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
Tuesday, January 28,2003
-Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Editor
Pat Payne
Editorial
University donors
need to focus on
true charity, not
name recognition
With the state budget in free-fall and further cuts
looming, the University has undertaken an ambitious
plan to stem the hemorrhaging of money. The cam
paign aims to raise hundreds of millions of dollars
through an aggressive round of passing the hat among
wealthy alumni and other donors. “Wish lists” of nec
essary — or desired — funding are being drawn up by
all the academic departments to be presented to
prospective donors.
We are fearful that this may reward legislators and
taxpayers for refusing to support higher education. If
the University is successful at raising private money,
the state could cut more and more — and it would be
come a private university. At the same time, we are
heartened that in this time of severe budget meltdown,
the University is doing something — anything — to
help keep itself running financially.
But we have a request for the potential donors.
There is an enduring perception that one of the main
reasons donors give to the University is because if they
give enough money, they, too, can have a building
named after them.
It’s sad that someone would donate money to an in
stitution as an ego-booster and mark of recognition
rather than from the simple desire to give back and to
aid the students attending. Charity, if it’s truly charita
ble, should be anonymous.
We also can’t help thinking, in this same vein, about
Grayson, er, McKenzie Hall. This increased reliance on
private benefactors, while it may be politically neces
sary, could conceivably open the University up to an
other scandal like the one weathered last year when it
was discovered that some #850,000 donated by Uni
versity alum Jeffrey Grayson was actually stolen.
We were heartened to see that students have a voice
in the process — on the wish list committee — and
that some items on the wish lists include additional
student scholarships and endowed chairs to help boost
the salary of select professors. But given the ever-in
creasing cost of attending the University and the ongo
ing brain drain of some of our best professors to better
paying jobs, these wishes aren’t enough.
Rather than constructing another building that ac
commodates over-enrollment, just so there’s a place for
a donor to plunk his or her name, why can’t the Uni
versity find real charitable souls who will help fund the
education of the students directly?
We’d like to see money raised to directly subsidize
the most popular majors — or the least popular, for
that matter — by increasing professor salaries, provid
ing additional classified staff support and offsetting the
cost of tuition in those programs.
In Portland, when it looked like after-school sports
programs were going to be cut for lack of funding, a
number of well-heeled donors stepped in and donated
enough to keep the programs running. They didn’t do
nate for recognition, and no buildings are named after
them. Their monument is in the children who now are
playing sports because of them.
Donors to the University’s comprehensive campaign
should follow the Portland example.
Long-legged lies
With a war looming on the near hori
zon, troops being shipped out around
the state and the fate of Measure 28 be
ing thrust upon us, I have decided in
stead to devote this space to a topic that
isn’t at all serious.
Urban legends have been around
longer than the written word. As stupid
miu mugiuai as
most may seem,
they spread like
wildfire are be
lieved as truth
by many. j
The legends usu- jgjjjjj
ally start simply J
enougn. Ana m
this day and age,
they’re spread not
only by word of
mouth, but by e- In other words
mail as well.
For instance, I was sent an e-mail
that was an online petition “for women
against war.” I was given the fascinat
ing story of 25 congresswomen who
walked out of the House chamber in
disgust during a session, refusing to
participate in the vote to give Presi
dent Bush powers of war. The e-mail
claimed that the walk-out was led by
Barbara Bell of California. I’m not too
sure what online petitions actually
have the legal power to do, but I duti
fully “signed” my name anyway and
forwarded it to my female friends.
Afterwards, finding the story intrigu
ing enough to check out for myself, I
looked online and discovered that Cali
fornia is represented in Congress by Sen.
Barbara Boxer and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Apparently, Barbara Lee got the same e
mail that I did and didn’t like it. On her
Web site (http://www.house.gov/lee/In
ternet.scam.htm), Lee makes it clear
that she never participated in any walk
out, nor was there one — the petition
was fiction.
Another favorite that I found clogging
my e-mail box was the warning about
smelling “discounted perfumes” in mall,
grocery store, gas station and bank park
ing lots (as a side note, I don’t see myself
actually being interested in buying dis
counted perfume in a parking lot any
way, but whatever). The tale is that rob
bers across the country are looking for
Kathryn
Petersen
Steve Baggs Emerald
single women to rob. Their method is to
have you smell the perfume, which is ac
tually ether, and once you’re knocked
out, steal all of your belongings, includ
ing the car you’re driving.
This story was also cooked up. There
are no cases in America that resemble
these crimes, except for one in 1999, and
that story is said to be false because no
evidence was ever found to verify the sto
ry. Also, it would take more than a few
whiffs of ether to knock someone out.
