Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dcdlyemerald.com
-Oregon Daily Emerald
Endorsements
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Editors:
Salena De La Cruz, Pat Payne
Friday, November 1,2002
Candidates
State Senate — Tony Corcoran
Students can find a friend in the state
Senate race by electing Tony Corcoran to
represent District 4.
District 4 represents rural areas around
Eugene and the University area. Corcoran is an
incumbent, he has experience representing
diverse populations, and he served in the state
House for two years before moving to the
Senate. Corcoran has maintained a self
described good relationship with the Oregon
Students Association and with the current
ASUO Executive, giving students a voice in the
state Legislature.
We urge students in the University com
munity to vote for Tony Corcoran — he will
best represent District 4.
State House — Floyd Prozanski
Floyd Prozanski is the best choice for
District 8. Prozanski can boast seven years
in the Oregon Legislature as a member of
the House of Representatives. His oppo
nent, Greg McNeill, while a student, can
claim only a failed run for ASUO Executive.
While we feel that a student’s viewpoint
would be welcome in the House, Greg
McNeill has no experience in office, and his
ideas sound unformed. Prozanski is a com
mitted environmentalist and has solid ideas
to keep education affordable.
Elected representatives must be answer
able to the people they serve, and we hearti
ly endorse a candidate that has concrete
ideas that represent students — not just a
candidate who is a student.
U.S. Senate — Bill Bradbury
Voters can send back the garbage U.S.
Sen. Gordon Smith has been shoveling and
elect a senator who genuinely supports
what students want and need — Oregon
Secretary of State Bill Bradbury.
Smith’s campaign portrays him as a mod
erate, but voting records tell a different
story. Smith has been moderate for as long
as his campaign has been running.
Bradbury has voted in support of a
woman’s right to choose, actively supported
equal rights for minorities and homosexu
als, and voted repeatedly for environmental
protection in the state Senate.
Bradbury is the best choice for students
— his understanding and support of issues
extends beyond a TV commercial.
U.S. House — Peter DeFazio
The Emerald heartily supports Peter
DeFazio for the U.S. House of Representatives.
He has represented this area for 20 years, 16 of
those in the Congress, as a committed envi
ronmentalist and a principled lawmaker.
DeFazio has tried to increase Pell Grants and
has said that he favors federal loans and schol
arships over bank loans. He has even helped
students out of his own pocket. Years ago, he
refused to accept a pay raise while the budget
wasn’t balanced. Ever since, he has used that
extra pay to fund nine scholarships annually.
To date, he has paid out nearly $182,000 in
scholarships.
It’s simple: Re-elect Peter DeFazio.
Governor
We wanted to endorse write-in candidate
Gary Alan Spanovich. A majority of the edito
rial board believes Spanovich would be the
best candidate — he offers enlightened leader
ship and a change in the way Oregon does pol
itics. But there’s a lot at stake in this race.
In an interview with the Emerald,
Spanovich said Oregon politics is mired the
status quo, which means money and influence
in leadership, instead of vision and values. We
wholeheartedly agree.
We want a different, better vision for Oregon
than is represented by our current two-party
choices. Nevertheless, there are stark differences
between the two leading candidates—Ted Kulon
goski and Kevin Mannix — that are important to
us and that we believe are important to students.
So then we could have endorsed Kulongos
ki. But we cannot overlook the fact that we be
lieve a better candidate exists.
For some people, democracy means every
one votes for what they believe is best. Others
pick from a pre-determined set of choices. We
don’t know which is right.
But our conscience tells us the only en
dorsement we can make is for University com
munity members to vote their conscience.
City measures
Measure 20-67—Yes
It’s time that legislators started doing their
job and finding money for schools. Measure
20-67 may circumvent that job and increase
local taxes to fund schools, but it’s the right de
cision. It’s likely to be a while before the Leg
islature starts putting schools first, and kids
need these programs.
Measure 20-68 —Yes
This city charter amendment would make
minor changes to the current charter to mod
ernize it and provide better readability. There
is no hidden agenda here — they really are
housekeeping changes.
Measure 20-69—No
This ethics and city councilor conflict of in
terest code is unnecessary. There are already
conflict of interest provisions in place, and the
language of this code is too vague. We’re un
sure what type of conflicts would be prohibited
and which would not, so we urge a no vote.
Measure 20-70—No
The city manager should not have to report
to the City Council every time they make a
change in department heads or accept a resig
nation. The City Council should be setting
policies, not micromanaging. When controver
sial decisions have been made in the past, the
Council made sure to find out what happened.
We don’t need this process made into a sched
ule-hampering law.
Measure 20-71—Yes
The potential for conflict of interest in the
city’s use of a private attorney is simply too
large to be ignored. Any large organization
should have an attorney that works only for
them, and it is especially true for the city,
which on occasion may need to be involved in
litigation against private law firms.
Measure 20-72—Yes
This measure would fill elected city official
positions at the next possible election oppor
tunity. Sounds reasonable.
Measure 20-73—No
City officials need to know that they can be
held responsible for their subordinates’ ac
tions. with power comes responsibility. If they
know that they can be held culpable, they may
be more scrupulous managers.
Measure 20-74—Yes
Currently, citizens have to be informed of
the adoption of ordinances, unless the City
Council unanimously agrees. In Eugene, the
likelihood of unanimity is slim, but nonethe
less, it’s important for the public to be advised
of hearings and adoption of ordinances.
Measure 20-74—Yes
This would allow city voters to put an initia
tive on the ballot which would be protected
from change, unless by another vote of the vot
ers or a unanimous vote of the City Council.
This is a smart way to stop elected officials
from undoing the will of the voters.
