Pubdate: Tue, 18 Oct 2005
Source: Post, The (Ohio U, OH Edu)
Copyright: 2005 The Post
Contact: http://thepost.baker.ohiou.edu/letter.php
Website: http://thepost.baker.ohiou.edu/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1269
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hea.htm (Higher Education Act)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth)

HIGH(ER) EDUCATION

Drug Provision Inflexible, Excessive

As the U.S. Congress prepares to vote on the reauthorization of the Higher 
Education Act, one of its more controversial provisions has fallen under 
renewed scrutiny.

The legislation's drug provision, which delays or denies federal aid to 
applicants with past drug convictions, has been singled out as unfair and 
misguided.

Much of this criticism is entirely justified. HEA's drug provision is 
clumsily devised and should be eliminated from the reauthorization process.

The Higher Education Act was passed during the Johnson administration with 
the intent to create opportunities to attend college for all would-be 
students, regardless of their financial status.

Many of the federal loans and grants used by students today were created by 
HEA. The fact that the legislation itself should be reauthorized is not 
under dispute.

However, the drug provision in question was added in 1998 and has since 
denied financial opportunities to approximately 175,000 students, not 
counting those who did not apply after learning of the provision.

The provision is another misguided aspect of the federal government's 
overzealous waging of the War on Drugs and is causing more harm than good.

The drug provision delays federal aid for one year for one offense, two 
years for two offenses and implements a life-time ban after three.

However, it in no way accommodates for the severity of a conviction. This 
is not to mention that those victimized by this provision are being unduly 
punished twice for their crimes.

Whatever sentences offenders are handed in court should be the extent of 
their punishments. Instead, they are subsequently denied opportunities to 
better themselves because of the inherent failings of a poorly designed 
piece of legislation. This provision is another in a series of backward, 
misguided laws that need to be recognized as such and challenged.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D