TO THE EDITOR
BY MARY O’BRIEN
Yes, you and your “righteous majority” have
the right or privilege to be there, or as it says in
the Constitution (which the left says is so reck-
lessly thrown aside), “the right to peaceably as-
semble.” But the police also have the right, the
second gatherings go south, to step in and, as
they say, “serve and protect.”
James Ready
Springfield
CRITICAL OF CRITIC
It is time to say something! I’ve let this go
on for too long. What of this so-called film critic
of yours, Lois Wadsworth? If she’s wise, this is
an alias. I have always questioned why critics
think they should exist. However, if a publica-
tion decides to have such a thing, how about a
critic that writes well and knows what he or she
is writing about? In the case of EW, both quali-
ties are missing.
This is not about disagreeing with the opinion
of the film subject. It’s about reviews that read
like book reports. If one doesn’t know anything
about the art of filmmaking, they can just write a
bad synopsis of the plot, and as a bonus, give
away the ending! This fills space. Then make up
some absurd angle about the characters that no
one understands. If the readers don’t get it, that’s
OK because it might confuse them into thinking
the “critic” knows something they don’t.
Therefore, it’s profound. Also be sure to leave
out anything about the making of the picture, as
this might confuse things (and give away the fact
that the writer doesn’t know anything). Then,
publish the review two weeks after the film’s
opening after everyone has already seen it!
I just love the boldface “BORING” in the re-
view of Phone Booth in the 4/17 issue. Ms.
Wadsworth must be making a statement about
herself! I do appreciate honesty in a person.
(This is a good film by the way.) Isn’t it time to
hire someone who is knowledgeable about film
making and is a competent writer?
Dub Taylor
Cottage Grove
PEOPLE’S PAPER
The part of EW I usually find the most fasci-
nating is the Letters section. This past week, I
checked out the “Web Letters” as well, and
found that, with only one or two exceptions,
they were just as well-written, cogent and valu-
able as the ones to which you allotted space in
the print edition. I’d like to suggest that you
print more of these letters, to help make the
Weekly truly the “people’s paper.”
What should you cut to make room for this?
While I appreciate the work and perspectives of
Tony Corcoran and Tom Lininger, I hardly need
to hear from them every week; once a month
would be fine. The new “Music at the Clubs”
format takes twice as much space and is much
more difficult to read than the old grid-style cal-
endar. By paring some of this fat, you’d have
room to give more voice to diverse community
members. On behalf of the many talented and
passionate letter-writers who contribute to EW
(or attempt to), thanks for considering this plea.
Chris Roth
Dexter
EDITOR’S NOTE: For the record, our new
Clubs listings and photos actually take up the
same space as the old grid. Also, Corcoran
only writes when the Legislature is in session,
and Lininger’s days on the commission are
numbered.
THE KIVA
BOOKSELLERS,
BOOKSELLERS, • Organic Produce,
Natural and
GROCERS International Foods
GROCERS
WINE
& & WINE
Homeopathic and
M ERCHANTS • Herbal
MERCHANTS
Remedies
• Dried Fruits, Nuts
and Bulk Foods
• Imported and
Domestic Wine
and Beer
Right to Know
Why must we defend common sense?
T
he powerful lobby organization, Associated Oregon
Industries (AOI), was not happy in 1996 when
Eugene’s citizens voted to grant themselves the
right to find out what toxic chemicals are produced,
stored, and dumped into their air and water by local
manufacturers. Even then-Governor Kitzhaber, a
physician, opined that only the state, not a local com-
munity, should grant that right.
In other words, Eugene shouldn’t give workers at
St. Vincent de Paul’s facility on 7th and Seneca the ability
to find out what chemicals are making some of them keep
their office windows closed, and might be causing the headaches some experience
at work. As it turns out, in 2002 Lanz Cabinet across the street released 60 tons
of acetone and more than 18 tons of butyl acetate (along with 37 other chemicals)
into the air St. Vincent de Paul’s 80 workers breathe. Both acetone and butyl
acetate are toxic to human nervous, gastrointestinal, and respiratory systems.
In 2002, 360 tons of 36 manufacturers’ toxic chemicals filled the air breathed
by residents in Lanz Cabinet’s zip code (97402). By comparison, one ton was
released in the air around the UO (i.e., zip code 97403)*. (However, the UO, a state
institution that Eugene’s law can’t govern, has refused to voluntarily report its
toxics use and releases. The city of Eugene, although not a manufacturer, volun-
tarily reports.)
At the behest of AOI and the Semiconductor Industry Association, the 1999
Legislature created Oregon Statute 453.370. This law made it virtually impossible
for any other Oregon community to establish their right to know about local toxic
exposures. The state law also capped program fees at $2,000 per company for
Eugene’s program starting in 2004. This means, in order to cover costs of the pro-
gram, small companies of 10 workers will annually pay as much as $200 per full-
time worker, while the largest companies (e.g., Hynix) will pay less than $3 per
worker. Currently, every manufacturer is paying $13.92 per worker. The state law is
also requiring that Eugene “provide an opportunity for written and oral public
comment” on its program**, as if voting for it had not been comment enough.
I
believe the right to know about toxic exposures should be recognized as a
human right. But “rights” never exist as an indisputable fact, such as “There is
a mountain here in front of us.” Instead, human communities, with broad or
constricted participation, decide which human rights they will grant or deny.
Sometimes we even decide to recognize that other species have some rights, for in-
stance, to not be purposefully driven extinct. President Bush’s administration
seems particularly focused on taking rights away, for instance diminishing the Bill
of Rights via the PATRIOT Act, and eliminating the current requirement that the
Forest Service insure the survival of native plant and animal species residing in na-
tional forests.
Communities (whether local, national, or international) define themselves by
which and whose rights they acknowledge and deliver. A student’s right to learn
art as well as take math tests? A corporation’s right to pollute ancient plants and
animals with engineered genes? A child’s right to play in a field free of land
mines? A wolf’s right to return to Oregon? A released felon’s right to vote? A cor-
poration’s right to buy an election? A president’s right to invade and occupy a
country?
At the moment, there may be no more urgent task in front of each of us than
to consider what rights our community, nation, and world should be delivering, to
whom; and to gain, restore, and protect those rights. I suggest two particular
guidelines: 1) prioritize rights for the most vulnerable humans, not the most pow-
erful; and 2) consider the long-term rights of other species who, like us, call this
planet home.
* The clever and user-friendly charts and right-to-know reports on www.ci.eugene.or.us/toxics provided the
above information about Lanz Cabinet toxics, pollution by zip code, and health effects data.
** I do urge you to let the Toxics Board know on or before May 5 that you support Eugene’s toxics
reporting program. See news item, page 8. Mary O’Brien has worked as a public interest scientist for the
past 21 years. She can be reached at mob@efn.org
• Deli with Over 150
Cheeses, Sliced or
Cut to Order
• Vitamins and Body
Care Products
Mon
- Sat 9-8
9-8 • SUN
• Sun
10-5
MON-SAT
10-5
125
W. 11th
11th
Ave,
DOWNTOWN
EUGENE
342-8666
125 W.
Ave,
DOWNTOWN
EUGENE
• • 342-8666
MAY 1, 2003 7