Penn State College Republicans has formed a committee to fight the negative response members say they have received from many Penn State administrators and students after several members attended a controversial Halloween party.

College Republicans chair Brian Battaglia said the organization is carrying a "business as usual" attitude through this semester.

Battaglia said the past incidents have taken so much of the College Republicans' time, the group recently formed a standing committee to counter the demands made by Black Caucus and to come up with better ways to deal with the situation.

"People don't come to the club to talk about this issue, but the committee allows them the opportunity, while the club still functions," he said.

The committee has already met, and the issue has been discussed, but no action has been taken yet, Battaglia said. He confirmed the group has made contact with legal council for possible use in the future, if the university were to try to reprimand the group for exercising what members said are their First Amendment rights.

Bill Mahon, Penn State spokesman, said rumors about any type of university imposed "speech codes" that would monitor student groups' speech were untrue.

"We would be breaking the law if we had a system to penalize individuals for using their right to free speech, even if it is repugnant. The university will not step in and break federal laws," he said.

Tiffiany Iriana, College Republicans secretary, said the committee was formed so the group could stay focused on things like the upcoming presidential campaign.

"We are working on deciding what our plan of action will be," she said. "We really do want to move past this, but we are prepared to deal with any form of ramifications."

Undergraduate Student Government (USG) Vice President Takkeem Morgan, said he was unaware of the new committee.

"I think the more protection against rebuke from the student body, the more they will put themselves in a hole in the eyes of the students," he said.

After last semester, heated debate has put the College Republicans and other groups like USG and Black Caucus on opposite sides.

Battaglia said his organization has no problems with any groups or their existence. However, he said members do have a problem with the way some groups have been handling the situation.

"[USG and Black Caucus] are trying to blacklist the club and republicans on this campus," he said.

Battaglia said all the demands set by Black Caucus and other groups are unacceptable ways to resolve the issue.

Acting Black Caucus Vice President Ed Smith said he was also unaware of the new committee.

"It is not an 'us verses them' thing. We think it is much bigger than that. We are not trying to make it into that. It is a problem that lies within the school, not them," he said.

Smith said Black Caucus' list of demands is not an attack against the College Republicans.

"We are only trying to create a safer environment for students of color and all people. This is not only about black people. Black people are not the only ones who should feel uncomfortable," he said.

Smith said he realized after issuing the demands that some of them were not legally possible. Black Caucus is planning a revision of their demands; however, Smith would not offer any details. It is currently unknown when the revised demands would be made public.

"We understand that some negotiation has to be done, but we want to be taken seriously. Student groups shouldn't have to beg to be taken seriously," Smith said.

Battaglia said Black Caucus and USG have gone after the College Republicans, not by talking, but by going to national media and turning it into a larger political issue, he said.

Morgan said this is not a political issue, nor simply one of race, but it is a matter of respecting one another.

"Some of the leadership within the College Republicans don't understand that. This is not about the First Amendment; the law protects the minority viewpoint. But this is about respect, not a minority viewpoint," he added.

Mahon said speaking out is the best feasible action the university can take against "hateful speech."

"The university was quick to do that; we used our right to condemn their actions and I think it was done beautifully," Mahon said.

The way they tried to respond says a lot about some members' character, he said.

Terrell Jones, vice provost for educational equity, also said any speech codes would be illegal and most likely unsuccessful. Institutions of higher education try not to restrict ideals of free speech, he said

Battaglia said the university has been slanderous and libelous toward the group by issuing public spoken and written statements condemning the incidents.

In an e-mail message, Penn State President Graham Spanier said, "I can say that the university is certainly not guilty of libel or slander. We stand behind any official statements made on behalf of the university."

In reaction to Battaglia's allegations, Jones said he did not know how the group could blame people for being disgruntled about this.

"We were responding to concerned students. You can't create the situation and then play the victim; it is just disingenuous," he said.

Jones said the big picture is not what happened but what will happen from now on. He added it could be time for the group to stop blaming others.

"I think the university acted very responsibly. Maybe it is time for the College Republicans to be more introspective," he added.

Some College Republicans are pessimistic about reaching an equally satisfying resolution.

"It doesn't seem like they are interested in peaceful resolution," Iriana said.

Morgan said he is not too concerned with an "equally satisfying" resolution.

"It's not about being equally satisfied; it is about teaching respect," he said. "Equal damage wasn't done; the element of equality is not necessary in this case."