Students fight having aid tied to drug convictions

-Tribune Media Service

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — When a Kansas State University sophomore went to court in December for smoking marijuana, she was worried not only about what the judge would say but also about what the U.S. Department of Education would do.

The woman, a passenger in a car stopped by police, knew about a new law that says students convicted of a drug offense will be denied federal financial aid.

She and her friend had less than an ounce of marijuana between them, and she had never been charged with a crime before. Now she was in jeopardy of losing her tuition aid. Without it, she said, she would have been forced to drop out.

“It was terrifying for me because I’ve never even had a speeding ticket,” said the 20-year-old, who asked for anonymity so that her parents and others would not learn what happened. “I’m pretty much a good kid.”

She avoided a conviction by paying a $350 fine and agreeing to supervisory probation. Now she counts herself among those across the country who are pushing for repeal of the financial aid law.

The law, which applies to misdemeanor or felony convictions of state or federal drug laws, is being enforced fully for the first time this year under the Bush administration. Previously, applicants who left the drug question blank on their application still could receive aid, but that changed this year.

Last year, out of nearly 10 million applicants, 9,200 lost all or part of their financial aid because of the law. National organizations that oppose the law predict that the number will rise to 60,000 for the coming academic year.

“We don’t feel there should be this second punishment that applies only to illegal drug users and no other criminals,” said David Borden, executive director of the Drug Reform Coordination Network, a national organization working to overturn the law. More important, he said, why should anyone be discouraged from getting a college education after paying for their crimes in a court of law?

The law is unfairly aimed at the poor and the working class, he said, and racial profiling leads to higher conviction rates for minorities.

Student governments at more than 60 universities, including the University of Missouri-Columbia, have called for repeal. Justin Mills, the incoming student president at the University of Kansas, said he was thinking about pushing for a repeal resolution next fall. Students at Kansas State said such a resolution was a long-term goal.

“I couldn’t believe that the government was doing this,” said Kansas State student Katherine Dinkel, a junior who this semester helped organize a chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy, another national group fighting the law. “I’d rather go to school with someone who’s smoking a joint than walk down a hallway with a rapist.”

The law, which took effect last July, was approved in 1998 as an amendment to the Higher Education Act. Rep. Mark Souder, an Indiana Republican, offered the amendment to hold accountable students who benefit from tax dollars, said Angela Flood, Souder’s press secretary.

“If you are asking for and receiving financial aid, then you have an obligation to maintain a certain standard of responsibility,” Flood said. “If you are using and selling drugs, you are not making the best use of the opportunity you have been given.”

Statistics at the time showed that drug use among students was increasing, Flood said. Souder probably would be open to expanding the penalties to other crimes, she said.

Flood said the law was affecting more applicants than intended because the Clinton administration had misinterpreted the law. Administration officials set it up to include applicants for aid, she said, but Souder intended it to apply only to students already receiving aid. She said her office was trying to work with the Bush administration to resolve that problem.

Under the law, students who are convicted of possessing an illegal drug lose their loans, grants and work assistance for a year from the date of their conviction. A second conviction brings a two-year loss of aid; a third an indefinite loss.

A person convicted of selling drugs for the first time loses aid for two years; a second such offense leads to an indefinite loss.

Students can regain their eligibility by completing a drug rehabilitation program that includes at least two unannounced drug tests.

Students who apply for federal aid must fill out a lengthy form. The drug issue is addressed in question 35, which asks whether the applicant has been convicted of a drug offense. Last year, 279,000 applicants who did not answer the question received aid anyway.

This year Education Secretary Rod Paige and financial aid officers decided that those who refused to answer the question would not receive aid, said Lindsey Kozberg of the U.S. Department of Education.

Of the 5 million applicants whose forms were processed from Jan. 1 through May 6, about 37,100 said they had had a conviction. Of those, 18,800 became eligible after completing a worksheet that determined eligibility, based on how long ago the crime occurred and whether the person had completed a rehabilitation program. An additional 6,700 are still being processed, and 11,600 were denied aid, Education Department statistics show.

An additional 10,000 left the question blank. They will receive notices stating that the question must be answered before the application can be processed.

About 5 million applications are yet to be processed for the 2001-2002 school year, officials estimated.

Applications are checked against several databases for drug convictions. If any part of the application is falsified, the applicant can be prosecuted.

Mark Bresnahan, student body president at MU, said the student government had voted 24-14 in favor of a resolution urging repeal of the law, with five persons abstaining.

“I could see arguments on both sides,” said Bresnahan, who did not have a vote on the matter. Those who opposed repeal said students should not be wasting government money, he said.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy has grown from two chapters two years ago to about 100, mostly because of growing opposition to the law, said Shawn Heller, the organization’s national director. An additional 200 chapters are in the works, he said.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, has introduced legislation to repeal the law. Heller hopes it will pass next spring, when the Higher Education Act comes up for reauthorization, if not sooner.

In the meantime, Heller’s group is trying to raise $100,000 to provide financial assistance to students hurt by the law. It recently handed out its first award — $600 — to Kris Sperry, 23, of Mountain Home, Ark.

Sperry said he had to drop out of Arkansas State University in January because his financial aid had been cut off. He had two misdemeanor convictions for possessing marijuana, he said.

“I’ve paid for my crimes,” Sperry said. “I’ve had my license taken; I’ve done community service.... Now I feel like I am being penalized again.”

Heller said he found it extremely hypocritical that President Bush — who refused to answer questions during the campaign about possible drug use in his past — was making students answer questions about drug convictions.

Bush likes to say that his education plan calls for leaving no child behind, Heller said. “Certainly a child trying to get his (college) education should not be left behind,” he said.