OSPIRGON THE BALLOT
Letters to the editor
OSPIRG full of empty promises
I am a student at Portland State
University, and I am becoming fa
miliar with OSPIRG on this cam
pus. Some of the same problems
apply to OSPIRG at the University
of Oregon.
OSPIRG claims to be for the en
vironment, but who wastes more
money on posters than OSPIRG (at
PSU, they don’t even appear to be
on recycled paper)? OSPIRG also
claims to support campaign fi
nance reform, but when it’s on the
ballot, it outspends the opposition
four times over!
OSPIRG likes students to think
they are the last hope for environ
mental causes, and lots of students
think that giving OSPIRG money
equals doing something good. But
when was the last time OSPIRG ac
tually proved it was effective?
There are many environmental
groups that are funded voluntarily
and are much more successful
than OSPIRG, such as the
Audubon Society, Sierra Club,
Oregon Trout, the Cascadia Forest
Alliance and the World Forestry
Center. Do you see those groups
misleading students about how
their money is spent? Those
groups don’t require gtudents to
pay for them.
OSPIRG likes to say it involves
students, but the groups I’ve men
tioned will gladly take student vol
unteers. Why doesn’t OSPIRG let
students make that decision for
themselves?
Simply, they are afraid that peo
ple will realize that OSPIRG is full
of empty promises, and that if stu
dents paid more attention, they
would realize OSPIRG is not what
it claims to be. Students should
vote no on OSPIRG, because they
are being taken for a ride.
Ken Oke
Portland State University
freshman
speech communications
OSPIRG: a fighter and a
winner
If there is any issue that calls you
to vote in the general elections next
week, it should be to vote yes for
OSPIRG. OSPIRG is always on tar
get in its campaigns. I am from
Alaska, and preserving one of the
last real areas of wilderness in the
country — the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge — is one of my top
environmental concerns.
OSPIRG is making protection of
the refuge its fop national cam
paign. The other big issue that it is
working on is cleaning up the
Willamette River. Progress on this
issue is going to takh more than
kids cleaning up trash on the
stream walks; it’s going to mean
hiring staff to work with students
to uncover the foot causes of the
pollution and then finding solu
tions to those root problems. OS
PIRG gets results by having staff
work on these issues year-round.
I want that, and so I am going to
vote to fund the work that OSPIRG
does. I want the Willamette
cleaned up. I want the Arctic Na
tional Wildlife Refuge to be pro
tected. I want a group to focus on
hunger and homelessness in Eu
gene. I want OSPIRG because it
will not stop working on these is
sues until they are solved.
I am voting yes on OSPIRG be
cause these battles need fighting,
and OSPIRG is in the business of
winning them.
Erin Pursell
junior
political science
MCC’s doors are open to all
The Multicultural Center is on
the ballot this year for the first time.
Our support can really make a dif
ference for the MCC and everyone
on campus. The MCC represents a
strong community that welcomes
everybody, not just students of col
or. Its goal is to spread “diversity”
and awareness of other cultures
through events, workshops, guest
speakers, etc.
It is very important for students
to see different people’s perspec
tives on issues, and without the
MCC, this would be very difficult.
Many student groups come to the
MCC when they need money to fi
nance an event. The MCC sponsors
these groups but usually cannot
contribute enough money because
of its small budget. These events
are almost always free and are al
ways open to everyone. If this bal
lot measure passes, the money
would not go only to the MCC, it
would also go to many student
' groups.
MCC is asking for a mere 37
cents per student per term, which
would yield about $18,000 to allo
cate to student groups, such as the
Black Student Union, APASU and
MEChA, for events next year. This
money will support events that are
open to everyone. Just as our game
tickets are open to everyone, the
MCC is open to everyone.
I encourage every student to
support the MCC and pass this
measure on the ballot. It’s our duty
to this university and society to
keep the MCC properly funded
and running.
Give the MCC a chance to show
what it can do by voting!
Nicholas D. Madani
freshman
business
OSPIRG: a statewide leader
It’s again that time of year in
which students jockey over sup
port for or against certain ballot
measures in the ASUO elections.
