Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 21, 2000)
Tuesday 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 Recent developments in the ongoing Worker Rights Consortium controversy give us serious pause. . Nike President and CEO Phil 1 Knight has resumed attending \ University football games, and the * media have portrayed Knight as a » wounded but well-meaning donor \ who is beginning to warm up to # the University again, now that University President Dave Frohn ‘ mayer is distancing the University from the WRC. What this represents is the wholesale auction cf University policy to private donors, and the campus community should be up set. The University doesn’t have adequate funding from the state, so it’s willing to sell its reputation and its decisions to whoever can pony up enough money. For shame. After the University agreed to join the WRC earlier this year, Knight pulled his $30 million pledge to help fund the expansion of Autzen Stadium. Knight said he was upset that he hadn’t been con sulted about the decision. Frohnmayer repeatedly insisted that Knight wasn’t trying to buy control of University policy, but that he had deserved a phone call first. This is plain wrong — no one voice, especially one with a lot of money — should have an overrid ing say in a public university’s de cisions. As soon as Knight pulled his money, Frohnmayer began dis tancing the University from the WRC. Concerns were raised about the group’s formation, operation and ability to monitor working conditions. The University dragged its feet and refused to help the WRC address the concerns that were raised. During the summer, Frohnmay er joined the Fair Labor Associa tion, another labor-monitoring group established by the govern ment in conjunction with the ap parel industry. And recently, the University’s legal counsel, at Frohnmayer’s request, issued an opinion that the University could not pay its dues to the WRC be ] •mmm ,.Mt. imr ' mi imir 1 1 I 1 cause the group was not of ficially in corporated, and the group’s structure ex posed the Uni versi ty to law suits. The WRC responded with a statement that none of the University’s opin ions are true. Then the media got involved. The Register-Guard ran an article and a column about Phil Knight’s return to Oregon football games, saying now that the University has backed away from the WRC, Knight feels the relationship is be ing repaired, and he might again be able to give money to his alma mater someday. Local television stations have dramatically present calls the col lege’s largest pri vate donor, a wealthy busi nessman whose company would be af fected by the labor group. The ed the situation as though the Uni versity has already cut off the WRC, and the Eugene Weekly’s re cent cover story seemed to assume the University’s pull-out is as good as done. If this saga were a novel, critics would laugh at the plot for being so obvious. How would the fic tionalized version of events read? A public college moves to join a la bor group unfriendly to the appar el industry. The college president president ex plains that the handwriting is on the wall; students are protesting and he needs to join the labor group to appear that he’s doing the right thing. The businessman says to go ahead and join the group. When you join, the businessman says, I’ll pull my money and help demonize the labor group in the eyes of the community. The com munity will pressure you to drop your association, and as you pull away, I’ll say that the relationship s being repaired. When you final y drop out of the group, the busi lessman says, I’ll give my money lack, and this will ensure that any ittempt to rejoin the group will be ioundly defeated. Sounds great, ;ays the college president. Unfortunately, what has actually lappened has occurred behind dosed doors. Yet it seems as hough it’s still too transparent, rhanks to a stingy Oregon Legisla te, the University doesn’t have he money to fund its programs ind expand its football facilities at he same time. And with the recent Dassage of Measures 88 and 7, the hnding situation isn’t likely to get letter any time soon. So the Uni /ersity is relying on private dona ions, which would be fine if they were really charitable. But Knight aas shown that this is not charita ile giving; it’s a successful attempt :o buy control. If the Legislature wants the Uni versity to be privately funded and controlled, than it should sell the college to the highest bidder. Knight could then make all the de cisions he wants about the cam pus’ apparel manufacturing. Until :hat happens, however, the Uni versity is still a public institution. [t should receive adequate funding and make decisions based on what’s right and what the whole community wants — not on the fi nancial impact to one private donor. With the current state of affairs, the University and Frohnmayer look like pawns to the rest of the country, bought and sold by Knight. The University of Califor nia system hasn’t buckled to busi ness pressures — they’ve paid their dues to the WRC and are ac tive in the organization. This Uni versity, however, has earned its nickname of Nike U. Despite Frohnmayer’s protests to the contrary, the campus com munity should be embarrassed that, for lack of public funding, private donors can boss around the University. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. Responses can be sent to ode@oregon.uoregon.edu. Letters to the editor The Electoral College: an unfair antiquity Despite the uncertainty and confusion surrounding the outcome of the presidential election, our democracy is strong and stable. The League of Women Voters believes wholeheartedly that the current legal steps being taken to decide the outcome of the 2000 presidential election should be pur sued to their final conclusion. The League has advocated abolition of the Electoral College since 1970. What more ev idence do we need that it is time to bring our elections into the 21st century? The course of American history has been an inexorable trend toward greater fairness, uniformity and inclusiveness in our democ racy. Yet, some systems for electing the most important representative of the American people are stuck in a time warp. We need a technology upgrade. The Electoral College, a curious vestige of the 18th century, violates the principle of “one person, one vote.” The time has come to eval uate it. It’s time to ensure that the president of the United States is directly elected by the people he or she will represent. It’s time to guarantee that, across the country, every per son’s vote counts — and counts the same. Karen Rikhoff president of the League of Women Voters of Lane County Leadership positions open to anyone The issue at hand in Emily Gust's article (“Student workers demand pav-offs,” ODE, Nov. 8) is that these students are victims of an attempt to make student leadership positions open to only those who can afford to be in them. The current system allows leadership positions to be accessible to anyone, regard less of financial need. Traditionally, most leaders in ASUO-rec ognized programs are paid small stipends for the many hours of hard work that they do. Because these leaders put so much time into their organizations, they may not have time to'work other jobs. Those that-qualify for work study, a federal financial aid program, can use these jobs to earn their work study — at almost no extra cost to the organizations. These federal matching dollars create a win/win situation for students and groups. All of this work-study money is earmarked for tuition and educational expenses. We are committed to ensuring that student organi zations and leadership positions are accessi ble to everyone, regardless of financial sta tus. We urge you to send a strong message to the Student Senate that you are too. C.J. Gabbe ASUO student senator Katie Howard ASUO student senator Preserving the wild As one of millions of Americans who are concerned about protecting what’s left of our country’s wild heritage, I would like to di rect attention to the Forest Service’s final plan for roadless area management in our national forests. Monday, Nov. 13. it was released. It is the most expansive preservation act since 1907, when the Forest Service was created. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) would end commodity logging in roadless areas, but would delay protections for the Tongass Rainforest in Alaska — the largest national forest — for four years. In addition, the FEIS would include “steward ship” activities, or in other words, getting rid of fire threats by cutting certain areas. In recent years, however, about two-thirds of the timber volume cut from national forest lands has been derived from stewardship, and the Forest Service has been very lenient with this definition. Many are pleased to see progress in the Forest Service plan, though it still falls short of the full protection the American people have asked for. The Clinton administration now has 30 days, as of Monday, and a unique opportunity to permanently protect all 60 million acres of unprotected wilder ness in our national forests. Brad Schallert freshman journalism
