Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Monday, November 4,2002
-Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Editors:
>alena De La Cruz, Pat Payne
Editorial
Ballots are due Tuesday!
This year’s election will determine the balance
of power in the U.S. House and Senate. Please
do your part and vote by 8 p.m. Tuesday.
Drug testing
won’t predict
driving habits
U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Dole recently an
nounced she wants legislation passed requiring teenagers
applying for their driver’s licenses to submit to drug testing
— so that they’ll realize how important it is to be drug-free.
While we agree that operating a 2,000-pound weapon
under the influence of any intoxicant is dangerous and
stupid, we think Dole is missing the point. We fail to see
how implementing a system for drug testing will predict
whether a person will also use drugs while driving.
According to the Mothers Against Drunk Driving Web
site, drunken driving is the nation’s most frequently
committed violent crime. Alcohol, however, is virtually
undetectable in a drug test, unless the person being test
ed had been drinking in the past 24 hours.
Even if alcohol were detectable in drug tests, the as
sumption is that people who drink do so responsibly, and
that they refrain from operating a vehicle if they are intoxi
cated. Does this same assumption not apply to people who
use drugs on occasion? Drug users are not “high” all the
time, making them no more likely to get behind the wheel
while under the influence than a drinker.
Teenagers are often in an experimental phase of their
lives. Some of the them affected by this plan may be “just
experimenting” with drugs and alcohol. But only those
teens who have been using marijuana would fail the test,
and those who have been drinking alcohol would not. Ei
ther way, the test is not reflective of whether any sub
stances were consumed before driving, and it is not a
predictor of whether substances will be consumed before
driving in the future.
We also worry about the establishment of a govern
mental infrastructure to organize and implement drug
testing for so many people. This is a frightening first foot
fall toward a fascist fantasy.
Currently, some states have laws revoking the licens
es, at least temporarily, of teens caught driving under the
influence. If Dole is interested in a policy that will actu
ally deter dangerous driving, maybe she could promote
legislation that would permanently revoke the licenses
of people who are found to be driving while intoxicated.
Drug testing isn’t the answer.
Editorial policy
This editorial represents the opinion of the
Emerald editorial board. Responses can be
sent to letters #dai!yemerald.com. Letters to
the editor and guest commentaries are
encouraged, letters are limited to 250 words
and guest commentaries to 550 words. The
Emerald reserves the right to edit for space,
grammar and style.
Peter Utsey Emerald
OUS cuts staff, students out of ‘The Deal’
Guest commentary
Anyone who thinks that bureaucracy
moves slowly is probably unaware of
“The Deal” — the latest OUS scheme to
“save” higher education — which is
currently moving through the various
governmental layers at warp speed. Not
familiar with it? In place of solid infor
mation, rumors quite naturally abound.
OUS has, for example, vehemently
denied that what is being proposed
involves “privatization,” but certain
tell-tale odors suggest otherwise.
Take the concept of putting the
results of research up for bid to private
corporations. Assuming this is part of
the plan, then one must ask oneself:
Does this kind of profit-oriented phi
losophy have any place in an institu
tion built and maintained, at least in
part, on the taxpayers’ dime?
And tuition? According to the
Emerald (“Students, University agree
on tuition plan,” ODE, Sept. 30), there
will be no limit on how much students
must fork over, other than some vague
notion that it will “not be more than
half the cost”— whatever that ulti
mately turns out to be. A cap on
enrollment is mentioned, but based on
what criteria? GPA, or ability to pay?
One hopes OUS will nobly claim the
former, but if higher education is to
become a “for-profit nonprofit,” then
one can only wonder.
Which brings us to the faculty. If
you’re into research, then you’ll
probably do well. But what kind of
revenue is there to be had from
music, dance, ethnic and women’s
studies, anthropology, geography,
creative writing, etc.?
Of course, we classified employees
will get the butt-end of the stick, as
usual. The talk is of pulling out of the
PERS retirement system, which will
then be replaced by “something else,”
and the same with insurance. What
“something else” will actually be is,
again, unclear, but it is difficult to pic
ture a better “deal.”
As for collective bargaining: If the
seven universities are cast out to fend
for themselves, then the resources for
negotiation are split — and it is diffi
cult to believe that has not been
taken into consideration over at
Susan Campbell.
Years ago, OUS separated from the
rest of the state for many of the reasons
now being restated (i.e., fewer “pesky”
regulations to follow) and with many of
the same promises (greater efficiency).
Apparently the first try didn’t work; are
we to have more faith now?
As to the first point: Sometimes,
much as we might hate them, many
regulations are effected for good rea
sons — to prevent bureaucrats from
abusing power. And the second point:
The promise of “greater efficiency”
simply has not materialized.
Indeed, with the unregulated
increase in the number of officers of
administration to a point where,
according figures taken from the ODE
and other sources, there are two offi
cers for every three classifieds — the
people who do the real work.
Maybe therein lies the beginning of a
solution: If one were to cut back the
number of officers to a reasonable
level, return those positions that were
inexplicably removed from classified
status, and cut redundant managerial
and administrative posts as well, then
millions of dollars per year could be
saved at the University alone. Now
there’s a “deal.”
Bill Smee is chief steward for SEIU/OPEU,
Local 085 and kiosk attendant at
the University.
Letters to the editor
Limited parking
causes towing woes
I and eight people in our group
were victimized by your local
B&B Towing. We came back to
the Centennial Plaza shopping
center after the game Oct. 19,
about 5 p.m., to find my vehicle
gone. At first we thought it had
been stolen, then we saw the
B&B sign and suspected it was
probably towed.
We called the phone number on
the sign only to find out there was
a recording indicating we had to
call back after 7:30 p.m. The prob
lem compounded for our group of
nine because we are from out of
town, as many fans are. This delay
was terrible service; it created
schedule problems for all our
friends and family.
We finally spoke to someone
around 7:45 p.m. who said they
would be willing to give us direc
tions and meet us at the towing
yard if I had $190 in cash only.
I saw only upper end late model
cars towed. Mine is a 2003 GMG
4x4 truck. Although B&B was cer
tainly under their rights to tow, it
was clearly premeditated.
Many people come from out of
the area to support the Universi
ty’s athletic programs. As the facil
ities grow to encourage more fan
support, the need for adequate
parking and traffic control grows
with it.
Currently, parking is limited
around the stadium. It is in the
best interest of the local commu
nity to support this situation the
best that they can.
Wayne Lecomte
Medford
End vicious cycle
by voting
Candidates make no attempts to
reach out to us because we don’t vote,
and we make no effort to vote because
candidates don’t reach out to us.
Let’s end the vicious cycle.
We need to support candidates
who acknowledge young adults’
contribution to society and vow to
fight for us. By voting, we can make
ourselves heard. If young voters in
creased our voter participation by
just 1 percent, we would be the de
ciding factor in competitive races
across the nation. As our genera
tion begins to decide the outcome
of elections, politicians will begin
to work for us.
On issues many of us care about
— affordable education, housing,
health care, good-paying jobs, cor
porate accountability, the environ
ment — Democrats have been de
fending our agenda. This election,
we have the ability to set the is
sues. Get out and vote on Nov. 5
and show politicians we are an ac
tive, mobilized, educated force that
won’t be underestimated.
Jenn Kauffman
director
Drive Up The Vote
*"* * * Washington, D.C.
4 t* 0 4 # » # *4 * # *1. * i »*f>| #^ 4