Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Portland observer. (Portland, Or.) 1970-current | View Entire Issue (March 16, 1983)
Paga 4 Portland Observer, March IC, 1963 EDITORIAL/OPINION Salem Watch Who will support Ron Dellums? Congressman Ron Dellum s o f C a lifo rn ia , easily the most outspoken congressional critic of President Reagan’s m ilitary buildup and the headlong rush to nuclear war is under investiga tion for use o f marijuana and cocaine. T h e investigation o f Ron D ellum s is only another in a long series o f government harass ment of black spokesmen. The typical pattern is press slander, repeated investigations, occasion ally prosecution, and vindication. W hen, after years of slander, these persons are proved inno cent, their political base and their financial se curity has been eroded. Suspicion remains in the minds o f the public— the government persecu tors have done their job. We can name a long list o f national and local leaders who have suffered this harassment. It is not new: Marcus Garvey, W .E .B . DuBois, Paul Robeson were earlier targets. The question now is, will the black commu nity and its leadership rally around and support Dellums; w ill they reject him as many did D u Bois and Robeson; will they stand in the wings and wait until the verdict is in? Even before the investigation was begun, the members o f the Congressional Black Caucus denied Dellums its chairmanship, calling him too radical, too far from the mainstream. This is a demonstration o f their fear o f identification with the forces for change. W ill the members o f the Black Caucus defend and assist Dellums, or will they wait their turn? No black person can promote radical change in this country and not be presecuted by the press and government; yet no change in the con ditions o f black life— and in the life of all Am er icans— will occur unless black spokesmen chal lenge the system. This is one o f the dilemmas black A m ericans must face. Support those spokesmen who dare to challenge and demand change or give up the struggle for justice and ac cept life as it is. Protect worker health, safety Dangerous substances in the workplace re main a serious threat to workers in this state and in the nation. Millions o f workers have been ex posed to asbestos, coal dust, cotton dust and other substances that cause lung and heart prob lems and eventual death. Others have been ex posed to PCB, dioxin and a multitude o f cancer- causing or lung destroying chemicals. A pproxi mately 100,000 die from occupational disease annually while 400,000 new cases are diagnosed each year. Under the Reagan administration profit has been given a higher priority than workers’ lives — federal safety restrictions have been relaxed and enforcements reduced. Governor A tiych’s budget eliminates eight safety enforcement o ffi cers. Senate Bill 294, sponsored by State Senator Steve S tarkovich, would require labelling o f toxic substances in places o f employment. This seems to be a simple bill— it allows workers to know that they are working with dangerous sub stances. Too often they arc informed only when they already debilitated and dying. The business lobby opposes the bill, saying it is unworkable and too costly. Can certain businesses afford to endanger the lives o f its employees? W o rkm en ’s compensa tion and disability payments are costly, as are hours o f work missed due to illness. But with a large pool o f unemployed and the resulting pres sure for lower and lower wages, Oregon’s em ployees can afford to ignore the health and safe ty o f their employees. It is the responsibility of the State Legislature to insure the safety o f Ore gon’s workers. Corporations reconsider South Africa {Continued from page I column 3) $90 m illion had been lost because the bank—like the u.S. government — ignored signs o f extreme social tension in the Shah's Iran. Another shareholder added: "Things are not going to get better in South Africa. So we had belter begin to think now about what we're going to do as things get worse.” On January 26, the Chrysler cor poration announced its decision to sell o ff its 25 percent stake in Sigma Motors C orporation, South A fr i ca's third largest auto and truck manufacturing company. Not long before. General Electric backed out of a mining venture in the KwaZulu black "hom eland," in part because of mounting calls for divestment in the company's home state o f Con necticut. Polaroid, Inc., pulled out in 1977, after learning that its South African distributor had violated a 1971 agreement not to sell products to the government. Indeed. South A frica’s own largest company, the Anglo-American Corporation, has expanded its overseas investments— as insurance against future upheav als, according to some observers. A few companies are even finding ways to profit from pro-divestment sentmcnt. Chem ical Bank still makes trade-related loans of a non- strategic nature to South Africa, but has made no loans to the South A f rican government or companies doing business there since 1974. Chemical is now setting up a special fund that would invest only in non- South Africa-related companies, to capture part of the divested public pension funds and church endow ments. No one understands more clearly that divestment has become a seri ous matter than the South Africans IS » HOreaon 1 New .p.iiM-i 1 Publishers Asso, lation =4 || æ IV themselves. W hile South A frican consulates have often conducted low-key lobbying efforts against di vestment bills, only recently have South A fric a ’ s paid lobbyists be come active at the state level, in re sponse to the growing success o f state and municipal divestment bills. These efforts have been success fully countered by groups which en jo y widespread support from churches, organized labor and com munity organizations. Among the proposals for alternative investment made by divestment supporters in Massachusetts, one particularly struck home with state residents: that the pension funds be used to help revitalize local neighborhoods and generate jobs. There, as in Michigan, the Ford Motor Company lobbied vigorously against divestment, arguing for an amendment that would have ex empted companies which observe the so-called "Sullivan principles'* o f corporate responsibility. Black unions in South Africa have public ly rejected this approach, which in volves voluntary, company-spon sored improvements in working conditions, as cosmetics and d iffi cult to monitor or evaluate. Adoption of the Ford amendment in Massachusetts would have ex empted from the divestment bill's coverage I I of the 13 companies in South Africa in which state pension funds are invested. In M ichigan, Ford's lobbyist implicitly conceded divestment's impact by asking state legislators to exempt the automaker as "an economically distressed cor poration." The University of Michi gan, another active opponent of the b ill, may still challenge it in the courts as an infringement on univer sity autonomy. Divestment advocates are far from claim ing that the battle has been won. In m id-1982, U.S. banks had S3.6 billion in outstanding loans to South Africa's public and private sectors, and direct investment was estimated at $2.6 billion. Moreover, the Reagan administration has re moved restrictions on trade with South Africa's military and police, and eased them on nuclear-related exports. Nevertheless, divestment as an is sue has generated a potent, "new federalist" approach. It promises to keep apartheid more effectively on the minds o f millions of Americans who do care, after, about the way their money is spent ♦J A k V« Nrwj SrrvKv. I9H.1 Portland Observer ~ i » i . ,,o»‘ ItlO Bii ’ • The P u r lla n d O b t r r v t r IU S P S 9 5 9 68011« pu blish ed every Thurxtey by E iie Publishing Com pany. Inc 2201 North Killingi worth. Portland Oregon 9 7 2 1 /. Post Office Bo« 3137. Portland Oregon 9 /7 0 8 Second class iMistage iiael at Portland Oregon '9 U && «H «SP4M« - NL <1 NêWAw X tio c iH io o - founded IM S Subscriptions S10 00 per year in the Tri County area P ost m a s te r Send address changes to the P o rtla n d Observer P O Bo« 3137, Portland Oregon 97208 Alfred I. Henderson. Editor/Publisher A ! Williams, Advertising Manager 283 2486 (Excerptedfrom Human Relations: A Global Perspective, by A m b ily Etekpet It is no longer an exaggeration that "tim e is running out in N am i bia.” It has to be liberated. As long as the Namibian problem remains unsolved in terms of Security Coun cil Resolution (S C R ) 435, and as long as the anachronistic and perni cious apartheid system remains alive, peace and international secur ity in the southern part of our con tinent w ill continue to be th reat ened, and the "h om e-g ro w n ” re sistance will escalate. Nam ibia is a land o f wealth and awesome beauty, but also o f pov erty and terrible oppression for the blacks. Perhaps it is the richest country in the world in relation to the size o f its population and per haps it is also the most exploited na- Letters To the editor: We all know so much has been said and written about Portland's School Board. The bottom line is our town needs decisive leadership in the area o f education. Such lead ership has to come from the Board members. H ow ever, every voting member of the