I will stand up in front of all and say that Pennsylvania funds higher education HORRIBLY. They fund the state owned universities just about worse than Penn State, but in both cases the schools are funded horribly. However, Penn State needs to learn how to live and make it work with what it has before it continues to build and build and build. Should another massive bank crisis hit ala 1929, Penn State will be screwed for sure with $1 billion loaned.

1) Kevin routinely avoided responsibility. You are responsible for the company you keep - even if they are from another school.

2) After you break a rule is not the time to debate the ethics or validity of that rule. The rule has been around for more than ten years, and Phi Delt’s national claim to fame is this alcohol-free housing rule, AND it is included in the new member program, so there is little excuse for not knowing that this rule exists.

3) Penn State student affairs won’t recognize a chapter that is not recognized by its own national, so Fraternity & Sorority Life won’t support people who break their own national rules.

4) My suggestion for the chapter: instead of rabble rousing and shouting at the top of your lungs how you disagree with all of this, Kevin, you are a very articulate guy. I was impressed with what you had to say and how well you said it. Sit down with Phi Delt leadership, your alumni, and Penn State (Roy Baker or someone else) to work out a plan to keep the chapter there. You may have to compromise your stance on alcohol-free housing, but what is the overall goal here: to have alcohol in your house or keep your fraternity chapter?

PSU acquired a vast number of small trailers for married veterans. For singles, army barracks were put up on the east side of campus. Veteran students, used to camp, fort and base facilities like Officer’s Clubs and Enlisted Men’s Clubs sough such facilities for PSU. The Temporary Union Building was a former USO club that was acquired and erected behind the Infirmary.

At the same time, the National Student Association was being formed, largely because veterans were seeking a voice in student affairs on campus and a national voice in Washington. Penn State sent delegates to regional and national conferences, discovering that Big Ten and other Universities had “Union Buildings.” The PSU delegates were often members of Lion’s Paw.

Thus, an effort to acquire a new Union Building for PSU was begun. The state would only fund classroom and lab buildings at the time. LP leadership proposed a student fee through the All-College Cabinet to create a fund to construct a proper Union Building. The proposal was to be put to a student referendum, as the fee was to be $15.00 per semester. Certain students were opposed to this and held marches and other demonstrations against the idea, largely for monetary reasons.

Even with that, the Trustees received the proposal and voted after the Spring Semester was over to avoid any opposing demonstrations against their action. While LP acted behind the scenes in the entire process, the Hetzel Union Building, which opened in April 1955, is a monument to mature student government in action and something for which LP leadership can be justly proud.

*Well, at least they’re honest

I tend to be very skeptical of both the praticalities and economics of applying US labor standards across the globe; but I would be far more sympathetic to these protestors had they not gone out of their way to get arrested. Obviously, sometimes you need to make a splash to get some attention, but there’s a line you just don’t cross. The administration might not be playing nicely with the labor protestors, but they certainly aren’t playing unfairly.

Students and administrators should work to liberalize speech and the time/place/manner restrictions even more, and Safeguard Old State should take the lead on that. But no one should think that the mere fact of participation in political activism magically eliminates responsibility to act within the boundaries of both the law and valid PSU regulations. These protestors knew what they were getting into, were asked to leave, and did not. They violated the law, and yes, that may hurt them in the job market. Employers generally don’t like to see a pattern of flouting reasonable (i.e. constitutional) rules, lack of respect, and poor judgment in balancing benefits and consequences. Did they really think Spanier would become convinced by these antics? Of course not, it was a publicity stunt, and publicity stunts have costs. Hopefully, no one involved is too harmed, but hopefully there are some lessons learned- both in terms of professionalism and in terms of judgment.

This is amazing. I don’t always agree with the content of this blog (although mostly, I do), but I am continually impressed by the level of investigative work that you undertake. Unfortunately, only a select group of students who are actively involved in the University have a working knowledge about the administration and the severe lack of student-centeredness that exists there. By pushing for transparency and by making publicly available documents such as these, you are are truly creating the opportunity for a shift in the public consciousness. Its time the administration learned that we, as students, are absolutely going to hold them accountable. No more wool over the eyes, no more hypocritical rhetoric about a student centered university.

I hope this puts some things in perspective. 3 times the crime during a university sanctioned event than State Patty’s. Now who looks silly?