Perspective

New drug law is attack on college students

By Larissa Price

Today in the United States, college students are denied student loans if they have been convicted of any state or federal drug offenses. This is in accordance with Section 484, subjection ‘r’ of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1998, which came into effect this past July. According to the Department of Education, an estimated 8,100 students have lost some or all of their federal aid in the 2000-2001 school year. This bill clearly does more harm than good. By increasing the number of students who are denied loans, it in turn becomes a very harsh penalty on students from low income families. One would think that the government would want to encourage people to seek higher education. But now, those who were struggling to make it through college in the first place now have to drop out of school.

The Department of Education has even spoken out against the student loan provision of the HEA reminding lawmakers, pointing out that judges already have the power to take away student aid if they feel it is appropriate punishment. Judges were able to use their own discretion, going on a case-by-case basis. Now these particular students will lose their federal aid no matter how minor the charges may be.

For anyone who is a proponent of this bill, it should be noted that there are no similar laws for rapists, murderers, robbers, or those convicted on assault. Why is there a different standard for drug use? One who has smoked pot on occasion will lose their financial aid before a murderer would, according to this legislation. Why the government would punish a drug user more harshly than they would a murderer or rapist is baffling. Drug users are far less dangerous to society when compared to such other violent offenders. 

In fact, some people today are beginning to realize that drug users are not directly a threat to society, but rather only threatening their own well being. Keppie Keppel, high school junior, agrees with this, saying, "I do not support this law. Just because someone is a drug user, that isn’t something that should determine whether they receive financial aid."

Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), has introduced a bill to repeal this federal provision. Frank says, "Someone who commits murder or armed robbery is not automatically barred from financial aid eligibility, but if you have even one non-violent drug conviction, you can’t get aid for a year.

Authorities previously had the discretion to bar aid to people based on the severity of their crimes and whether they are taking the steps to rehabilitate themselves. My bill would simply restore that discretion." Frank’s bill is co-sponsored by Maxine Waters (D-CA), Connie Morella (R-MD), and Eleanor Holmes-Norton(D-DC), among twenty-three other representatives.

Over seventy civil and national educational groups including the NAACP, ACLU, and NORML have also endorsed the bill would repeal those previous provisions. This bill is an attack on the youth of America. Young people wishing to make something of themselves may be stopped from receiving higher education because of this law. Even if a student tried smoking pot once and were caught, he or she would lose financial aid. In a society where it is deemed necessary to receive a college education in order to become successful, the government should make all opportunities open to those who do not pose a direct threat to society.

Some students are convicted on minor, non-violent charges, but are still denied aid. Kate Wetzel, high school junior, states, "I don’t think it should rule out your chance at financial aid because people make mistakes." With the support of law makers and civil rights organizations, this law will be repealed and eligibility will be restored to students convicted of minor charges who are clearly worthy of receiving financial aid.