County measures_
Measure 20-59 — Yes
While we would rather see money going to
crime prevention than to jails, this measure
serves to expand the intake center and medical
services space, not the jail's general housing. An
improvement to the intake center would allow
arrested persons to be processed more quickly,
increase efficiency in delivering medical servic
es and enhance security for staff and inmates.
Measure 20-69 — Yes
The current sheriff radios are extremely
outdated and provide limited-to-nonexist
ent two-way communication in significant
parts of Lane County. Law enforcement,
emergency services and public works agen
cies are not able to connect. This measure
would improve emergency response in rural
and wilderness areas, which is a basic right.
Measure 20-61 — Yes
This measure, to improve disabled access to
the courthouse, should have been approved a
long time ago. As is, the courthouse is not
directly accessible to many seniors or people
with disabilities, medical conditions or
strollers. Approving the measure allows for a
single-level entry and faster access to public
records and licensing procedures.
Measure 20-62 — No
While we like parks and do see the need
for improvement, this measure has too
many flaws. It costs nearly #30 million to
build boat, RV and horse facilities that
would benefit few taxpayers. And we want
to see money for acquiring and protecting
new natural areas.
Measure 20-63 — Yes
We need to support our community's public
health and social services. The current public
health building is 50 years old, and listen to all
it houses: communicable disease control,
bioterrorism planning, HIV counseling and
testing, prenatal care and family planning.
This measure would build a new facility to
house these essential services.
Measure 20-65 — Yes
With WISTEC still on shaky ground, a new
planetarium and learning center are essential
to local science education. This measure
would buy that, and a privately funded endow
ment will be raised to cover any operating
deficits, so it won't fall on tax payers. A new
planetarium would be a great attraction and
help supplement our underfunded schools.
State measures
Measure 14 — Yes
Although part of history, the language in
the state Constitution that excluded free
blacks from the state hasn’t been in force
since 1868. The sections themselves were re
pealed in 1925. It’s time to take the final step
and remove this offensive language.
Measures 15 and 16 — Yes
Although people may not realize it, Oregon is
at as much risk as California for earthquakes.
Yet many of the city’s public education and
emergency buildings are not designed to with
stand a major earthquake — including Univer
sity buildings. Geologists say that a massive
earthquake actually will happen. It’s time we
were ready. These two bills would allow the state
to float general obligation bonds to pay for retro
fitting schools, fire stations and hospitals.
Measure 17 — Yes
This measure would allow people age 18 or
over to run for state legislator. We can’t en
dorse this measure highly enough. An 18
year-old can legally drive, smoke, be drafted
and — most importantly — vote. So why
shouldn’t 18-year-old adults be able to vote
for their peers?
Measure 18 — Yes, or No
Truth to tell, this measure confuses us. It
adds a section to a very dense article of the
state Constitution dealing with tax rates. It is
unclear what impact, if any, allowing for the
division of a taxing district into zones and be
ing able to vary the rates between the divi
sions would have. The state says there would
be no financial impact from this measure, but
it’s about taxes, so maybe they don’t know
what it does, either.
Measure 21 — No
This measure would allow a “None of the
above” choice when voting forjudges. While we
understand the sentiment, hat happens if
“None of the Above” wins, and continues to win
in a particular race, or worse, in a number of
races? We worry that the measure could be a
recipe for gridlock in our courts system.
Measure 22 — No
Oregon Supreme Court justices and ap
peals court judges should be representative of
the entire state of Oregon, not just individual
districts. Judges should make rulings based on
law, not on the sympathies of a particular re
gion of the state.
Measure 23 — Yes
Health care is needed for all. We need a
safety net for necessary medical services in
Oregon. It does cost money, but in the long
run it saves money by providing services in
an expeditious manner. Any lost jobs would
be replaced by new jobs in the new system.
Measure 24 — Yes
This measure allows licensed denturists to
install partial dentures or replacement teeth.
Denturists are trained and knowledgeable,
and this measure should be a no-brainer. The
only argument is from dentists, who worry
that all treatment options won’t be presented
by denturists who stand to make money by
suggesting dentures. That’s funny; don’t all
medical professionals potentially profit by
suggesting certain treatments, like prescrip
tion drugs?
Measure 25 — Yes
The cost of living has steadily increased
since 1996, but minimum wage workers
haven’t seen a raise in six years. Measure 25
raises the minimum wage from $6.50 to $6.90
in January, but even better, it ties annual rais
es to the cost of living, beginning in 2005.
People earning minimum wage are barely
sliding by; these few workers deserve to earn
enough to pay for the increasing cost of food,
rent and electricity. Vote yes.
Measure 26 — Yes
This measure would bring a new level of
credibility to Oregon’s much-touted initia
tive system by prohibiting signature gather
ers from being paid per signature. Paying by
the signature encourages fraud; with this
measure, groups will still be able to pay sig
nature gatherers by the hour. This is a
smart measure that encourages citizen par
ticipation.
Measure 27 — Yes
Consumers already have the right to know
what’s in the food they buy. This measure
would simply give consumers the ability to
know how that food is made. Right or wrong,
many consumers are nervous about geneti
cally engineered food. In fighting so hard
against this measure, it really seems that food
producers have something scary to hide when
it comes to GE foods. As with all labeling laws,
the food industry has fought this tooth and
nail. Why is it hard to understand that people
want to know what’s in their food? Vote yes.
Editorial board
These editorials represent the opinion
of the Emerald editorial board. Responses
can be sent to letters @daiiyemeraid,com.
Michael J. Kieckner Salena De La Cruz
Editor m chief Editorial editor
Jessica Richelderfer Pat Payne
Managing editor Editorial editor
>' ' Jfinns. Cun