if we blow it at the ballot box, we have to wait until the next electoral circus to recov er our power. Then, of course, there's all the power we'll “lose” to the “wrong” Supreme Court. A Bush presidency and Supreme Court is not really the disaster. The disaster we actually face is the relinquishing of our spirit to a politics of despair, a poli tics of second-guessing and hedg ing bets and a politics that accedes our natural power to create both lo cal and global change day to day and week to week: Bottom-up change, in defiance of whatever hi erarchy pretends to wield defini tive power in this land. When, exactly, do we intend to start living and behaving in accor dance with our actual highest be liefs and principles? Is it just after we cast one more vote for the guv we don't really believe in — be! cause we're afraid? Living life, and doing politics, in this hopeless and fear-based fash ion is the paralyzing sickness which we need to see as the real enemy. Too many “Greens for Gore” have lost their vision, and now preach a politics of reactivity, disempowerment, appeasement and despair. Vip Short Eugene Putting youth first Born in the summer of 1950, in the small town of Eugene, I was the product of a home filled with love and support. My mom was always there to talk to me after school and dad came home every night, anx ious to hear all about my day. Most parents are still trying to till those roles — but they are find ing themselves stretched beyond belief by the demands and stresses of needing to work to make ends meet. There are many single parent homes who are even more chal lenged to find positive alternatives for their children before and after school hours. As a lifelong Eugene resident and a graduate from the Universi ty School of Community Services and Public Affairs, I have long be lieved that we, as a society, need to prioritize prevention programs. That means spending money up front to teach life skills and not waiting until a young person makes a really poor decision that forces us to begin their connection with the juvenile justice system. Measure 20-37 is the first true prevention measure I have ever seen. It was developed by a very thoughtful and caring group of non-profit agencies who worked with the city recreation depart ment staff to plan, survey, docu ment gaps and develop a proposal that reaches out to as many youth as possible. It definitely put the young people first — right where they belong! Please join me in voting yes on Measure 20-37. We need to start prioritizing youth right now. Marilyn Kalstad class of 74
