Peer universities debate drinking initiative
By Suzanne Arian
Contributing Writer
Susquehanna University President Jay Lemons signed the Amethyst Initiative this month, joining the dialogue on student drinking.
Lemons joined 130 university and college presidents and chancellors willing to engage in dialogue regarding the minimum drinking age and the irresponsible, alcohol-related behavior they believe it causes on campuses.
The goal of the initiative is not to incite change in current laws at this point, but to encourage the public, especially lawmakers, to talk about the law and its consequences, according to the Amethyst Initiative Web site.
University President Brian C. Mitchell has not signed the statement.
“The University doesn’t have an official position on [the Amethyst Initiative],” Chief of Staff David Myers said.
Myers agrees an informed discussion by lawmakers on the legal drinking age is a good thing.
But signing the declaration would create too committed a position, something the president and University wish to avoid for the time being, Myers said.
The initiative began in July with John McCardell, president emeritus of Middlebury College, and a few other college presidents saying a drinking age of 21 is not working.
Technically, state governments set the drinking age.
But since Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, states lose 10 percent of their annual federal highway apportionment under the Federal Aid Highway Act if they set the minimum age lower than 21.
The national response has been mixed.
The initiative’s supporters cite the growing college culture of binge-drinking as a major reason laws need to be discussed, according the initiative Web site.
They also said that current drinking laws lead to an erosion of young adults’ respect for all types of laws, an effect of the use of fake IDs.
“It is ludicrous that we can send young men and women to war, but they can’t legally drink a beer. They can vote for our next president, but they can’t legally drink a glass of wine,” David C. Joyce, president of Ripon College, said on the Web site.
Other signers complain about ineffective alcohol education programs which promote abstinence as the only legal option instead of focusing on moderation and responsibility, according to Web site testimonials.
One group opposing the initiative is Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). It says there has been a decline in alcohol-related driving accidents since the National Minimum Drinking Age Act was passed.
At the University, Bob Thomas, coordinator of alcohol and other drug programs at Student Health Services, said debate is a good thing and will tell us whether to change current laws.
As a counselor, he does not support lowering the minimum drinking age because alcohol abuse during college years can negatively affect brain development.
He also said that if those under 21 are legally permitted to purchase alcohol then even younger students will have easier access to it.
Many students, while neither for nor against the initiative, said they don’t think lowering the drinking age will change anything.
“I don’t think [students] are binge drinking because they’re not allowed to drink,” Chanel Trader ’09 said. Changing the laws wouldn’t change student behavior, she said.
“Drinking is not going to go away [on college campuses],” Chris Zapp ’11 said.
For more information, see the Amethyst Initiative’s Web site, http://www.AmethystInitiative.org.
