Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 9, 2006)
Co mmentary Monday, January 9, 2006 NEWS STAFF ■ Editorial (541) 346-5511 PARKER HOWELL EDITOR IN CHIEF SHADRA BEESLEY MANAGING EDITOR STEVEN NEUMAN JARED PABEN NEWS EDITORS OSSIE BLADINE RYAN KNUTSON EVA SYLWESTER NICHOLAS WILBUR NEWS REPORTERS SHAWN MILLER SPORTS EDITOR SCOTT J. ADAMS LUKE ANDREWS JEFFREY DRANSFELDT SPORTS REPORTERS AMY LICHTY PULSE EDITOR TREVOR DAVIS ANDREW MCCOLLUM PULSE REPORTERS AILEE SLATER COMMENTARY EDITOR GABE BRADLEY KIRSTEN BROCK JESSICA DERLETH ARMY FETH COLUMNISTS DAWN HELZER MATT TIFFANY COPY CHIEFS ASHLEY CHASE JENNY DORNER BRYN JANSSON JOSH NORRIS JENNA ROHRBACHER COPY EDITORS TIM BOBOSKY PHOTO EDITOR HASANG CHEON KATE HORTON ZANE RITT KAI-HEUI YAU PHOTOGRAPHERS JONAH SCHROGIN DESIGN EDITOR MOLLY BEDFORD SARAH DAVIS KERI SPANGLER NATALIE WINKLER DESIGNERS CHRIS TODD GRAPHIC DESIGNER AARON DUCHATEU ILLUSTRATOR MICHAEL WILT WEBMASTER BUSINESS (541) 346-5511 JUDY RIEDL GENERAL MANAGER KATHY CARBONE BUSINESS MANAGER LAUNA DE GIUSTI RECEPTIONIST LUKE BELLOTTI RYAN JOHNSON GAVIN PLACE SEBASTIAN STORLORZ NICK VICINO DISTRIBUTION ADVERTISING (541) 346-3712 MELISSA GUST ADVERTISING DIRECTOR NORA BURMEISTER KELLEE KAUFTHEIL JOHN KELLY LINDSEY FERGUSON WINTER GIBBS KATE HIRONAKA KATE ISRAELS STEPHEN MILLER MALIA RAWLINGS TIM SEYMOUR CODY WILSON SALES REPRESENTATIVES BONA LEE AD ASSISTANT CLASSIFIED (541) 346-4343 TRINA SHANAMAN CLASSIFIED MANAGER LISA CLARK AN DO SABRINA GOWETTE AMANDA KANTOR KERI SPANGLER KATIE STRINGER CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING ASSOCIATES PRODUCTION (541) 346-4381 MICHELE ROSS PRODUCTION MANAGER KIRA PARK PRODUCTION COORDINATOR JAMIE ACKERMAN CAITLIN MCCURDY ERIN MCKENZIE TERRY STRONG 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. Building disrepair: an issue that cannot wait A ARON D UCHATEU | I LLUSTRATOR ■ In my opinion Bush’s budget needs less fo r the buck B ANG When it was drafted last year, President Bush’s 2006 budget proposed to increase U.S. security, restrain spend- ing and attempt to cut the federal deficit in half by 2009. Formidable goals, con- sidering the current deficit of more than $8 trillion dollars, unplanned expendi- tures thanks to hurricane season and the ever-growing number of baby boomers looking to take advantage of such federal services as Social Security and Medicare. In 2006, how will Presi- dent Bush meet his national defense and financial restraint goals while con- tinuing to offer his nation’s citizens an appropriate level of anticipated, primari- ly domestic services? A bit of number crunching reveals all the answers, or, at the very least, reveals Bush’s pretense of a solution to a Repub- lican administration hoping to cut taxes and restrain spending while sluggishly ending a war we started for reasons later deemed the result of ineptitude. The first prominent figure under Bush’s “Highlights of Program Increas- es and New Initiatives” is $35 billion— otherwise known as the amount of money slated to be spent between now and 2011 on reorganizing all Army forces as well as increasing active Army com- bat brigades by 30 percent. In five years, the U.S. Army will occupy 30 percent more of the world — good news for weapons industries and global outsourc- ing opportunities. The number 35 billion is so large it takes a minute to comprehend what it really means. There are 1,000 millions in a billion. That is akin to 1,000 $1 mil- lion stacks of money. And $1 million is a sizable stack of money. Needless to say, 3,500 stacks of $1 million is an even more sizable amount. If the federal government could do, say, a 20- rather than 30-per- cent increase of Army troops, the left over money would be astounding. The federal government could still show its support for the military by re- AILEE SLATER FURTHER FROM PERFECTION versing its decision to decrease the budget for the Department of Veterans. Instead of letting the Department’s budget reach its lowest point since 2004, Bush could easily pony up the $1 billion necessary to give the Depart- ment of Veterans a more reasonable amount of funding. Especially during a time of war, it is of the utmost necessity to remember that a country of PTSD veterans is toxic to national morale. With part of the remaining, non- Army dollars, President Bush could bet- ter uphold his promise of placing edu- cation at the forefront of U.S. policy. One analysis of Bush’s 2006 budget proposal points out that programs in education will, as a whole, lose $1.3 bil- lion in funding. This dip in financial support includes the reduction of schol- arship programs, as well as menial funding for certain secondary educa- tion opportunities. If the education poli- cies once stripped of their funding were to regain that $1.3 billion, it would mean easier access to higher education for low-income students and a boost of support for secondary institutions serv- ing underprivileged populations. In Oregon the welfare program Tem- porary Assistance for Needy Families will be flat-funded in 2006, a financial loss of about $4 million. Although TANF is a flawed welfare policy (the state spends most of its time figuring out how to get people off TANF, thanks to the fact that