University of Virginia Library

IFC Proposals

Four proposed constitutional changes are
being debated in the University's fraternities
this week in preparation for a vote
in next Monday's Inter-Fraternity Council
meeting. One of the three, a by-law establishing
standing committees for the IFC,
seems a routine procedural matter that
should be approved with no difficulty. The
other three proposals, however, affect, to
one degree or another, every student at the
University.

The first (Article III, Section 1.) sets up
a "President's Council" composed of the
president of each house. "This Council shall
meet with the Governing Board of the IFC
at least once a month to advise and implement
all matters of policy," the article
reads. We see little need for such a council.
The procedure of calling special presidents'
meetings when the need arises seems to
have worked well in the past. Lack of communication
with the houses has been cited
as the rationale for such a council, but
there would be no such lack if the regular
IFC representatives performed their duties
conscientiously and if the position of IFC
president were a well respected one.

Consideration of the president's role leads
us to a second proposal (Article V, Section
1), this one providing for a year's term
for the president and vice-president and
semester terms for the other two officers.
As Mr. Canevari once remarked, just when
the Dean's Office and the 3-3-3 Committee
develops a good working relationship with
the IFC president, he is likely to go out of
office. In addition to the advantages of a
year's experience in the office, there is the
additional consideration that the person
elected for a full year would be much less
susceptible to political pressures since he
wouldn't have to face a re-election campaign
in which his firmness in dealing with the
member houses could cost him votes. Many
fraternities favor a weak president, of course,
but we feel a stronger leader will prove
to the fraternities' advantage in the long
run-in his improved bargaining position
with the administration, if nothing else.

The third proposal (Article IX) in essence
is a tightening of the closed party rule.
We hope it is defeated, both for the burdensome
paperwork its enforcement would require
and for its effect of preventing a
number of independents from enjoying the
weekend entertainment provided in the past
free of charge to them by the fraternities.
Provided a house has an efficient doorman,
the closed party rule as it now exists seems
quite sufficient to prevent the thefts and
disorder that plagued house parties in the
past.