IUSA halfway there, not far enough

The IU Student Association's recent suggestions, spearheaded by President Alex Shortle, to increase knowledge of alcohol issues and expand free speech zones are certainly attractive. Meeting both goals would fulfill Vote for Pedro's spring campaign promises. However, the effectiveness of the initiatives IUSA has suggested to accomplish its goals is questionable. \nHaving a beer garden at the Indiana Memorial Union where students can see faculty drinking "responsibly" is an entertaining concept, but the conviction that IU-Bloomington will not only reverse its dry campus policy but also install a bar in its student union is unrealistic. Brad Allen, Union Board marketing director, was right to veto the idea on several counts ("Drinking, free speech on IUSA agenda," Sept. 8). The influence of graduate students and faculty on their students when it comes to drinking habits is questionable, assuming that graduate students and faculty would visit a bar in the Union at all. \nLet's move on to IUSA's next compelling enterprise. Expanding free speech zones seems like a worthy cause for IUSA to espouse, but are there actually any places on campus that are off-limits to the practice of free speech now? Technically, what sets a "free speech zone" apart from other places on campus is straightforward: When a group exercises free speech in a free speech zone, no one may ask them to leave the area or to stop protesting. In theory, groups or individuals protesting beyond the parameters of the free speech zones might be asked to leave or desist. The crucial phrase in this distinction is "in theory." \nFor years the reality has been that those areas beyond the boundaries of Dunn Meadow and the Sample Gates -- also an official area -- are governed by the same rules as free speech zones. Today's IU students rarely organize the reactionary demonstrations that made the designation of free speech zones necessary in the 1970s. We have eliminated the need for an emphasis on free speech boundaries, since the demonstrations we actually support are usually far from reactionary. So while IUSA President Alex Shortle's heart is in the right place, his initiative to expand free speech zones will only make true in statute what has been a common practice for years. \nVote For Pedro was elected to represent the student voice on campus and has fulfilled two of its campaign promises so far: kick starting the student government readership program on campus and passing out T-shirt coupons to those with basketball or football season tickets. But IUSA's attempts to increase awareness of alcohol issues and encourage free speech on campus have been either unrealistic or ineffective. Shortle has either targeted issues where IUSA has little or no power -- for example, Bloomington's public intoxication laws -- or supported ineffective initiatives, like the movement to expand virtually nonexistent free speech zone boundaries.\nAs the student body's liaison with the IUB administration, IUSA must develop and implement dynamic, realistic proposals to improve the IU student experience. Shortle might have followed through on two of his campaign promises, but he still has half of his promises to fulfill. IUSA needs to reassess its priorities and get back on track with realistic goals and effective proposals. We're waiting.