I’d like to add a fresh perspective
to the OSPIRG debate.
If you don’t read the paper every
day,, then it can be hard to see the
work that OSPIRG performs not
only on this campus, but in our
community and across our state.
Last fall, OSPIRG was an invalu
able ingredient in an ASUO recipe
that registered more than 5,500 stu
dents to vote.
In addition to motivating stu
dents to exercise their democratic
rights, OSPIRG is a leader across
the state. By hiring staff and reach
ing out to the community to work
with citizens to clean up our wa
terways, protect the air we breathe
and for consumer protection, stu
dents here improve the quality of
life for the community as a whole.
These actions demonstrate that
University students are invested
community members, and we
should be invested community
members, as it’s our duty to create a
positive future for Oregon.
For many, including myself, OS
PIRG has taught valuable skills
outside of the classroom. These
skills have provided students a
foundation to make an impact on
the world we live in. Support the
OSPIRG ballot measure.
Brian Tanner
senior
political science
OSPIRG effective for students
I am writing to strongly endorse
the OSPIRG ballot measure.
Through my involvement with
statewide and national student or
ganizations, I have seen the effec
tiveness of OSPIRG.
Whether it has been registering
students to vote, advocating for
higher Pell Grants, fighting ATM
fees or protecting student fee con
trol, OSPIRG has achieved con
crete victories that benefit stu
dents.
OSPIRG is a non-partisan organ
ization that brings students from
universities and community col
leges together to work on issues
students care about. This has re
sulted in a very positive reputa
tion for OSPIRG on campus,
statewide and national levels.
I encourage everyone to find
more out about OSPIRG and vote
yes for OSPIRG in the ASUO elec
tion.
C.j. Gabbe
student senator
senior
planning, public policy and man
agement
OSPIRG: still recycling UO students fee money
Guest Commentary
Owen
JJrennan Rounds
Like drizzle in the Eugene forecast or an al
most-great season for the football team, OS
PIRG seems ever present at the University of
Oregon. But unlike the weather or dreams of
the Rose Bowl, students can actually have an
impact on OSPIRG’s future.
In his Feb. 20 column (“OSPIRG: A model
for citizens”), Eric Pfeiffer regaled Emerald
readers with OSPIRG’s quaint history with
Ralph Nader. But OSPIRG’s true legacy is in
its ability to take student fees and funnel
them to a group that lobbies government. For
years, it has done a remarkable job of hiding
this fundraising model from students and
the administration.
Their model is very simple, very effective
and reveals that OSPIRG is hardly a student
organization. According to the Oregon De
partment of Justice, there are three OSPIRGs
in the state of Oregon. One is the Student
PIRG, whose budget is up for approval in
next week’s election. Another is the OSPIRG
Foundation, Inc. The third is the Oregon
State Public Interest Research Group. They
share the same office, phone number, staff
and name.
According to paperwork filed with the
DOJ, the three OSPIRGs also have similar
missions:
StudentPIRG: “To engage in non-partisan
analysis, study or research of issues of gener
al public interest and to make results avail
able for the public. ”
StatePIRG: “To engage in non-partisan
analysis, education and research on such
topics of environmental protection and other
issues of the general public interest, and to
advocate on behalf of consumers and the en
vironment.”
OSPIRG Foundation Inc.: “Promote envi
ronmental preservation and consumer
rights.”
While their similarities blur the lines of
distinction, the three OSPIRGs exploit one
salient difference in order to bilk University
students out of more than $100,000 each
year by organizing themselves under differ
ent IRS filing codes. The StudentPIRG may
accept public money in the form of student
fees, but federal law prohibits it from using
public money to lobby. The StudentPIRG
simply reports its “non-partisan analysis,
study or research.”
But the StatePIRG’s IRS status, while pro
hibiting it from collecting public money, al
lows it to lobby government. Both the
StatePIRG and the OSPIRG Foundation, Inc.
have missions to “advocate” or “promote”
environmental and consumer issues.
