Pubdate: Sat, 09 Apr 2005
Source: Journal Gazette, The (IN)
Copyright: 2005 The Journal Gazette
Contact:  http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/908
Author: Marisa Garcia
Note: Marisa Garcia is a junior at California State Fullerton, where she
is studying sociology.

SOUDER'S DRUG PROVISION KEEPS GOOD KIDS OUT OF COLLEGE

Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., recently rejoined the education committee in
the U.S. House of Representatives. Because of his past attacks on
access to education, students around the country are worried.

In 1998, without debate or a recorded vote, Souder slipped an obscure
provision into the Higher Education Act that strips financial aid from
students who have drug convictions. Since that time, more than 160,000
students have been affected by Souder's HEA drug provision.

I am one of those students.

Back in January 2000, I was caught with a pipe containing marijuana
residue. I pleaded guilty, paid my fine and thought I'd be able to
move on with my life, so I didn't bother telling my mom. But when it
came time to fill out my financial aid application together, we came
across a question asking if I'd ever been convicted on a drug charge.
I had to fess up.

Although my mom was understandably disappointed with me, she didn't
want my mistake to prevent me from going to college. But without
financial aid it was nearly impossible to continue my education.
Luckily, my mom was refinancing our house at the time, so she had some
extra money to help me pay for tuition. She even offered to let me
charge my schoolbooks on her credit card so I could afford to stay in
school.

Over the past six years, most major education, addiction recovery,
civil rights and student organizations have said that Souder's law is
a bad idea. Some of the more than 180 organizations that have risen in
opposition to Souder's HEA drug provision are the National Education
Association, the National Association of Student Financial Aid
Administrators, the Association for Addiction Professionals, the NAACP
and the United States Student Association.

In response to this growing outrage, Souder has backtracked, saying
that his own law should be scaled back and calling its current
enforcement "Draconian." He claims he meant for the law to apply only
to students who get convicted while they're attending college, but
that the Department of Education is misinterpreting the law by also
denying aid to students with convictions in the past.

But blaming his own mistakes on others doesn't help the victims of his
fundamentally flawed law. Under Souder's new proposal, students who
were convicted before they were enrolled in college would now be
eligible to receive aid, but thousands of students would be left
behind, and the harms inherent in the HEA drug provision would remain
unaddressed.

Souder's new proposal wouldn't have helped me because I was convicted
when I was already enrolled in school.

Even with Souder's proposed changes, the HEA drug provision would
still have an unfair impact on minorities because of the
discriminatory enforcement of drug laws.

It would still only affect students from low- and middle-income
families, since wealthier students can afford tuition on their own and
don't have to worry about losing access to college because of a drug
conviction. Souder even remarked that his law couldn't affect his own
son because he doesn't rely on public aid to go to school.

Since there are already minimum GPA requirements for receiving
financial aid, Souder's law would still only affect students who are
doing well in school.

The drug question's appearance on the financial aid application would
still deter many students from applying, even if they're actually eligible.

Put simply, pulling students out of school does nothing to keep them
away from drugs and out of the criminal justice system.

Souder has been talking about changing his law for several years but
hasn't done anything to make it happen. This shows that while he's
more than happy to talk the talk, he doesn't care enough about the
victims of his law to truly walk the walk.

Just last month, the congressionally appointed Advisory Committee on
Student Financial Assistance recommended that Souder's law be
repealed. They called his law "irrelevant" and said that the drug
question "... add(s) complexity to the form and can deter some
students from applying for financial aid." Congress should follow the
committee's recommendation and repeal the HEA drug provision in full.

It's time for Rep. Souder to come clean and admit that writing the HEA
drug provision was a horrible mistake. His new proposal is simply a
diversion meant to fool voters into thinking he cares about students.
Thousands of young people like me continue to be unnecessarily hurt by
Souder's wrongheaded law every year, and his new proposal won't help
many of them.

* Marisa Garcia is a junior at California State Fullerton, where she
is studying sociology. She wrote this for The Journal Gazette.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek