Pubdate: Mon, 08 Apr 2002
Source: GW Hatchet (DC)
Copyright: 2002 The GW Hatchet
Contact:  http://www.gwhatchet.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/757
Author: Carolyn Lunman
Note: The writer, a sophomore majoring in international affairs, is a 
member of GW Students for Sensible Drug Policy (http://www.ssdp.org)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hea.htm (Higher Education Act)

TAKING AWAY AID HURTS THOSE PURSUING HIGHER EDUCATION

Former President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "We have entered an age 
in which education is not just a luxury permitting some men an 
advantage over others. It has become a necessity without which a 
person is defenseless in this complex industrial society." It is for 
this reason that the landmark Higher Education Act was passed in 1965 
to insure every child in America more equal access to education. In 
1998, Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) tacked a provision onto this law that 
is against the very spirit of the Higher Education Act.

This amendment, the Drug-Free Student Aid Provision, denies federal 
financial aid to students with drug convictions for periods ranging 
from one year to indefinitely, depending on the conviction. Students 
may have the aid reinstated only if they complete a rehabilitation 
program and pass two drug tests.

What's wrong with this law? It hurts the working class students who 
need federal financial aid. These students may not have enough money 
for the drug treatment that could reinstate their aid, especially 
considering how little money the federal government puts into such 
programs. The law has no impact on wealthy students with drug 
convictions.

The provision discriminates against minorities. For example, African 
Americans comprise 13 percent of the nation's population and 13 
percent of the nation's drug users, yet this demographic constitutes 
55 percent of drug convictions. African Americans and other 
minorities are disproportionately affected by this law.

Has this law reached its goal of making students free from drugs? 
Look around campus and decide for yourself. Denying underprivileged 
students education, which has been proven repeatedly to be the best 
anti-drug and the best weapon against poverty, has not reduced drug 
use.

Some may say that financial aid is a privilege, not a right. However, 
this privilege is being afforded to thieves, rapists, murderers and 
others convicted of violent crimes. What makes those with drug 
convictions, many of which are non-violent, less worthy of education 
than other criminals? Don't they deserve a second chance too?

Apparently not. Once others pay their debt to society based on the 
sentence the judge hands down to them they are free to rebuild their 
lives. Those convicted of drug crimes, no matter how minor, are 
denied access to education, which is so essential to succeed in 
today's society.

The first thing we must all do as students who understand the 
importance of education is write Congress, encouraging them to 
support HR 786, which repeals the provision.

The second thing we must do is encourage the Student Association to 
join nearly a hundred other student government across the country to 
pass a resolution saying that they, as representatives of our student 
body, encourage Congress to reevaluate the law based on its flaws.

The SA has an opportunity to do this Tuesday and I hope they will, as 
the SA did two years ago.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh