Support fair trade through consumerism
As mentioned in the Sept. 25 ODE article, Starbucks is to be applauded for responding to socially-minded consumers and developing a fair-trade line.
But before we labor/environmentally-sensitive consumers go rushing to support this newly progressive company, be aware that Starbucks is currently only selling this coffee packaged: you cannot buy a fair-trade brand in a cup! Until Starbucks provides brewed fair-trade alternatives to caffeine-hungry students, our only alternative is to buy sweatshop coffee from them or (what I will be doing) continue to support the Duck Stop, the only consistent fair-trade vendor on the strip.
We can work to change this policy by showing a presence at Starbucks and insisting on being served the Mexican shade-grown variety over the counter — or taking our business elsewhere. Some Starbucks shops are willing to french-press cups of the brand upon request, and the more customers who ask, the more likely that fair-trade brands will be offered in the future (and show Starbucks that there is profit in fair-trade.)
To those who still wonder what all the fuss is about, my personal view is that at two cups per school day, at $1 a cup, I spend $522 a year on retail coffee and can make a sizable personal impact on one of the most exploitative industries by choosing to buy fair-trade brands over sweatshop brands. It’s easy, cheap and convenient socially-responsible consumerism. Who wouldn’t want to switch?
 

R. Charli Carpenter

Graduate student

Political science

Vote no on Measure 9
Save the Chess club! Vote no on Measure 9! The OCA is at it again, this time with the “Student Protection Act” which would eliminate any non-negative mention of homosexuality or bisexuality in public schools through the college level. Whatever your feelings about these issues, it is important that you be aware that this law, if passed, could eliminate all extra-curricular clubs.
It is clear that any gay-friendly extracurricular club would be prohibited under this measure. If that sounds like good news to you, read on. A student in a Utah school requested formation of a gay-straight alliance club. The school district denied the request, and the student sued. The court ruled that federal law did not allow schools receiving federal funding to discriminate based on club content. The school board was faced with allowing the club or disallowing ALL extracurricular clubs. Or losing federal funding. They chose to disallow all extracurricular clubs.
If Measure 9 passes, every school district in Oregon will have to choose between eliminating all extracurricular clubs or losing state or federal funding. That’s a choice we can’t afford to make! Don’t let the OCA’s poorly-crafted bill hurt our schools. Vote NO on Measure 9.
 

Shasta K. Wilson

CIS

Booing unsportsmanlike
Coach Len Casanova didn’t want any booing from students at football games. Back in fall of 1950, as a newly-elected yell king, I asked for an interview with our new football coach, Len Casanova, and he made it very clear that he considered booing unsportsmanlike, and firmly stated that he did not approve of that kind of conduct — so, we complied. It was a good call.
Our student body was in the neighborhood of 4,500, and I recall reading of University President Newburn praising the spirit of the fans, but I dare say the spirit of the fans at the recent UCLA game in Autzen Stadium was deafening and awesome. Congratulations to the cheerleaders and fans. If booing were eliminated, the sport would be elevated.
 

Ron Symons

WRC requirements not too restrictive
You should really take a look at what the Worker Rights Consortium is about. Yes, they ask for a living wage, but they admit that the definition of a living wage is still unclear and so they don’t require it at the schools, and they haven’t yet had to deal with the living wage in apparel companies. The requirements are the same whether at home or abroad. The most important things that they do require:
* Freedom to organize without threat of job loss/other penalties
* Overtime cannot be required
* No discrimination (including in pay) based on gender, race, etc.
* Maximum work week of either 48 hours or the national maximum, whichever is less
* Maternity leave and no required pregnancy testing at any time
* No forced labor (indentured, bonded, or prison labor)
* Release the information about compliance to the public (wage, hours, health/safety conditions)
* Are these requirements too restrictive? It doesn’t seem like it to me. Want to actually see what they do require? Read at their site: http://www.workersrights.org
 

Eric Anholt

Portland, OR