Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
RO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Editor in Chief:
Andrew Adams
Associate Editors:
Jeremy Lang
Peter Hockaday
Editorial
Academic skills should
dktate who receives aid
The New York Times has
reported that 28 of the
nation’s top universi
ties will soon change
their guidelines for financial
aid. Those schools making the
changes include such top-name
universities as Yale, Stanford
and the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology.
It is encouraging to see that
these schools, which are some
of the most expensive in the
country, feel obligated to give
students in financial need an
opportunity to attend classes on
their prestigious campuses. For
decades, higher education in
the United States has been an
exclusive enclave of the rich,
the brilliant or those with un
equaled athletic prowess.
Increasing need-based aid
should bring new perspectives
to higher education and help
administrators find some of that
longed-for diversity, which is
so often praised on most cam
puses. But as painful as it is for
! some people to hear it, a college
education is not a right. En
trance to a university is some
thing that an individual should
and must work to obtain. Those
people who do work hard in
their early years and obtain
high grades and respectable test
scores, and can also demon
strate some sort of social re
sponsibility by being active in
sports or other organizations,
should be given the rewards of
scholarships and grants.
Therefore, a move toward ad
justing standards for need
based aid should be taken with
due consideration to ensure
that the best and the brightest
do not get left behind. When
colleges and universities at
tempt to bring about social
change through admissions and
scholarships, they run the risk
of defeating their main purpose
— to educate those who want
and can handle a university ed
ucation. Let’s not see the Uni
versity of Oregon, or any other
school, extend financial aid to
those who may need the money
but don’t have the academic
skills.
It is, without a doubt, justi
fied to ensure that those who
deserve to attend a university
but cannot because of financial
reasons should be given some
financial aid. But it is highly
unjustified to give students aid
based solely on their financial
ability. Be they poor or rich, if
they are bad students they
should not attend a university.
Sadly, however, our capitalist
system ensures that most poor
students who do not have uni
versity-level skills do not at
tend, but many rich students
who should not have even grad
uated from high school are wel
comed with open arms.
It is not a perfect system, but
universities should not attempt
to change that with scholar
ships. The fact remains there
are those who qualify for need
based aid and should receive it,
and there are those who qualify
but should not take aid from
others.
Legislative session ends
Following a walk-out from
the Capitol building by most of
the Democratic lawmakers, our
legislators wrere hard-pressed to
finish most of their business in
a timely manner. But they did
it, and at 5:15 a.m. Saturday,
Oregon’s 71st Legislative As
sembly adjourned.
Much was accomplished
during the tumultuous session
that witnessed wrangling
across the aisle over budget is
sues and other pieces of legisla
tive business. Yet by many
news accounts, in the early
hours of the morning on Satur
day there was much back-slap
ping and praise for a session
that finally ended with Oregon
schools getting more money,
the Oregon Department of
Transportation receiving repair
funds and an assurance for ade
quate hospital staffing.
It is good to see that students
who fall prey to date-rape drugs
now know that if their assailant
is ever caught, tougher laws en
acted by this Legislature will
increase the rapist’s prison time
because of the use of date-rape
drugs.
But for all the handshakes
and smiles leaving Salem lately,
there should be some concern
over the lack of support for
higher education. It took
months for legislators to get
around to filling in some of the
holes the governor made, de
spite claims of support by many
legislators.
And while it is understand
able that the budget process
takes some time, there should
have been more concrete work
to ensure higher education was
properly funded early on in the
session. The guesswork, ru
mors, suspicions, inaccuracies
and fears that pervaded during
most of the discussion about
the higher education budget
seemed to protract the process
longer then necessary. This
made several instructors and
classified workers worried
about losing their jobs, and stu
dents fearful they would not be
able to afford a university edu
cation.
It may be how the system
works, but in the case of higher
education when the benefits are
clear, state lawmakers should
have made a stronger effort ear
ly on to assure those in higher
education that the system
would not suffer too much.
This editorial represents the views of the
Emerald editor in chief and does not
necessarily reflect the views of the Oregon
Daily Emerald.
Audit revives debate on donor anonymity
Guest Commentary
George
Bern
-_-----... ..tt..? .
Some months ago, Oregon
newspapers took issue with
what others mistakenly
viewed as an innocent re
quest by the president of a state
university. Now, because of a new
report from state auditors, pub
lished by the Oregon Daily Emer
ald, that request loses any claim of
innocence.
The press objection had been
to an appeal Dave Frohnmayer of
the University of Oregon made to
the Oregon University System,
asking the right to assure
anonymity, to the University's ma
jor donors. Frohnmayer's argu
ment had some credibility, since
some donors — unlike those who
enjoy public esteem when their
gifts are announced — prefer to
keep a low profile. The OUS rub
ber-stamped approval of his re
quest. It then was overruled by
the state Legislature.
