Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www' dailyemerald.com
Tuesday, October 30, 2001
Oregon Daily Emerald
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Michael J. Kleckner
Editorial Editor:
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Editorial
Let ethics
regulate
decisions
How are a tuxedo rental, plane
tickets to the Aloha Bowl and
a car insurance deductible
classified as appropriate
“work-related expenses”? We’re still
wondering the same thing. However, a
state ethics panel last week dismissed
complaints filed earlier this year against
seven University employees, voting that
the University Foundation money they
received was legitimately spent.
The panel went on to note that the
expenses may have been unusual, but
they weren’t illegal, driving home the
old adage that following the letter of
the law may not indicate the most ethi
cal behavior. Illegal or not, we still
think the spending was unnecessary
and unethical.
It seems wrong somehow that it is
OK for the University to foot the bill for
luxuries such as catering for office par
ties, while students at the University
are forced to pay for the most basic
items, such as Scantrons and even
class schedules. It just doesn’t add up.
At a University where countless
courses teach us that ethical behavior
and acting within the boundaries of the
law aren’t always one and the same,
and at a University that tries to instill a
secular sense of ethical behavior, it is
disheartening, if not surprising, that
the case was dismissed.
Choices should be based on what is
right, regardless of whether the law
deems it legitimate.
Editorial Policy
These editorials represent the opinion of
the Emerald editorial board. Responses
WELCOME TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF
INEBRIATE LICENSING
A journalism class research project
on the first American drug epi
demic got me thinking about
how to solve the drug problem
while maintaining an individual’s right to
get blitzed. Here’s what I came up with.
It’s a bit impractical given our current po
litical/cultural cli
mate, so I will call this
■ column “If I Ruled the
World.”
If I ruled the world, I
would commission a
panel of doctors,
chemists, textbook
writers and hard-core
drug users to create
I authoritative manuals
on each and every
drug that is used recre
ationally. Each manual
would contain every
thing there is to know
about the given sub
stance, and I don’t mean the D.A.R.E.,
scare-you-straight propaganda they feed
us in school. These manuals would con
tain facts; facts on positive and negative
side effects, facts on addictive properties,
facts on the correct dosages for different
desired effects with body weight factored
in, and so on and so forth. Upon comple
tion, I would sell the manuals to book
stores where they could be purchased, for
a modest price, by any curious individual
over the age of 18.
I would also repeal drug regulations and
allow the major pharmaceutical companies,
with the correct licensing, to traffic in
“street drugs” once again. Because Bayer,
Lilly and Pfizer can pay marijuana, coca
and opium producers much more than drug
cartels and crooked governments do now,
the black market for these drugs would dis
appear and many third-world countries
would get a major boost to their economies
at the same time. Amphetamines, Ecstasy
and LSD would still be cheap enough to
make locally, but I can’t see many people
buying a sack of crank made in Bubba Ray’s
bathtub when legal, better quality stuff is
available at Walgreens.
I would then set up offices for the newly
Aaron
Rorick
Columnist
created Department of Inebriate Licensing,
or DIL for short, in every county, province
and district. In the United States, I figure
the easiest way to go would be to wall off a
section of the DMV, which already has of
fices in every county in the nation. Anyone
who wants to use a narcotic for non-medic
inal purposes and has thoroughly studied
the corresponding manual would then go
to the local DIL office and take a test. The
test would be long and difficult, but if a
person is able to pass it, he or she would be
declared an expert on the substance in
question and be issued a license to pur
chase and consume that substance in any
way they see fit.
To pay for all this, I would tax the hell
out of everyone, every step of the way.
Any narcotic purchased with a DIL card
(as opposed to a prescription) would be
considered a luxury item and taxed as
such. The profits from the manuals and
Steve Baggs Emerald
licenses, when combined with the taxes
paid by the pharmaceutical companies,
the pharmacists and finally John Q.
Junkie himself, would be more than
enough to pay for the entire project.
