The constitutional right to freedom of association is one of the hallmarks of American society, and the cost of a postsecondary education should never include sacrificing that right. In recognition of the unique and historic role social fraternities and sororities play in offering college students outstanding opportunities for leadership development in values‐based organizations, Congress amended Title IX in 1974 to ensure institutions would not violate anti-discrimination laws if students belonged to these groups.

In recent years, there has been a growing trend for students in men’s‐only and women’s‐only organizations to be singled out for disparate regulation on college campuses, as compared to the rules imposed on students in other on-campus student organizations and/or sports teams.

These new rules include trying to force fraternities and sororities to become co‐ed against their will, inappropriate control of their membership selection processes, and collective sanctions imposed on thousands of students in a fraternity/sorority community to punish the conduct of a few students.

We understand there are many institutions that have religious or other mission‐based reasons for policies that do not recognize certain men’s‐only and women’s‐only organizations on their campuses. We are not seeking to change those policies but simply protect interfraternal organizations where they exist and thrive today.

Of voters with an opinion on the issue:

• 70 percent believe institutions should not restrict student choices, including amount borrowed, major, classes, or student organizations.
• 62 percent believe college students are mature enough to decide which organizations to join and should not be punished by school administrators for those decisions.
• 56 percent support Congress passing a law to protect the freedom of association rights of college students.

Hazing threatens the health and safety of students in high school and college and undermines an institution’s educational mission.

As values‐based organizations run by and for students, fraternities and sororities are the leading source of anti‐hazing educational programming on college campuses nationwide, but we still see instances when our members violate our values by hazing fellow students.

Federal policymakers can help educate parents and students about the dangers of hazing and how to prevent it by focusing on transparency and accountability inside all student organizations. Any federal solution on hazing must give institutions, organizations, and students the latitude to address – rather than hide – the small‐scale violations of the student code of conduct that, if not addressed, can grow into more dangerous hazing behaviors that threaten student safety.

84 percent of voters with an opinion on the issue support Congress passing a law to require increased transparency regarding college hazing incidents.

To that end, FGRC supports legislation to require institutions of higher education to maintain and update biannually a page on their websites that disclose student organization violations of the institution’s code of conduct that threaten the safety of students. We also support legislation to require institutions to include incidents of hazing in their Clery Act reporting and provide students with educational programming related to hazing.

College brings many financial burdens to students, including the cost of housing on campus. At most public institutions, students spend more money on room and board than tuition. The non‐profit student housing industry is home to several hundred thousand students nationwide and plays a vital role at a time when public universities lack the capacity to house all of their students in state‐owned facilities.

The Collegiate Housing and Infrastructure Act (CHIA) makes college more affordable for students, creates thousands of small business jobs nationwide, improves campus safety and reduces long-term student debt. CHIA eliminates an arbitrary distinction in the current tax code that allows colleges and universities to use charitable contributions to build and maintain student housing but prevents other not-for-profit student housing entities from doing the same. CHIA is one of the most cost-effective solutions to the college affordability crisis and enjoys a strong history of bipartisan support in Congress.

In the interest of fairness to students, federal tax policy should not distinguish between charitable contributions made to colleges and universities for infrastructure improvements and donations made to other not-for-profit entities for the same purpose. Providers of not-for-profit student housing, such as fraternities and sororities, should be able to utilize charitable contributions for housing infrastructure projects just as institutions of higher education do.

Allowing this change would simplify the current tax code, ending a disparity in the law and allowing interfraternal organizations to make critical property improvements to the $3 billion of affordable housing owned and offered nationwide that is used by nearly 400,000 students.