COLUMN: Politics, parties and power

From Jeff Adler's, "Secton 8," Fall '98 From Jeff Adler's, "Secton 8," Fall '98If you're anything like me, you're probably sick of hearing about the Greek system and the Undergraduate Assembly. Between the columnist who stereotypes Greeks as beer guzzling, pledge-hazing monsters, and the InterFraternity Council representative who has to defend his constituents as they cart off another student to the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, who can you trust? Driven by naivete, I thought I could find the answers. Since then much has been made about the UA's control of the $30,000. How will the Greeks find a way to fund parties with money generated by student fees? How has the allocation of this money hurt student groups on campus? In the end, however, it seems that the melodramatic Penn community has made this out to be a much bigger deal than it really is. As stipulated by the UA, the $30,000 in question can only be used for non-alcoholic events. Moreover, according to UA Chairperson Bill Conway, the UA will not be involved with any event if there is even a likelihood that alcohol may be present. So how do the Greeks benefit from this influx of money? The short answer is that it will fund events like Greek Week that will give the Greek system higher exposure. In the past, such events were supported by dues that each fraternity and sorority paid to its respective umbrella organization, the IFC or the Panhellenic Council. With the UA now supporting these events, however, some money will be freed up for individual houses for their own disposal. In effect, one could argue that the UA money enables the Greeks to purchase alcohol. Of course, fraternities don't spend all their money on alcohol, but let's not kid ourselves. With large parties replete with drunken freshmen, Greek houses offer little more than a social outlet for most students. And far too often, fraternities get way out of hand, causing students to be hurt both physically and emotionally. But does that mean that a group which represents approximately a third of the undergraduate student body should not receive any funds from the UA? Well, maybe they shouldn't if the other 2/3 of campus disagrees. In fact, many students believe the money used for Greeks has caused myriad problems for student groups. These beliefs are misplaced. The $30,000 cut from the Student Activities Council's budget has not been the chief cause of problems for SAC groups this year. In the 1997-98 school year, SAC's budget was $449,919. This year, even with $30,000 less, SAC's budget has increased to $571,573. How is this possible? Under SAC rules, any money that groups leave unused by the end of the year must be returned and placed into a reserve fund. Last spring, SAC advisors announced that this fund contained a total of $357,492. This substantial reserve explains how for this year, SAC has over $120,000 more than last year to grant to the 158 student groups it supports. This being the case, one would expect that student groups are not suffering financially; and for the most part, they aren't. The major problem this year is not lack of money but space. With several campus facilities under renovations, rehearsal and performance space have become extremely limited. Perhaps SAC could dip more into its mysterious reserve fund to solve this problem. After all, aren't reserves supposed to be used for unforeseen problems? More than anything, the $30,000 debate is about principles. Specifically, is it acceptable that our student government is largely controlled by people who have strong ties to a special interest group? I don't think anyone can blame the Greeks for being proactive. They represent a large body of students on this campus, and they succeeded in doing what they had to do to achieve what they wanted. What unnerves me, however, is the fact that of the 25 current members of the UA, nine are from Zeta Beta Tau and four are from Phi Kappa Psi. I hold nothing against these people nor their fraternities. But in a community striving for diversity, it seems problematic that the UA is comprised of people who are closely affiliated with one another. If we are to believe to any extent that fraternities are comprised of brothers, how can we expect that they will not call on each other for support? Is it any surprise, therefore, that last spring the battle for UA chairperson was fought between representatives of these two houses? Penn politics may be ridiculous, as the turf war between the UA and SAC indicates. But this is our money, and we should care about who controls it. In the future, be careful how you vote and who you vote for. If elected bodies like the UA are not representative of the student body, how can we expect them to meet our various needs? If you don't like the status quo, help to change it. You've got a vote. Use it.