An ongoing debate over a federal law raises the question of whether the government should just say no to giving financial aid to students with drug convictions.
As part of the 1998 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, a law initially passed in 1965, Congress inserted a regulation preventing students with certain drug convictions from receiving financial aid.
Students who are convicted of drug possession once are denied aid for a year, twice are denied aid for two years, and thrice are denied aid indefinitely.
A first conviction for selling drugs prompts a two-year denial of aid, while any second sales conviction prompts an indefinite suspension.
Students can start receiving aid again before their suspension period is up, if they complete a drug rehabilitation program that meets certain government standards.
Underage use or possession of alcohol or cigarettes is not covered under the law.
Congressman Mark Souder, R-Ind., the law's original sponsor, says the rules are justified to ensure that the government's money is spent in the best possible way.
"Students who receive financial aid from taxpayer money should live within the law," Souder spokesman Seth Becker said.
Inconsistent Enforcement
Though Souder continues to favor the concept of the law, Becker said Souder has not been pleased by the way it has worked in practice, particularly over the last two years.
Though the provision became law in 1998, it was loosely enforced by Bill Clinton's administration.
During Clinton's tenure, students who left the question about drug convictions blank on their Free Application for Federal Student Aid form were able to receive aid, said Ben Gaines, coordinator of the Coalition for Higher Education Act Reform.
Under George W. Bush's administration, however, Education Department officials have not been so lenient.
The rules were enforced to their fullest extent for the first time for the 2001-2002 school year, resulting in the denial of aid to 48,629 students, Gaines said.
The rules also may have deterred other students from asking for money in the first place, he said.
"A lot of people have chosen not to seek aid," Gaines added.
Differing Interpretations
One reason for the large number of students affected by the regulation is that department officials have interpreted the law as meaning that drug convictions prior to acceptance into college count against students.
Though still supportive of the concept of the law, Souder has said he intended for it to only pertain to convictions students receive while taking financial aid.
"We are not pleased with the way the provision is being enforced," Becker said.
Many of the students who were denied aid under the rule, likely would have been able to receive aid if the law had only applied to students who were convicted of drug offenses while receiving aid.
Such a change would "drastically reduce the number" of students denied aid, Gaines said.
Department officials have said, however, that, as the law is currently written, they are forced to withhold aid from students with drug convictions that date from before they began receiving aid.
"Our lawyers looked at the law," Education Department spokeswoman Jane Glickman said. "In the way it was written, there was no flexibility."
The Higher Education Act is up for reauthorization again this year, and Becker said Souder intends to use this as an opportunity to change the law to only affect students who are convicted of drug offenses while receiving financial aid.
Becker said he knows of no Congressman who supports the drug rule in its present form, and that he thinks the change will pass.
An Unfair Law?
Some in Congress and elsewhere are more fundamentally dissatisfied with the financial aid rule than Souder.
Congressman Barney Frank, D-Mass., has introduced legislation that would entirely scrap the law linking drug convictions and financial aid.
Frank, and others who oppose the law such as Gaines, say the law inherently discriminates based on class and race because it only affects a group of people, those who receive financial aid, who are disproportionately non-white and poor.
"This law directly targets the minorities and the lower class," said Joe Racalto, Frank's legislative assistant who specializes in education policy.
Opponents of the law also argue that higher education is a way for people with troubled pasts to overcome their problems and become productive members of society.
"The students who we should be helping the most are the ones we are hurting the worst," Gaines said.
Finally, Racalto and Gaines said drug offenses are already punished in the courts, meaning the financial aid rule amounts to a second punishment for a single offense.
"Punishment should remain in the courts, not the schools," Racalto said.
However, supporters of the provision such as Becker say the law's opponents fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the law.
Becker compared the law to rules that require students on athletic scholarships to play sports.
Just as students attending universities on an athletic scholarships lose their free ride if they do not live up to their side of the bargain by playing their sport, students receiving financial aid should lose their money if they do not uphold their end of the deal by avoiding drug convictions, he said.
"It's not a punishment," he added. "You simply have to live by the condition" of the financial aid agreement.
He also said opponents of the law are basing their criticism on the way the rule has actually been enforced, not on Souder's intention that the regulation only apply to convictions that occur while students are receiving aid.
"There are some who will use this as an excuse to take it out altogether," Becker said.
The Law's Future
Regardless of who is right in the debate over the merits of the law, Souder's supporters appear likely to win in Congress this year, thereby altering the law rather than removing it entirely.
Becker said Frank's proposal to eliminate the law is "not going to get a lot of support."
Politics Prof. Larry J. Sabato agreed, saying Frank's proposal to eliminate the law has "zero" chance of passing this year.
Democrats are much more likely to support eliminating the rule than Republicans are.
At one point last year, 56 of the 57 co-sponsors to Frank's amendment were Democrats.
Frank ultimately secured more than 60 co-sponsors to the bill last year, and he is hoping to build on that number this year.
Given that Republicans took control of both houses of Congress in November, however, the chances of the complete elimination of the financial aid restrictions passing are not high.
Even many Democrats are loath to support Frank's proposal for fear of the political consequences of such a vote, Sabato said.
"Even most Democrats are opposed to that, simply because they would be portrayed as soft on crime or soft on drugs," he said.
Racalto acknowledged Frank's proposal is unlikely to pass, barring more widespread public outcry about the law.
"Unless we get heavy public support, we're not going to get it through," Racalto said.
Supporters of full elimination of the financial aid rules say,if their effort is defeated, then they are willing to consider Souder's proposed changes as a compromise.
"If we're put in a position of helping someone or helping no one, we'd want to help someone," Racalto said.
The Law and the University
This year Congress will either reauthorize the Higher Education Act or temporarily continue the old version of the law, pending reauthorization at a later date, Sabato said.
Among its provisions, the Higher Education Act includes money for financial aid, aid to colleges and universities, and funding to help K-12 students prepare for college and to improve teacher training.
Any changes Congress makes to the act could have significant effects on the University and on student indebtedness, University Director of Financial Services Yvonne Hubbard said.
"The whole question of the ratio of grants to loans" will be one issue Congress will address during the reauthorization, she said.
Despite the overall importance of the Higher Education Act, most attention and controversy has focused on the drug conviction provision.
If a University student did lose financial aid as a result of the provision, then the University would likely help him or her complete the rehabilitation program in order to regain eligibility, Hubbard said.
She said, however, few University students have been affected by the regulation.
"It's very, very low for us," she added. "I don't know if we've had one."
Read More
Students have federal internship offers rescinded due to hiring freeze
By Nina Broderick | YesterdayUntil July 15, no presently vacant federal civilian positions may be filled, and no new positions may be created.
Man dies from self-inflicted gunshot wounds at the Rotunda
By Ford McCracken | 2 days agoThe investigation is ongoing, and additional details are not available at this time.
Virginia primary elections feature contested race for Democratic Lt. Gov. candidate
By Nicolas Biernacki | 2 days agoEligible voters can find more information about early voting by consulting the City Department of Voter Registration & Elections website or the County Department of Elections website.
