Pubdate: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Source: Michigan Daily (Ann Arbor, MI Edu)
Copyright: 2005 The Michigan Daily
Contact:  http://www.michigandaily.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/582
Author: Anne VanderMey, Daily Staff Reporter
Cited: Students for Sensible Drug Policy http://www.daregeneration.com/
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?219 (Students for Sensible Drug Policy)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 (Students - United States)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Mark+Souder
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hea.htm (Higher Education Act)

DRUG OFFENDERS MAY RECEIVE AID

Students Convicted of Drug Possession Currently Cannot Get Financial Aid

The results of a recent study may prompt members of the U.S. House of 
Representatives and Senate to repeal a provision of the Higher 
Education Act that has withheld federal financial aid from students 
convicted of a drug offense.

A study done by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that 
the provision has withheld federal financial aid from nearly 175,000 
college students, yet did not help deter drug use.

The provision that denies aid to students convicted for either the 
sale or possession of drugs was first instituted in 1998, when U.S. 
Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) tacked it on to the Higher Education Act. 
Since the bill began to be aggressively enforced in 2001, the 
provision has barred approximately 40,000 students from federal aid per year.

With the Higher Education Act currently up for renewal and review, 
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has introduced an act called 
Removing Impediments to Students' Education, which would repeal the 
entire provision. Frank said he views the punishment as unfair and 
potentially discriminatory.

"Students who have drug convictions but come from families that don't 
need financial aid aren't affected by this law," Frank told the press 
in March. "I don't condone illegal drug use, ... but preventing 
students with minor convictions from being able to pursue an 
education is counterproductive and excessive."

Souder, who initiated the provision, proposed an alternative 
amendment to it that would scale back the severity of the proposal, 
but not eliminate it. The amendment would make the penalties 
applicable only to students who committed a drug offense while 
receiving federal aid.

The current proposal renders a student ineligible for aid if they 
were convicted of a drug related offense at any time in the past, 
even in high school.

The House committee on education and the workforce said the original 
provision was never intended to retroactively penalize students who 
were convicted in the past.

"(The new amendment) would ensure that the provision serves as a 
deterrent rather than an additional reach-back; it will correct the 
misapplication," said Alexa Marrero, spokesperson for the committee.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a vocal opponent of Souder's 
provision, have argued that the partial repeal would not be enough.

"It's like slapping a bandana on a gaping wound," said Tom Angell, 
campaign director of the organization's national chapter. "It would 
still leave tens of thousands of students behind."

Margaret Rodriguez, Vice President of the University's financial aid 
office, said that the bill has had a fairly small impact on 
University students.

But Scarlett Swardlow executive director of Students For Sensible 
Drug Policy said that it is often difficult for individual 
universities to monitor how many students are denied aid as a result 
of the anti-drug provision because if an application for aid is 
denied, no explanation is given. State-by-state figures of students 
denied aid are not publicly available.

Another reason that the University may not be largely impacted is 
that much of the University's drug prosecution is handled internally.

Drug offenses handled by the Department of Public Safety instead of 
the Ann Arbor Police Department would not make a student ineligible 
to receive aid.

According to the 2005 campus safety handbook, 71 people were arrested 
on campus for drug related offenses by the DPS last year; only four 
people were arrested by the AAPD.

Even if a student is convicted of a drug offense on the state level 
they have the option of not telling anyone about it when they apply for aid.

"We have talked to parents who encourage students to lie on their 
application so that they could receive financial aid," Swardlow said.

"One of the really unfortunate consequences of this provision is that 
it's promoting dishonesty."

Rodriguez said she felt smaller schools and community colleges would 
be more affected by the provision than the University of Michigan.

Many share her concern that the law primarily affects lower income 
students, who can't get by without the aid, and students from 
minority populations who are often disproportionately convicted of 
drug related crime.

"The war on drugs was the national cry at the time, and they were 
trying to fight it on all fronts, but this probably wasn't the best 
front to be fighting it on," Rodriguez said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake