Letters to the Editor

PennForum hangover

To the Editor,

In response to the article on the underage drinking law debate held Thursday night and hosted by PennForum ("U. Uncorks Debate on Drinking Age," The Daily Pennsylvanian, 9/13/02), I would like to correct a misrepresentation made regarding Penn's approach to social events with alcohol.

I was quoted as saying the University's goal is to create "as incredible and enjoyable an atmosphere as is possible for students." This statement referred specifically to the University's desire for students to achieve the most positive and beneficial academic career possible.

The article then interjected, "and for that reason the administration does not crack down on parties." The statement is incorrect and speculative. The University has been diligently working to promote a low-risk environment whenever alcohol is present.

To this end, we require that on-campus parties hosted by undergraduate student organizations be registered and monitored. The alcohol policy also requires that parties hosted at bars, clubs and restaurants be registered.

We do not take a laissez-faire attitude toward social events with alcohol. The statement promotes an implication that the administration has a lackadaisical attitude toward alcohol use and it does not do justice to the many students, faculty and staff who have worked hard to ensure that abusive use of alcohol is reduced as much as possible.

Stephanie Ives

The writer is the director of University alcohol policy initiatives.

•

To the Editor:

In a recent article on a PennForum debate about legal drinking age, my quote was taken out of context.

I said, "If there is no respect for law... we would have to be hardliners." I meant that people who like to drink now should be happy that the law is hardly enforced. Being hardline on this issue would mimic a prohibition-era style of enforcement, which I am absolutely not supporting.

The question pointed to a contradiction Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Ken Krawchuk was making -- that while he criticized the law for not being fully enforced, he also criticized the law for even existing.

So which side does he support, the hardline or the no-line?

Doug Sherrets

Wharton '06

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.