community, regard less o f whether they are property owners, renters, or have kids in school, has the responsibility to make this leadership happen. Some incumbent members of the School Board are still working on a "comprehensive educational plan." We have had enough o f “ plan n in g .” It's time fo r results, and workable solutions to serious prob lems. It is my personal judgement that one candidate, Jim Standring, has the in teg rity, desire and com m it ment to fill a void on the Board. He certainly has the " te c h n ic a l" cre dentials to do a good job, but more important. I believe he has the feel ing o f what needs to be done to make our School Distrtict Number One. He is a team player, but also capable of making independent de cisins. If you don't vote on the 29th — you lost. Rash Roofing Co. Roofing of all kinds. Guarantaa; 90 days thru 1 year N ational A d v e rtis in g R ep resentative A m a lg a m a te d Publishers. Inc N e w T o rli Complicating the issue o f water rights, o f course, is that most o f these uses conflict. One solution to Oregon’s water rights dilemma may be impossible to achieve because o f conflicting claims, but any resolution— any at all— may be well nigh impossible to achieve because traditional sources o f in fo rm atio n — the technical ex perts— seem to have reached a stand-off. One example of this stand-off is a benefit-cost analysis conducted by the A rm y Corps o f Engineers. In 1978, they concluded that the eco nomic benefits generated by irriga tion approximates the economic costs o f lost hydro-electric power due to the withdrawal of water from streams. Perhaps more significant to the impasse is the legal mare's nest o f Oregon's water allocation system. A non-stream water right, once issued, is held in perpetuity, as long as the holder exercises his/her right within any five year period. Thus, each year the legislature fails to ade quately address water policy, the State's managerial fle x ib ility de creases. Each year the conflict con tinues, the options available to all Oregonians are further reduced. At the center of Oregon’s current water program is the Water Policy Review Board. Several bills this leg islative session would attempt to al ter Oregon’s water policy by chang ing the composition o f the Review Board’ s members. The real prob lem, of course, remains: Past failure to adequately address Oregon's con flicted water policies have resulted in a future that has been mortgaged more than once. Portland State University’s Insti tute for Oregon Policy Studies, in a work entitled "Past Commitments, C urrent Problem s, and W ater Choices for O regon’ s F u tu re ,” seems to have accurately outlined the choice: The (W ater Policy Reviewj Board has had the opportunity since 1995 to protect minimum in-stream flows, to classify wat ers, and to allocate water based on its determination o f the pub lic interest. The Board has the ability to anticipate and perhaps prevent harm to in-stream uses by continued consumptive appropri ation. Instead, the Board main tains a permissive policy on fu ture consumptive appropriations from most state waters. Harm to in-stream uses under this policy is almost inevitable. It will be difficult to undo a gen eration of neglect— to pay o ff that overdue mortgage— yet the Oregon legislature must begin sometime. Perhaps the place to start is with the reconfirmation hearing o f the Water Resources Department’s director, James Sexon. While M r. Sexon, an Atiyeh appointee, is not responsible for the entire tangle of Oregon wa ter rights, it is certainly appropriate for him to address these issues at his reconfirmation hearing next week in Salem. Secondly, the legislature must ad dress these issues itself. A fte r all, M r. Sexon w ill be reconfirmed or not at the pleasure of the legislature. I f a continued plundering o f our water resources is the will of the leg islature, then that is what Oregon ians will get. But if our elected o ffi cials want to help preserve our na tural heritage for future generations of every species, the time for action is now. Time runs out for Namibia Fran Ariniello The Pordeed O ta r rv r r wes established m 1970 member "W a te r, water, everywhere, and not a drop to drink,** may become the next official Oregon motto if the State legislature fails to address a lengthy list of water right issues be fore it. Water right issues include main taining the m inimum stream flow needed to sustain aquatic life , in- stream use (say for recreation) ver sus out-of-stream use (perhaps for irrig atio n), or the maintenance o f ground water safe for human con sumption. These and other water