In a lawsuit brought against the University
regarding OSPIRG’s funding, it was discov
ered that the StudentPIRG pays an inordi
nate amount of money for a space in the
StatePIRG’s office. Both groups also used the
same office equipment — even the same sta
tionery — and had the same staff of profes
sional lobbyists and lawyers, all paid for by
the StudentPIRG. Student fees subsidized
the lobbyists, lawyers and their entire office.
The lines between the various OSPIRGs
disappeared during depositions. Kalpana
Krishnamurthy, the former chair of the Stu
dentPIRG’s state board, confirmed the
group’s lobbying. And while that admission
would have seemed to seal StudentPIRG’s
fate, the most revealing information came
from the deposition of University President
Dave Frohnmayer. OSPIRG’s ability to obfus
cate its organizational model was so effective
that even Frohnmayer did not know there
were multiple OSPIRGs in the state of Ore
gon.
The StudentPIRG has been hiding its
fundraising technique for years, to the bene
fit of the StatePIRG’s lawyers and lobbyists.
University students may learn to enjoy
Willamette Valley drizzle or the reliability of
the fighting Ducks, but they don’t have to tol
erate being lied to by OSPIRG.
Owen Brennan Rounds, class of ‘95, is the former edi
tor of the Oregon Commentator and a writer living in
New York City. He filed a lawsuit along with several
other students in 1995 challenging the constitutional
ity of OSPIRG’s funding.
Yes for OSPIRG means yes for political change
Guest Commentary
Melissa
_ Unger
Students are voting yes for OS
PIRG for many reasons; the big one
is that all too often, big-money spe
cial interests are allowed to pollute
the Willamette River, rip off con
sumers, raise tuition and corrupt
our government.
OSPIRG stands up to these spe
cial interests and gets results. By
joining professional staff with the
idealism of college students, OS
PIRG works statewide to make a
difference. There’re lots of ways
we can do that, and the best exam
ple is our recent work to protect
, our national forests.
In 1997, OSPIRG joined a num
ber of environmental groups in an
effort to protect our national
forests. At the time, President Clin
ton’s plan was in its early stages —
the plan merely proposed to stop
road building in a limited number
of forest areas, and the Northwest’s
forests and Alaska’s Tongass Na
tional Forest were not included in
the original proposal. The idea was
that if the environmental commu
nity joined together, we could real
ly protect a significant chunk of
pristine national forests forever.
On campus, students began to
educate and organize around the
issue. After a year and a half of or
ganizing, President Clinton pro
posed his second draft plan for for
est protection. This one included
the Northwest, but it didn’t stop
logging or mining in places such as
the Mt. Hood National Forest and
the Willamette National Forest, so
the fight continued.
OSPIRG field director Tiernan
Sittenfeld began working closely
with decision-makers on state and
national levels to show support.
Students stepped up their organiz
ing on campus; they held call-in
days, released reports and worked
with other student groups and stu
dent leaders to call on the presi
dent to do as much as he could to
protect our forests.
After another seven months, the
president released his third draft
plan — this one was even better —
but it still didn’t protect the Ton
gass. So we still weren’t done yet.
We had 30 more days to influence
the president’s final decision, so
once again we took to the streets
and educated the public just a lit
tle bit more. We gathered an addi
tional 50,000 public comments na
tionwide, we met with the
president’s staff and when the final
plan came out, it was nearly every
thing we could have wanted. It
permanently protected 58.5 mil
lion acres of forest, 1.9 million
acres of which were here in Ore
gon. We saved the Tongass Nation
al Forest in Alaska.
It was four years of hard work
and a good example of what stu
dents and staff working at the
statewide level can do. The hard
part is what comes next: Our cur
rent administration is working to
counteract the work we all have
done. In order to fight to stop these
problems, we need your help.
Over the next two weeks, people
may have questions about what we
do, how we do it and how we’re
funded. Don’t hesitate to call us, e
mail us, whatever. If you want
more information about the work
we do, visit
www.OSPlRGyes.com, our Web
site. It has everything from cam
paigns to budgets to recent articles.
We’re happy to answer ques
tions, and we’re confident we can
make a difference over the next
couple of years. Now more than
ever, we need to stand up for our
environment and consumers. Vote
yes for OSPIRG.
Melissa Unger is the OSPIRG board chair
and a senior history major.