People love free stuff. Who wouldn’t
want free clothes from The Gap, free
shoes from Nike, free computers from
IBM, free cars from Honda and — my
favorite — free money from Bill Gates?
Nobody. That’s why everyone seems to
forward me these dumb messages
telling me to forward to however many
people so that they, and I, can collect
the prize.
As lovely as these offers sound,
they’re all crap. Bill Gates would never
fathom sending you money and Honda
will never deliver you a car. The stated
reasoning that these e-mails offer be
hind the companies and individuals
sending you free stuff is that they’re
keeping track of everyone’s e-mails to
use for advertising and marketing. One
problem — no one has the technology
to do that. When in doubt, refer back to
the old adage, “there’s no such thing as
a free lunch.”
The list goes on and On. Just to clear
a few more things up, the Pop
Rocks/soda combination won’t kill you,
no school in the country will give you
straight A’s if your college roommate
dies, you cannot “cook to death” from
going tanning (but, you can receive fa
tal burns) and chewing gum does not
take seven years to digest when swal
lowed. For those of you who don’t be
lieve me, check it out yourselves — and
for that small percentage of the popula
tion (mostly just my Mom) that loves to
send me “perfume is really ether” type
warnings, don’t, unless they’re to make
me laugh. I won’t read them for any
other reason.
Contact the columnist
atkathrynpetersen@dailyemerald.com.
Her views do not necessarily represent those
of the Emerald.
OSPIRG will misuse student funds
Guest commentary
Every year, the Programs Finance
Committee decides how to distribute
millions of dollars in incidental fees. For
the past two years, because of the South
worth v. Board of Regents Supreme
Court case, the Oregon Student Public
Interest Research Group has been re
quired to follow PFC procedure in order
to be given fee money at the University.
OSPIRG, according to a story pub
lished Jan. 10 in Portland State Universi
ty’s Daily Vanguard, is planning to ask for
a 030,000 increase in its operating budg
et at University of Oregon. It requested
the same increase at PSU, if granted this
request will raise the operating budget for
OSPIRG at both schools to 0150,000.
OSPIRG’s intention for the large increase
in funding is to open a new office at Ore
gon State University.
This new office would be an egregious
misuse of our fee money. According to
the Clark Document, the incidental fee
must “provide for the ‘cultural and
physical development’” of students. By
removing 030,000 from our campus,
OSPIRG does not further any goals at
the University, but rather diverts mon
ey that could be better spent here. The
usage of student fees to build an office
at OSU should incense any fee-paying
student. 830,000 could be well used on
campus. To put things in perspective,
830,000 is twice the annual budget of
the Oregon Commentator, 812,000
more than the Crisis Center, about
twice the budget of MEChA, 86,000
more than the annual allocation for the
Debate Team, and about half the budget
of Project Saferide. Already the 12th
largest, OSPIRG’s annual allocation will
jump to eighth largest on campus if a
830,000 is granted.
A 8150,000 allocation, most of which
is not spent on this campus, exceeds
the individual allocations for Legal Ser
vices, Recreation and Intramurals, the
Women’s Center, and many other
prominent campus organizations.
These groups, regardless of their func
tion, spend their money here for the
benefit of University students. OSPIRG
is simply a front organization for the
Oregon State Public Interest Research
Group. The Student Pirg’s money filters
up to the State Pirg to fund offices in
Portland and Salem as well as lobbying
on behalf of the State Pirg’s agenda. The
Student Pirg’s Web site is even linked
off of the State Pirg’s (www.ospirg.org).
A quick perusal of OSPIRG’s Web site
shows that they are using our money to
accomplish what amounts to nothing.
For instance, they have an “Enron Fact
of the Day.” The saddest part about the
Enron “facts” is that many of them are
misleadingly stated, flat-out wrong, or
are provided by blatantly anti-corpo
rate sources such as United For a Fair
Economy. The other sections of the OS
PIRG Web site provide similar results.
Thusly, student money is being taken
from campus and used to further the
political agenda of a particular group.
This is reprehensible, morally bankrupt
and most certainly illegal.
It is time for OSPIRG to lose its
place at the table of student funding,
the PFG needs to step up to the plate
and finally force OSPIRG to comply
with the regulations that all other stu
dent groups must follow. If OSPIRG is
allowed to subvert the proper proce
dures again, the case for removing in
cidental fee control from student
hands will be closed.
Timothy Dreier is an economics major
and managing editor of the Oregon
Commentator.