Eventually I would regulate all drugs
this way, from alcohol to angel dust, earn
ing my government untold amounts of
money. Or maybe people wrould be
turned off by the manuals and the warn
ing labels and the stigma surrounding
drug use for pleasure, and the number of
drug users would decline. Either way the
problem is solved. No more crime and vi
olence surrounding the drug trade. No
more people overdosing on meth cut with
Ajax, or on Ecstasy that’s not really Ecsta
sy. I know it will never happen, but “If I
ruled the world ...”
Aaron Rorick is a columnist for the Oregon Daily Emerald.
His views do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
He can be reached at aaronrorick@dailyemerald.com.
Letters to the editor
Vote ‘No’ on Measure 20-54
Some politicians say, “The mon
ey is there,” for the West Eugene
Parkway, but show us the money!
Although TransPlan includes
$17 million for the first phase of
the Parkway, it doesn’t include the
$71 million needed for the other
three phases, as is clear from the
text of Measure 20-54.
Because funds for roads are se
verely limited, we must set priori
ties. After 10 years of planning and
public involvement, the conclu
sion of TransPlan is that making
our existing roads safer is more im
portant than building new roads.
TransPlan directs funding to high
er priority projects, such as needed
safety improvements at the Belt
line/I-5 and Beltline/Delta inter
changes. TransPlan doesn’t fund
lower priority projects, such as the
other three phases of the Parkway.
Because these phases ranked 15th,
20th and dead last out of 28 major
projects, they failed to make the
funding cut.
So why do some politicians say
we can have our cake and eat it,
too? Are they willing to forgo need
ed safety improvements to build
the Parkway? If voters approve the
Parkway, will they then ask for
higher taxes to pay for it?
I don’t know, but if the money
was there for the Parkway, it would
be in TransPlan. The money is not
there! Join me in voting “No” on
Measure 20-54, and hold on to
your wallet!
Robert Zako
Eugene
Statistics show marijuana
is not a highway risk
I want to call to your attention an
error in Tara Debenham’s column
(“There’s no hope with dope,” ODE,
10/15). She wrote, “I’ve heard the
drug hinders short term memory
and makes coordination difficult,
increasing car accidents.”
Marijuana intoxication’s effect
on the rate of auto accidents has
been studied by professional high
way safety statisticians for the last
15 years. At least five studies have
been published in different coun
tries that reached the same conclu
sion: The adjusted statistical risk in
dex for drivers on marijuana is
roughly the same as drivers who are
sober. Drivers on pot seem to cause
accidents at the same adjusted rate
as sober drivers. Marijuana doesn’t
increase the risk of accidents.
A study in America a few years
ago showed while marijuana intoxi
cation does cause a small impair
ment in reflexes and tracking, it also
causes users to perceive the impair
ment and drive conservatively.
Drivers on marijuana were less
likely than sober drivers to engage
in aggressive, risky driving, such as
passing other cars, excessive lane
changing and tailgating.
The effects cancel each other out,
leaving the average driver on pot as
statistically safe on the road as the av
erage driver not stoned on anything.
This explains why auto safety
statisticians in four countries
found marijuana is not an identifi
able highway safety risk in their
statistics.
The error needs to be corrected,
because highway safety involves
life and death. We need to pay at
tention to facts, even when they
seem to go against our social and
political instincts.
Patricia Schwarz
Pasadena, Calif.
Students should question
‘shady energy fee’
During the presidential cam
paign of 2000, many of us were in
troduced to the term “fuzzy math.”
Time for another lesson. This one
is “shady” math.
Last summer, the Oregon Uni
versity System instituted an ener
gy surcharge in order to compen
sate for rising energy costs. Over
the next two years students will
shell out $30 per term towards
what the Associated Students of
the University of Oregon have
termed the “Shady Energy Fee.”
While OUS has estimated the es
calation in energy costs at about $7
million to $12 million, statewide the
fee is expected to rake in $24 mil
lion. The coming 6.6 percent tuition
increase will surely be too great for
some students to keep up with.
Most aggravating about the new
fee is that it was imposed during
the summer, keeping the student
voice out of debate. Fortunately,
fall has arrived, and it is time for
students to act.
Adam Petkun
freshman
ASUO Intern