COLUMN: Perspectives on Penn's alcohol policy

Did penn find an excuse of punish?Did penn find an excuse of punish?From Andrew Exum's, "Perilous Orthodoxy," Fall '99 Did penn find an excuse of punish?From Andrew Exum's, "Perilous Orthodoxy," Fall '99President Rodin must have been born under a lucky star. In the first weekend under her new alcohol policy, there weren't any major disasters. That doesn't mean, however, that the highly-flawed mandates issued last Thursday won't eventually hurt the University, its students or both. Say what you want about fraternity parties and mixers, but at least they were subject to rules and regulations put in place with the welfare of students in mind. Parties on, say, 44th and Pine -- as well as unregistered parties in Center City -- are subject to no such regulations. In addition, fraternities and sororities were liable for anything that took place on their premises. No one holding a party in their privately owned house will care what happens to someone they barely know who happens to drink too much in too short a time. Will that person even make it to the hospital? The second problem is the half-hearted way in which this policy was designed. If President Rodin wants a dry campus, she should say so. Currently, though, the policy affects only undergraduates, which seems to suggest that in the eyes of the administration, alcohol abuse is solely an undergraduate problem, despite the fact that the tragedy a week ago involved a 26-year-old alumnus. If University officials really and truly wanted to end alcohol abuse on campus, they should carry this new policy over to graduate students and faculty as well. If senior honor societies in which all members are legally of age can't drink, then neither should any other of-age groups. That means no more alcohol served at the Faculty Club or the Wharton Pub. It also means no more graduate student parties on campus. Imagine the frustration of the Greek system when it held its annual Greek 101 Alcohol Education workshop, only to lead fraternity and sorority pledges into Meyerson Hall past an empty keg left over from a Friday afternoon graduate student social. The hypocrisy doesn't end there. The University Bookstore sells tall shot glasses with the following increments printed on the side: "Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, Graduate." What kind of message does this send? That by the time you get out of the University of Pennsylvania, you'll be able to do double shots of alcohol? In light of the recent tragedy involving an alumnus, is that the message Penn really wants to send? Third, the way in which administrators have dealt with the student body regarding this matter is shameful. If University officials are going to make such a monumental change in campus rules, they owe it to the student body to consult undergraduate representatives. They didn't. That said, they owe it to the student body to then meet with them the weekend of the announcement. They didn't do that either, breaking a promise they made to meet with campus leaders as soon as possible. Provost Barchi stated in last Friday's DP that he would meet with students that day. Four days have elapsed since the policy was handed down, and at the time you're reading this, policy-making administrators have yet to meet with students. In the end, this policy sadly represents an attempt to protect the University from liability and accompanying lawsuits. It is not a long-term solution by any means, and for that matter, the University doesn't say that it is. Undergraduates will continue to drink, only now they will do so in private, perhaps behind the closed doors of their dorm rooms and away from any regulation. If University administrators want a long-term solution to this problem (and I believe they do), they should really make a concentrated effort to meet with students and discuss possible solutions. So far, all administration efforts to help with alcohol problems on campus have been miserable failures. The only solutions that have even started to work have come from students, namely the Greek system. The president's special task force organized last year made several recommendations, but by President Rodin's own admission, few of those recommendations have been implemented. Contrast Penn's ineffectiveness with the Greek system and Drug and Alcohol Resource Team, which have both implemented short-term solutions to alcohol abuse (monitors, regulation) as well as long-term solutions (education, workshops). I raised this point to President Rodin at last week's University Council meeting and was assured by her afterwards that educational programs already in place would be taken into account before any decision was made. Apparently they were not. Ultimately, this new policy and the way it was handed down represent a long series of mistakes and miscalculations by the University and its administrators. As students leaders go into meetings with Barchi tomorrow, I hope he realizes that we expect to hear proposals and suggestions for a long-term policy on alcohol that works and will replace the farce that was announced last week.