Commentary
Oregon Daily Emerald
Friday, October 7, 2005
NEWS STAFF
(541)346-5511
PARKER HOWELL
EDITOR IN CHIEF
SHADRA BEESLEY
MANAGING EDITOR
MEGHANN M. CUNIFF
IARED PABEN
NEWS EDITORS
EVA SYLWESTER
SENIOR NEWS REPORTER
KELLY BROWN
KATY GAGNON
CHRISTOPHER HAGAN
BRITI'NI MCCLENAHAN
NICHOLAS WILBUR
NEWS REPORTERS
JOE BAILEY
EMILY SMITH
PART-TIME NEWS REPORTER
SHAWN MILLER
SPORTS EDITOR
SCOTT J. ADAMS
LUKE ANDREWS
JEFFREY DRANSFF.LDT
SPORTS REPORTERS
AMY EIGHTY
PULSE EDITOR
TREVOR DAVIS
KRISTEN GERHARD
ANDREW MCCOLLUM
PULSE REPORTERS
A1LEE SLATER
COMMENTARY EDITOR
GABE BRADLEY
JESSICA DERLETH
ARMY FETTI
RICHARD PRYOR
COLUMNISTS
TIM BOBOSKY
PHOTO EDITOR
NICOLE BARKER
SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
KATE HORTON
ZANE ritt
PHOTOGRAPHERS
KATIE GLEASON
PART TIME PHOTOGRAPHER
JONAH SCHROCIN
SENIOR DESIGNER
JOHN AYRES
JONNYBAGGS
MOLLY BEDFORD
KER1 SPANGLER
DESIGNERS
CHRIS TODD
GRAPHIC ARTIST
AARON DUCHATEAU
ILLUSTRATOR
ALEXANDRA BURGUIERES
REBECCA TAYLOR
COPY CHIEFS
EILEEN CHANG
JENNY DORNER
BRYN JANSSON
JOSH NORRIS
MINDI RICE
COPYEDITORS
STEVEN NEUMAN
ONLINE/SUPPLEMENTS EDITOR
TIMOTHY ROBINSON
WEBMASTER
BUSINESS
(541)346-5511
JUDY RIEDL
GENERAL MANAGER
KATHYCARBONE
BUSINESS MANAGER
1AUNADEGIUSTI
RECEPTIONIST
JOE BEES
A1AN FULLERTON
RYAN JOHNSON
ROB WEGNER
DISTRIBUTION
ADVERTISING
(541)346-3712
MELISSA GUST
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR
MIA LEIDELMEYER
SALES MANAGER
KELLEE KAUETHEIL
JOHN KELLY
LINDSEY FERGUSON
WINTER GIBBS
KATE HIRONAKA
DESI MCCORMICK
STEPHEN MILLER
KArHRYN O'SHEA-EVANS
EMILY PHILBIN
CODY WILSON
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
BONA LEE
AD ASSISTANT
CLASSIFIED
(541) 3464343
TRINASHANAMAN
CLASSIFIED MANAGER
LISA CLARK
ANDO
AMANDA KANTOR
KERI SPANGLER
KATIE STRINGER
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
ASSOCIATES
PRODUCTION
(541) 3464381
MICHELE ROSS
PRODUCTION MANAGER
KIRA PARK
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
JAMIE ACKERMAN
CAMERON GAUT
JONAH SCHROGIN
DESIGNERS
The Oregon Daily Emerald Is pub
lished daily Monday through Fri
day during the school year by the
Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing
Co. Inc., at the University of Ore
gon, Eugene, Ore. The Emerald
operates independently of the
University with offices in Suite
300 of the Erb Memorial Union.
The Emerald is private property
Unlawful removal or use of
papers is prosecutable by law.
■ In my opinion
OBESITY 101: The Blame Game
Obesity. It’s a common theme on
news programs and in newspapers
across the country. Everyone is puz
zling over the nation’s high level of
obesity — as though it is hard to un
derstand where the problem lies.
Each year, the average American
eats 10 pounds of chocolate. Hostess
produces 500 million T\vinkies a year.
Manhattan is home to nearly 100 Mc
Donald’s restaurants. The most popu
lar meal ordered in sit-down restau
rants in the United States is fried
chicken. Need I say more?
It is blatantly obvious why we are a
fat nation. I for one cannot sit through
one more broadcast where a dubious
reporter scrutinizes a French fry. Obe
sity has become a constant topic of
discussion; everyone is tiying to dis
sect the “epidemic” and it is driving
me crazy.
Lately, a lot of attention has been
given to the pubic school system and
what it feeds children. Schools are
now cutting back on soda and un
healthy menu items as parents de
mand healthier choices. It is great that
people are finally paying attention to
the food that’s served, but not enough
is being done.
When my high school began mak
ing changes to the food it served, the
task was approached half-heartedly
and with some backward logic.
The school removed the soda vend
ing machines in the cafeteria and re
placed them with fruit juice and milk.
Great move; the milk became wildly
popular. However, at least five soda
machines remained elsewhere on
campus. You cannot expect students
to stop drinking soda just by remov
ing cafeteria machines, especially not
when all they have to do to procure a
soft drink is to walk an extra 20 feet to
a machine outside the cafeteria.
The salad bar was expanded and
sandwiches were made ahead of time.
This was also great move; it appeared
quite a few students would rather
grab a ready-made sandwich than
JESSICA DERLETH
FREEDOM RINGS WHERE OPINIONS CLASH
stand in line for pizza. Unfortunately,
these changes did not prevent stu
dents from eating a basket of fries
for lunch (a practice I have seen
many times).
In a rather bold move, the snack
bar was purged of several unhealthy
items, such as the fountain sodas. The
chocolate, however, remained.
I found this to be quite puzzling.
What is the justification for continu
ing to sell chocolate bars when the
cafeteria is supposed to be reformed?
After asking a few employees, I got
my answer: Chocolate contains milk.
Yes, the chocolate was allowed be
cause the presence of milk gave it nu
tritional value. With this kind of log
ic, schools will never be able to
provide healthy meals.
Luckily, not all school districts con
duct themselves with such contradic
tory thought processes. On one news
broadcast, an elementary school with
a reformed cafeteria menu was fea
tured. The school was free of soda
and candy, and the cafeteria had a
well-balanced meal for every child.
This school district — and others like
it — should be applauded for spend
ing large amounts of time and effort to
set up a healthier food program. The
school did not receive the praise it de
serves because nearly half of the stu
dent population was overweight or
obese. Which means that it became
time to shift the blame.
In this particular news broadcast, a
map was pulled up showing the loca
tion of the school in relation to area
grocery stores and mini marts. For the
next five minutes, these mom-and
pop stores were closely examined and
deemed responsible for poisoning our
children with Cheetos and Snickers.
Through some keen detective work,
the reporter discovered that many of
the elementary school children would
walk home past these stores and pur
chase a wide array of fattening foods.
But who is to blame for the children
spending their allowance on chips
and soda?
It is not fair to lay blame on stores
that stock unhealthy food. Nor is it
fair to point the finger at companies
and fast food restaurants that make
the products. These companies and
stores are supplying the product that
is in demand. If there was not a de
mand for fries and greasy cheese
burgers, McDonald’s would not be
selling them.
When it comes to obesity and eat
ing habits, the responsibility lies with
the individual and the parent. At this
point, with media coverage and
movies such as “Super Size Me,” it is
safe to assume the average adult has
some concept of which foods are un
healthy. It is also easy ertough, with
public libraries and free Internet ac
cess, to determine what is OK to eat. I
do understand how it can be hard to
go with the healthy choice, especially
when bad eating habits have already
been established. But the only option
is to realize the importance of eating
well, and to establish better habits in
today’s children. The parents are re
sponsible for their child’s eating
habits, just as they are responsible for
their own diet; if a child is taught
what to eat and why, he or she will be
more likely to choose the healthy op
tions at school. Ultimately, the parent
is the one in charge of the child.
Wake up. Stop blaming the food
manufacturer. Stop suing the fast food
restaurant. Stop pointing the finger at
the school cafeteria. Stop wondering
why this country is obese.
jessicaderleth@dailyemerald.com
INBOX
Senators must protect
endangered species
As fall arrives, American bald eagles
will return to the Willamette Valley in
greater numbers than previous years.
It is not just the season that is bringing
our national bird back; The Endan
gered Species Act (ESA) — the most
important law fostering the return of
the bald eagle and other animals —
has greatly affected the bald eagle
population.
To date, the ESA has helped species
large and small. From the gray whale
and grizzly bear in the oceans and
forests to the Willamette daisy and
Fender’s blue butterfly in our own
backyards, the ESA has helped keep
these species around for us to enjoy.
A recent scientific study in the jour
nal BioScience found that species pro
tected under the ESA are more likely
to increase in numbers. The study also
found that species living for two or
more years in land designated a “criti
cal habitat” appeared more likely to
improve in status.
Now, more than ever, we need the
protection of the Endangered Species
Act. Species are going extinct at a rate
we haven’t seen since the last ice age,
yet some members of Congress feel
the need to undermine this hugely
successful law for a narrow group of
property-rights activists.
Representative Richard Pombo, R
Calif., supported by Rep. Greg
Walden, R-Ore., introduced and
passed a bill sure to tear holes in the
safety net provided by the Endangered
Species Act if it passes through the
Senate and becomes a law. Under the
guise of increasing the populations of
threatened or endangered species, the
bill is in fact a thinly-veiled attempt to
satisfy special interests. According to a
recent poll conducted by the Universi
ty of Arizona, 84 percent of Americans
support current or stronger endan
gered species protections. Unfortu
nately, Congress is not listening to the
majority. The logging, mining, cattle
and oil industries, which have lobby
ists in Washington, D.C., have influ
enced legislators to destroy the ESA.
House bill 3824 has been dubbed
the Wildlife Extinction Bill and has
been attacked from both sides of the
political spectrum. The Wildlife Ex
tinction Bill is bad news for threatened
species, taxpayers and science.
The bill forces us to choose between
rampant habitat destruction and big
payoffs to developers. Pombo’s bill
would force wildlife agencies to
choose between abandoning enforce
ment of the ESA or writing large
checks to pay developers to comply
with the law.
This bill eliminates scientific re
view. It forces wildlife agencies to ac
cept the developer’s characterization
of a project’s impacts. It denies scien
tists the ability to request additional
information from the developer.
The Wildlife Extinction Bill politi
cizes scientific decisions. The only
thing worse than money in politics is
politics in science. The Endangered
Species Act requires that all decisions
be made on basis of the best-available
scientific information — what consti
tutes the best science is left up to the
scientific community. Pombo’s bill al
lows the secretary of the interior to de
fine what science is sound.
Finally, the Wildlife Extinction Bill
weakens recovery efforts. The ESA re
quires that recovery plans be imple
mented and that species be protected
until they are fully recovered. Pombo’s
bill allows agencies to ignore recovery
plans, and it requires protections to be
removed within individual states even
though the species, as a whole, is tum
bling toward extinction.
Fortunately the bill isn’t law yet; it
must still pass in the Senate. It’s time
to ask our senators to stand up for en
dangered species.
Jonathan C. Evans
Law Student
■ Editorial
The Bush
philosophy:
Buy now,
pay later
President Bush has said his administration
“will do what it takes” to pay for damage caused
by Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita.
So far, it appears he will do whatever it takes
as long as it doesn’t involve raising taxes or cut
ting military spending. The day after his Sept. 15
speech in response to Katrina, he ruled out in
creasing taxes and said costs could be handled
by cutting “unnecessary spending.”
It turns out that at least part of that “unneces
sary spending” will come out of social programs
like Medicaid. Congress is working to determine
how it can cut those programs by more than $35
billion over five years — a great idea with hun
dreds of thousands of citizens in financial ruin.
Obviously, these cuts will not pay for recon
structing the Gulf States, which is projected to
cost as much as $150 billion. So how is Bush
planning to pay for the necessary repair? Easy:
He’ll borrow it.
He nas Dorrowea rrom cenirai DanKS in unina
and Japan to pay for the war and cut taxes simul
taneously. In fact, 46 percent of the national debt
(about $2.1 trillion) is owed to foreign nations.
Moreover, taxpayers will shell out roughly
$208 billion this fiscal year to cover interest on
this debt at an average annual interest rate of
about 4.5 percent, assuming a simple fixed rate.
At those rates, a loan of $150 billion to cover
reconstruction would cost about $6.75 billion per
year, or $34 billion over the next five years.
So the $35 billion of “unnecessary spending”
on social programs will barely pay the interest.
Add that to the interest the United States racked
up this year, without Katrina, and the billions it’ll
pay next year, and it equals a big mess for the
next person to clean up.
There’s also the fact, as reported by The
Washington Post, that nearly $300 billion in
emergency spending on the war in Iraq has
“never been offset by cuts in other areas or tax
increases.”
This may appear to be surprising behavior
coming from a “conservative” administration,
but a quick look at Bush’s fiscal history shows
that it’s par for the course.
Bush has never vetoed a spending bill. He
passed the biggest highway bill ever, even
though the $286 billion total was $36 billion
higher than what he said he would accept. The
prescription drug plan he passed will cost about
$700 billion over 10 years.Congress also deserves
a share of the blame. Although Republicans have
traditionally aimed to reduce the government’s
size, Congress has allowed discretionary spend
ing to rise more under Bush than under Lyndon
B. Johnson, according to the conservative Amer
ican Enterprise Institute’s Veronique de Rugy.
New York Times columnist David Brooks apt
ly described the spending crisis on a Sept. 23
episode of PBS’ “The NewsHour”:“So instead of
having a governing philosophy that will tell
them, ‘I’m going to spend it here but not there,’
[Republicans] have a governing philosophy that
is irrelevant to actually governing,” Brooks said.
“So they take that anti-governing philosophy and
they just toss it out the window and when they
get here they just spend like sailors. ’’
Now is the time to resuscitate the small-gov
ernment ideal. Making responsible cuts will be
difficult, but the Gulf States need to be recon
structed without driving up debt or cutting social
programs that will benefit hurricane victims.
Congress’ proposals for cuts are unacceptable.
Bottom line: Bush needs to stop borrowing
money. He needs to find some brainpower
(preferably someone else’s), look to old Republi
can ideals and find a solution that won’t dig this
country into a hole it can’t get out of.