The concern of the press is
that the mass media — and
through them the public — need
to know who is giving big bucks
to state institutions. At issue is
the occasional effort by a major
donor to use philanthropy to in
fluence education policy.
A prime example of how that
works is Phil Knight’s recent gift
ing turnaround. After announcing
a donation of $30 million to help
expand the size of the University's
Autzen Stadium, Knight pulled
back the gift. He was angry about
his alma mater becoming a mem
ber of the Worker Rights Consor
tium (WRC) at the urging of Ore
gon students.
Expansion plans for the Ducks
were in a bind — until the OUS
came to the rescue. It drafted a
new guideline that, after the fact,
made it illegal for the University
to be a member of the WRC. Re
instatement of the massive gift
has not followed, but some antic
ipate it.
Now the OUS and the Universi
ty have new financial confusion
to wade through. It is described in
a state audit that faults the Uni
versity for failing to adequately
control and account for how its
employees spend public dollars.
In response, a University vice
president agreed improvement
might be needed.
My experience as a one-time
University employee convinces
me that the assurance of seeking
improvement is sincere. But the
audit uncovered another ques
tionable money matter where the
University stonewalls when it
comes to disclosure: the exis
tence of a camouflaged Universi
ty foundation that escapes having
its donations publicly reported.
The University Foundation in
Agate Hall on campus is labeled
"private," suggesting it can be
used without accountability to
state guidelines.
The auditors got only partial
information on how money from
this low-profile foundation is
used, according to a published
comment by audit administrator
Jim Pitts. His statement said the
University claims that by desig
nating the foundation "private," it
can use the money as it chooses,
without state review.
If the money is spent improper
ly, auditors — and the public —
have no way of knowing. But
something else is clear and ironic.
Even if the president's request to
keep some donors anonymous
was denied by the Legislature,
anonymity still exists. In fact, it
thrives, thanks to a private foun
dation, unaccountable to the state
and its citizens, as it operates out
of the same building that houses
the University Alumni Office.
George Beres joined the University of Oregon
as sports information director. Later, before
retirement, he managed the UO Speakers Bu
reau.
We’ve all helped sports become business
Guest Commentary
David
Whitley
Are you sick of schools
paying coaches 10 times
more than Nobel Prize
winning professors? Are
you tired of kids who can barely
spell SAT getting into college?
If you can't live with the ex
ploitative, money-grabbing busi
ness of college sports, here's the
first thing you do.
Look in the mirror.
It's your fault. It's my fault. It’s
everybody's fault, and always has
been.
So what do we do about it?
The topic is hot again after a
report by the Knight Commis
sion, a group of 28 ex-college
presidents and other eggheads.
After 18 months, it concluded
higher sports and higher educa
tion don't mix. Next, it will re
port Chihuahuas can't speak Eng
lish.
I long ago accepted college
sports for what it is — big-time en
tertainment in school clothing.
The coaches, administrators and
players do what they're hired to
do. Try to win, sell tickets and
keep fans happy.
Most play by the rules we've
given them. And when athletes
get an education along the way, all
the better. But first and foremost,
college sports is a business and
has to be treated like one.
Unless you live in an ivory
tower. The commission envi
sions an Ivy League panacea,
where every jock is a scholar,
Steve Spurrier teaches P.E. and
winning doesn't matter. In a per
fect world, sure. In our world,
such idealism and reality has
never mixed.
"The responsibility to bring ath
letics into a sincere relation to the
intellectual life of the college rests
squarely on the shoulders of the
president and faculty." So said a
Carnegie Foundation study. The
year was 1929.
The sports genie isn't out of
the academic bottle, it was never
in it. The public has always
wanted student/athletes. But
forced to make a choice, we'll
take the latter. The Knight Com
mission believes change will
come with a few simple steps.
Like slashing salaries, eliminat
ing corporate money and telling
TV where to stick it.
OK, you slash Bobby Bowden’s
salary. You make Michigan re
turn the $22 million it's getting
from Nike, then see how long
non-revenue sports survive. You
suspend Lute Olsen because his
starting five declared early for
the NBA draft. You tell CBS the
$6 billion it pays for the prime
time NCAA Tournament isn't as
important as getting Shane Batti
er in bed by 10 p.m.
The commission has a valid
point. Things are getting worse.
So look in the mirror. If you
want colleges to be purely educa
tional, start by calling Florida
Athletic Director Jeremy Foley.
Tell him the school should junk
its $50 million football stadium
expansion. It's too symbolic of a
system we can no longer live
with.
Somehow, I think his phone
will remain still. A silent testa
ment to a system we really can't
live without.
. ©.Kpight:Ridder.Tribune, 2001.