federal funding remains unchanged regardless of increases in caseload), reducing federal funds means that welfare caseworkers will take on heavier client loads, less money will be available to assist poor citizens attempting to gain an education and the cycle of poverty will be once again passed on to future generations. If the federal government gave that $4 million back to Oregon and another $4 million to every other state for similar programs that experienced a funding cut, the total cost would be only $200 million. The 2006 Bush budget certainly needs to reallocate money, and not just from military to non-military spending: The president has directed TANF funds away from childcare and toward pro- grams to promote healthy marriage, ignoring the fact that in most areas, more than 50 percent of welfare users are single mothers and many have children under the age of 5. Ironically, after so much talk about helping small business, Bush cut job training and employment investment in Oregon by approximately $4 million. Once again, for just $200 million, every state in the nation could receive $4 mil- lion for similar programs that offer as- sistance to low-income citizens at- tempting to train for an occupation. For $2.5 billion (less than 10 percent of the federal dollars slotted to increase and reorganize armed forces) the White House could continue funding veterans services at a steady level, put back the money that was cut from edu- cation programs and give every state in the nation a boost in welfare and em- ployment resources. Considering the fact that the U.S. Army is trying to leave Iraq, it is mind boggling to think that five years down the road will bring little more than global encroachment by the United States. Just like the years before it, 2006 will be gone in the blink of an eye. Perhaps only then can the nation evaluate whether this year’s federal funds have been wisely spent. aslater@ dailyemerald.com The yellow tape surro unding bulging, water-damaged floors in the EMU’ s east wing should signal caution both to passing pedes- trians and to state law makers: Building repairs, especially preventative maintenance, are not receiving adequate funding. With a backlog of more than $123 million in needed repairs ( “ Campus maintenance costs total $123 million to date” ODE Dec. 5), maintenance needs from broken steam pipes to leaky ro o fs plague o ur buildings. Recent water damage to the EMU alone will cost an estimated $75,000, and five or six other build- ings may have suffered rain damage during the winter break. Maintenance presents a dirty, costly prob- lem, but it’ s a burden that no bo dy wants to pay fo r. Facilities Services, the department that oversees campus buildings and grounds, receives only about $5 million each year from the University general fund to maintain about 5 millio n square feet o f building space. The University also receives some money from the Oregon State Legislature through the Oregon University System, but that money is used for larger repair projects. Hence, about $9 to $12 million in repairs on campus buildings is deferred each year. The EMU, Athletics Department facilities, Univer- sity Ho using and the Student Recreatio n Center are not included in that figure. Further, donors would rather have a shiny new classro o m co mplex named after them than be known for financing a new roof. New buildings often don’ t receive gifts to cover the costs of long-term maintenance. W hen fo ul weather o r o ther fo rces create the need for emergency repairs, students can be left to help foot the bill. Recent water dam- age will be lumped together and billed to the state’ s insurance entity, but the University w ill still need to pay a $2,500 deductible. Student money will fund part of that bill. Catching up o n this maintenance backlo g and performing more preventative repairs will be difficult as the Legislature continually fails to emphasize higher educatio n. There are many demands for the state funding received by the University, and on paper, maintenance looks like an easy place to skimp. But an ounce of prevention really is worth a pound of cure, and legislators should priori- tize at least planning a way to pay-off deferred repairs. Donors should also consider mainte- nance of future building projects. The lo gic behind prio ritizing repairs is simple. Fo r example, if yo u ow n a car, yo u don’ t wait until it breaks down to change the o il. Delaying maintenance o nly co mpo unds inevitable future problems. EDITORIAL BOARD Parker Howell Editor in Chief Shadra Beesley Managing Editor Jonah Schrogin Design Editor Ailee Slater Commentary Editor OREGON DAILY EMERALD LETTERS POLICY Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged, and should be sent to letters@dailyemerald.com or submitted at the Oregon Daily Emerald office, EMU Suite 300. Electronic submissions are preferred. Letters are limited to 250 words, and guest commentaries to 550 words. Authors are limited to one submission per calendar month. Submissions should include phone number and ad- dress for verification. The Emerald reserves the right to edit for space, grammar and style. Guest submissions are published at the discretion of the Emerald.
