Ohio University President Roderick McDavis is not among a list of presidents and chancellors who have submitted their names to a petition to lower the drinking age to 18.

The Amethyst Initiative, a project of the nonprofit organization Choose Responsibility, began contacting university officials privately during May. The group informed university presidents and chancellors of the plan and gave them time to discuss and decide their stance. The petition was publicly launched in July, and its list of supporters has grown every day.

President McDavis has not signed on to the petition. Because he is out of town, interviews were referred to Dr. Kent Smith, vice president for Student Affairs.

“High risk drinking is a national issue,” Smith said. “If this is something that will bring attention and awareness — then I’m all for it.”

Grace Kronenberg, the assistant to the director of Choose Responsibility, calls the petition a “catalyst for debate.”

“There’s a distinction between calling for a lower drinking age, which we are not doing, (and) calling for a debate,” Kronenberg said. Choose Responsibility is advocating discussion of their belief that enforcing the drinking age isn’t the only alternative.

The bottom line for Amethyst Initiative is that the 21-year-old drinking age is not working. Their Web site claims presidents and chancellors agree that the law “has created a culture of dangerous binge drinking on their campuses.”Julie Leggett, the regional executive director of MADD’s Cleveland branch, agreed that the petition could start a much-needed conversation, but she did not agree with lowering the drinking age.

Leggett said MADD believes lowering the drinking age will cause the number of drunken driving related accidents to increase, along with other problems caused by alcohol.

“It just doesn’t make sense to increase access to alcohol,” Leggett said, adding that their organization was very surprised when they heard about the Amethyst Initiative. While they understand that underage people are still finding a way to drink, the important difference is that there are now penalties.

Smith opposes lowering the drinking age, citing research that supports the 21-year-old drinking age. Smith explained his past experience as an administrator has shaped his stance on student’s alcohol use. Throughout his career, he has had to call 11 parents to inform them their child had died as a direct result of alcohol.

Smith said new research in the area could sway his opinion.

“Certainly young people are being exposed to more,” he said. “Maybe students are more mature. The college effect is very real.”

Bars and liquor stores within close vicinity of campus probably impact a student’s decision to drink, he said, recalling a study he’d read that said on average, students who attended college drank more.