Debaters challenge wet vs. dry campus

by Janelle Krug
Staff Writer

Students stumbled into La Fetra auditorium last Thursday to debate the relative merits of ULV’s “dry” campus policy and whether it should go to “wet” instead.

The debate was led by the Lordsburg Debate Union, an independent student group, who chose the topic because it is a hot issue on campus, they said.

“We want students to get involved,” said Amanda Elsasser, vice president of Lordsburg. “Everyone has a voice.”

The debate started with opening speeches giving a brief explanation of each side of the issue.

The first speech was pro wet campus, given by ULV assistant housing director Eugene Shang. He gave examples of other wet college campuses around Southern California. Most of those schools have strict policies on regulating alcohol consumption, he said.

For example if a club wanted to have an event on campus that would serve alcohol, they would have to get approved by several committees first. Additionally, alcohol can only enter dorm rooms with students 21 and older.

Shang said that having a wet campus could generate more money for the school, citing examples that some schools have beer gardens at sporting events. The money raised could go toward paying for campus safety and alcohol awareness programs, he said.

Jasmine Carrillo, president of the Residence Hall Association, presented the next speech arguing to keep ULV alcohol free.

She questioned why ULV would need to be a wet campus, when people can walk less than a block to Nick’s, T. Phillips or Warehouse Pizza to get a drink.

And she touched on the problems that would come with a wet campus, such as students missing class, increased injuries and unprotected sex.

Next the members of the Lordsburg Debate Union took turns giving a five-minute argument either for or against a wet campus.

They all addressed the same issues that Shang and Carrillo had presented, but they exaggerated to to make their points.

On the side for a dry campus were Rob Ruiz, junior, Rida Fatima, freshman, and Xochitl Garcia, junior, arguing that if ULV becomes a wet campus there will be mass chaos on campus. Students will do poorly in class and there will be increased fighting and vandalism, they said.

They also argued that ULV probably could not get a liquor license from the city of La Verne to serve alcohol on campus. For the wet campus argument, Taylor Harry, freshman, Manuel Perez, senior, and Travis Raymond, senior, used humor and occasional sips from a flask to get their point across. They said that the classes are boring and students should be able to drink in order to tolerate them, and that everyone drinks anyway.

“Everyone needs to get drunk once in a while,” Harry said, “Everyone needs to relax.”

Financial issues were also addressed. Those arguing for a wet campus said it would bring in more money to the school through selling alcohol at sporting events and on campus at the Spot.

The dry side argued that this school depends on academics; it needs students to do well to create successful alumni. If ULV was a wet campus, they argued, student grades would decline.

Debaters noted that the University trustees are split 6-6 in the issue. The debate ended with an open floor speech, where people from the audience could go up on stage and give their personal opinions.

Most students who attended the debate were strongly in favor of a wet campus.

“I think the administration should get more involved and listen to the students; even non-drinkers support a wet campus,” said sophomore Michelle McPherson.

Even the students who spoke for a dry campus came up again to give their personal opinions, which were mostly for a wet campus.

Debaters said they were pleased with the outcome of the debate, and hoped it would evoke change.

“It will make a change,” Garcia said. “The people that came out will have an intelligent argument.”