Resurrecting the Beast

OSPIRG lives as the ASUO plucks the worms from its decaying brainstem.

OSPIRG is, simply, an undying beast, a Goliath without foreskin, a true enemy of freedom-loving students. I'll explain. As is always the case with rhetorical endeavors as such, one must first define the problem of clarify some minutae before the ranting and raving can begin. SO, for you readers unfamiliar with Satan a brief introduction follows.

OSPIRG is a completely unneeded organization on the University of Oregon campus.

The (Quick) Lowdown

OSPIRG (Oregon Students Public Interest Research Group) was founded at the University of Oregon in 1971 by a group of concerned, Marxist-sympathizing students who wished to alleviate the throes of capitalism. Ralph Nader was involved with this. Enough said.

The deal: students would voluntarily tax themselves to form a lobbying and research organization which would protect the "public interest." (Read: a majority of the 10% of voting students would agree to use the coercive force of the State to require the rest to fund a left-wing organization, making it impossible to register for classes until they paid the fee.)

The fees started out small. For 27 years they steadily increased, culminating in a $147,000 budget for 1997-98, adding roughly nine dollars a year to each student's tuition bill.

PIRGs exist in states across the nation. Two are in Oregon. One is ours. The other is the sister Oregon State Public Interest Research Group: a political lobbying organization which spends money campaigning for "public interest" legislation. As an example of such vital work in the public interest, a popular goal of the nation's PIRGs is increasing taxes on beverage containers. The student PIRG funds the salaries of the lobbyist staff while they're not lobbying, because it is unlawful to use student fees for political purposes. See a potential conflict of interest here?

As a "subsidized" group, the student OSPIRG, contrary to the requirements of every other student organization on campus, was not required to submit a line-by-line budget to account for its cash. Student fee money went to the state office in Portland, and students relied on Kierkegaardian faith alone that it came back to campus. No one could show that it did.

But in the spring of 1998, a movement materialized at the grassroots level to counter OSPIRG's biennial propaganda campaign to regain funds. Two little illustrative stories came to mind.

One is of the littleboy who pointed out to everyone that the emperor was wearing no clothes. That is to say, OSPIRG was an organization without substance; all the good things they talked about doing on campus -- like streamwalks, canned-food drives, and distributing a booklet on your rights as a renter -- cost virtually nothing to perform. These activities were, after all, voluntary and organized by volunteers.

The second story is that of David and Goliath. Outspent by at least four to one, a little campaign called "Honesty," organized by yours truly and armed with the truth, a megaphone, and some media-savvy rhetoric, hit the Giant between the eyes with thousands of little no-vote pebbles. On the way down, the Beast tried to take everyone to hell with it, and tied the elections results up in a kangaroo student court for several weeks.

Nevertheless, justice prevailed. The UO has now been rid of OSPIRG for a little more than six months.

But the Beast is rising from the dead. And that's where the story is now.

The Problem

Until recently, the state PIRG sapped roughly half of its budget from the tuition bills of UO students. As you can imagine, the Honesty Campaign's victory drastically affected the PIRGs' effectiveness in lobbying. In response, the Committee to Re-Establish OSPIRG (i.e., the Committee to Resurrect the Beast) spontaneously arose to lift the carcass from its heap of ashes.

The army of Satan -- the black-winged flying monkeys -- have recruited heavily, from the depths of the EMU Kremlin to the streets of Portland and Eugene.

And they're desperately searching for something to legitimize their existence.

If you read their literature, generously distributed by your own student government and sponsored by your own student fees, you'd find something interesting, albeit truth-stretching, tidbits.

For example, in case you haven't heard, the ASUO (student government) and OSPIRG single-handedly lobbied Congress and achieved a decrease on student-loan interest rates, as well as an expansion of the federal Pell Grant. This comes from their clever, faux-money handbill.

Visions of student body president Geneva Wortman and former OSPIRG campus coordinator Glenda Marshall come t mind. We see them fearlessly walking into the office of Newt Gingrich. Without even chaining each other to the desks in the Speaker's Lobby, they proceeded to argue so powerfully and articulately on the virtue of higher education that Gingrich eventually just caves. The ASUO and OSPIRG successfully -- and single-handedly -- lobbied the entire Republican Congress and got what they wanted.

If you were at the USC game, and you happened to be half brain-dead and listening to the fine men calling the plays, you might just think that was the case; after all, they announced those fearless activists' efforts over the loudspeakers.

Actually, I must admit that getting those guys to announce the big lie to 45,000 fans was pretty clever. It's a shame OSPIRG wasn't that media savvy before it lost funding last year.

But everyone wants credit for this thing. Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson sent out a press release taking credit -- after all, it was a Republican bill. So did Speaker Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, and Democratic leaders Dick Gephart and Tom Daschle. All of the bigwigs in Congress wanted a piece of that petty credit. They all went around patting each other on the backs about it.

And some of their hot air carried over into Eugene. It's not global warming, either.

The fact that OSPIRG took credit for a piece of Republican legislation shows the, well, rather intense idiocy that thrives in this little microcosm.

The Facts

After their stinging defeat at the hands of Honesty, OSPIRG took the hint, and published an "estimated" budget for their expenses. Key word: estimated. That's about as legally binding as the term, "oral sex." In case you haven't seen this piece of work, here it is:

OSPIRG's Estimated Expense Report per-student per-term total annualized:

1) Democracy Program $0.40 = $20,648.40
2) Consumer Watchdog 0.37 = 19,099.77
3) Higher Education 0.35 = 18,067.35
4) Service Projects 0.32 = 16,518.72
5) Saving Species 0.29 = 14,970.09
6) Administration 0.20 = 10,324.20
7) Fundraising 0.03 = 1,548.63
8) Clean Water 0.49 = 25,294.29
9) Recycling 0.43 = 22,197.03

Totals 2.88 = $148, 668.48

Clever move. Show all costs per term. This way everything costs pennies -- on paper.

But that's fine/ The problem arises when you add OSPIRG's line totals and name the categories differently. You'll find that lines 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9, or ~$123,000, go to political activities or administrative expenses. One one of the political activities (lobbying for higher education funding) is actually specific to students' interests, and only one line funds the "service" oriented stuff for which they always pat themselves on the back. With a critical eye, anyone can find that our prime assumption is fulfilled.

But much more consequential, the issue of funding OSPIRG raises some profound philosophical questions. Let's get abstract. I'm sure their definition of "democracy program" differs from mine, yours, and anyone's, excepting your local green pseudo-Marxist.

For example, Ralph Nader recently criticized Bill Gates for not being more generous with charities -- which is fine, so long as Nader's self-righteous words are backed up by his own great donatins to charity. Nader supports a "highly progressive," soak-the-rich income tax system, as well.

What is the public interest? Is it higher taxes, as Nader insists? More regulations, liek OSPIRG lobbies for? Of logical necessity, no. Whenever legislation is directed at something specific, it ceases to be for the public interest. That people take seriously the notion of a "voluntary tax," proves the intellectual prowess of those initiating and framing the debate. Taxes are burdens. "Voluntary tax" is as paradoxical as "free gift" is redundant.

Then how can we define "public interest?" One simple, beautiful word: Freedom. Expand it. Give everyone more. Tax everyone less. Don't tread on me. You want justice? Public interest? First understand that every expansion of government power necessarily diminishes your own. Close your ears to the convoluted jargon of "public interest" and "social justice." Define those terms first. And don't tread on anyone else.

Unfortunately, OSPIRG continues to tread. Heavily.

Jonathan Collegio, a senior majoring in Theoretical Nuclear Physics, is Publisher of the Oregon Commentator.