Tuesday August 28, 2001 |

The UA fraternities are pulling the wool over the eyes of the students, the administration and the community.

Last week, a resolution was passed that limited the number of alcohol-related on-campus greek events to just four per year. This may seem like a giant step for University of Arizona's greek system because it was allowed to have five to eight on-campus parties last year and an unlimited amount the year before that.

However, on closer inspection, this policy loosens a rule approved in fall 1999 that would have allowed only one on-campus party this semester, at Homecoming.

The new resolution limits on-campus parties to "Bid Night," Homecoming, the last weekend before spring semester finals and one yet-to-be-determined date.

Of course, fraternities can still have as many off-campus parties as they wish. The resolution passed last Tuesday was not a decision by the IFC to tone down the on-campus parties as much as it was a ruling to amend the 1999 resolution that would have limited houses to one on-campus party per year.

The IFC has reneged on a previous vow to curb on-campus partying.

In a statement by IFC President Mike Moran, it appears as if IFC is attempting to tighten its belt.

"I would imagine that (UA's IFC rules) are stricter that the average," Moran said.

But the truth is that IFC is, in fact, loosening its belt.

The reason for the change is fairly obvious. IFC wanted more on-campus parties than they had anticipated, and that's completely understandable.

On-campus parties have a higher draw and fraternities simply prefer to have parties at their houses.

Kim Tobiason, Greek Life graduate assistant, offers another reason altogether - she said IFC and the presidents of the fraternities that ultimately made this decision decided to amend the 1999 resolution and reinstate on-campus parties because fraternities have more control on campus.

"They can better look after their guests and members," she said. "GAMMA (Greeks Advocating the Mature Management of Alcohol) rules could be better enforced (during on-campus parties)."

From her statement, it seems logical to infer that GAMMA rules were not enforced well last year at off-campus parties.

The GAMMA rules are a set of guidelines for all fraternity parties that are enforced by the organization, which is a selection of members from the fraternities and sororities on campus. Tobiason's hope that bringing more parties back on-campus will lead to higher control by GAMMA and fraternities is unfounded and illogical.

The resolution does nothing to restrict the amount of off-campus parties. In fact, fraternities could have twice as many off-campus parties if they wished despite the fact that these parties that are difficult to both patrol and keep under control.

The IFC's timing is terrible, and it reflects badly on the council and the greek system as a whole. Its decision to amend a decision the moment it was going to take effect puts its legitimacy as a governing body in question.

The GAMMA rules must be enforced - it's absurd to believe that the best people to enforce them are greeks. This latest decision by the IFC leaves this university with a question - is the greek system trustworthy enough to police themselves?