rights is sues have existed unresolved for many legislative moons, largely be cause it is impossible to address one right to Oregon's most renewable natural resource without alienating a large or powerful block of special interests But perhaps the most com pelling reason for the Oregon legis lature's failure to address these con flicting and highly emotional claims is that it is difficult to convince peo ple in a state as wet as Oregon that water is a scarce and precious re source. The players in this water game are nearly endless, each with needs for certain amounts of water at specific times in varying quantities: •Farmers require water for irriga tion and livestock. •Municipalities require drinking water and m inim um streamflows for sewage discharge, as do many industries. •Recreational users, as well as hy droelectric utilities, require sizeable in-stream water flows. •Commercial and sport fishers re quire not only m inim um stream flows, but also preservation of spe cific stream habitats for fish procre ation and rearing. 4011 N.E. Union Ave. 287 8474 l l t n 'HeMRg»/» w tion in the world by the Westerners. N am ibia is about 318,261 square miles, which is about the size of Cal ifornia or as large as England and France combined. According to U .N . estimates, Namibian popula tion is about 1.5 million people with a gross domestic product (G D P ) of $1,000 per capita. And yet, about 80 percent o f the population (blacks) are living below poverty level. Apartheiam Race is the determinant factor in N am ibia. A non-white child has only 20 percent chance o f surviving disaease and malnutrition to reach the age o f five. The government spends about $700 annually for each white child's education. Whereas the average income for a white is $3,500, a black person earns less than $200 a year. The A partheid Law classified Namibians into three groups: I ) blacks/natives (80 percent); 2) mixed race (10 percent); and 3) whites (10 percent). The major agri cultural and mining areas are part of the white homeland. About 30,000 of the whites are German-speaking people, while the m ajority o f the whites are A frican-speaking and English-speaking, constituting seven percent. According to Rev. Z. Ka- meta, "have these three gods (race, language. color| taken the place of the trinity in the hearts of our white brothers?” Reactions In January 1981, South A frica again broke o ff negotiations with the U .N . to set up internationally supervised elections. At the same tim e. South A frican troops were busy invading Angola from Nam i bia to attack SW A P O bases. This, in our opinion, is an act o f aggres sion against the Angolian Sover eignty. With the latest rejection of a negotiated settlement, South Africa again faced threats o f U .N . sanc tions. However, in A pril 1981, the supposedly " fre e w o rld ” o f the U .S ., France and Britain, chose to veto any such sanctions. Instead, the U .S ., Canada, Britain, France and West Germany have decided to pursue the issue from the "contact group’s” point of view. The complicated activity o f the Western world has continued an ag gravated history o f blunders and negative reactions in A fric a n na tions. In the last organization of A f rican Unity (O A U ) meeting held at Kenya, the A frican nations con demned the roles o f the West. The strongest criticism o f U .S . policy came from the lib eration move ments. W hat the self-styled free world forgot to continuously understand is that African people have the right to decide what is good for them selves. They forgot to remember that there are socialist (or commu nist) parties even in the Western world. Rather, their major concern is that " A fric a is going com m u nist . . . . ” The battle should be de void o f ideologies o f "is m s .” A l ready millions of Africans are con cerned and frustrated over the mis happenings of ideologies in our con tinent. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, with for eign ideologies but because o f the "p ic tu re p ain ters,” they cannot quite put their fingers on it. The A f rican people should be allowed to adopt their “ economic order” that faces reality. Time is running out in Namibia. We believe, and accordingly de clared, that South A frican racist government policies are bound to fail Nothing can slop the Namibian people from becoming independent. This is not only because they are w»ging a just struggle but also be cause they are defending their right to self determination and freedom. Receive your Observer by mail— Subscribe todayl Only »10» per yea Mail to: Portland Observer Box 3137 Portland. Oregon 97208 Nam e_ Address City____ .State Zip.
