Pubdate: Thu, 08 Mar 2007
Source: Daily Sundial, The (CA Edu)
Copyright: Daily Sundial 2007
Contact:  http://sundial.csun.edu/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2731
Author: Paul Castillo
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hea.htm (Higher Education Act)

FINANCIAL AID DENIAL INEFFECTIVE AT CURBING DOPE USE

Financial Aid Denial Ineffective At Curbing Dope Use

Experimentation with illegal drugs is a stereotypical college 
activity. It seems like one of those things that you're supposed to 
do in college. Drug use during college is such a societal norm that 
even the nerds in "Revenge of the Nerds" smoked marijuana!

But, since the passage of the Higher Education Act of 1998, the 
consequences of getting caught have gotten a new, potentially 
crippling penalty for college students. Since the passage of the act, 
those who are convicted of a drug crime will be ineligible for 
financial aid from the government for a minimum of two years if they 
don't have the option to take a drug rehabilitation program.

This hasn't proved to be a very effective deterrent for keeping young 
people from engaging in these near ritual experimentations. According 
to crime statistics from the FBI, drug abuse charges for people under 
the age of 25 have risen from about 512,000 in 1998 to about 621,000 
in 2005, an increase of about 21 percent. While the possible causes 
of the increase in drug charges are many and varied, it does seem 
quite certain that there aren't less college students doing drugs. 
The number of students doing drugs is more likely to have increased 
than decreased.

So why have this penalty against college students or others likely to 
soon to be in need of financial aid, such as high school seniors? 
This penalty isn't even all that big a deal for every college student 
convicted of a drug charge. While there are many who rely on 
financial aid, there are also many college students who don't use 
financial aid from the government who would be entirely unaffected. 
There are students who are capable of paying for tuition on their 
own, and scholarships abound for those who choose to look for them, 
and this law doesn't stop those convicted of a drug crime from 
receiving scholarships. There are even organizations that set up 
scholarships for those who have been convicted of a drug crime.

Of course, for those who are convicted of a felony and don't have the 
safety net of a good family, finding a way to pay for college is the 
least of their concerns. Facets of life we take for granted, from 
getting a job to finding adequate housing, are extraordinarily 
difficult for those who have been convicted of a felony, which many 
drug crimes are. No longer being eligible for financial aid just 
seems like a cruel twist of the knife.

Who is really hurt by this law, then? If it's so easy to get around 
this supposed deterrent, then why not leave it in place? Isn't even 
the smallest deterrent worthwhile as long as someone is saved from a 
more difficult future? The answer, of course, is no.

This deterrent, as with any deterrent that isn't effective, should be 
removed. Now those who are most affected by this law are those in the 
lower-income brackets, those who need financial aid the most. Instead 
of helping those who show promise even though they've made some 
mistakes, the government's program of financial aid has been 
subverted to keep those who it could serve best from taking advantage 
of this opportunity.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom