“Chronic” Suffering
In 1998, unbeknownst to the general public and even to most of Congress, Congressman Mark Gouder, a conservative republican from Indiana snuck an amendment into the federal Higher Education Act. His amendment, called the Aid Elimination Penalty (and known to many as the Drug-Free Student Loan Amendment), denied federal aid to aspiring college students with prior adult drug convictions. Designed to keep criminal drug offenders out of American institutions of higher education, the amendment has affected around 200,000 students over the ten years in which it has been in effect. The law has likely resulted in thousands of Americans never attending college or dropping.
Though amended in 2006, the act remains in an altered form. It now allows students with prior convictions to receive aid, but if convicted while attending school, their loans are immediately revoked. Students can regain their loans if they complete a rehabilitation or drug counseling program.
This is certainly a step in a fairer direction although there are still glaring errors in the logic behind it. While the idea sounds appealing to conservatives and Drug War supporters, it denies aid to some of the most at-risk students, further draining their already lowered chances to succeed in life. Moreover, it hurts students who are particularly hard-working and intelligent, because keeping their federal aid packages, students must keep a relatively high GPA. As Students for a Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), a grass roots campaign working to change the amendment, puts it: “Statistics and common sense tell us that it simply doesn’t make sense to pull students out of school if we want to reduce drug abuse and encourage young people to become successful citizens.” Rather than continuing with their educations and going on to get jobs, it seems likely that many of these former students end up doing more drugs and becoming repeat offenders or worse. If their downward spiral goes far enough, they may be imprisoned and become a burden on the American tax system, rather than the assets if their educations had continued.
Meanwhile, as non-violent drug offenders are losing their aid, burglars, arsonists, murderers and rapists are completely eligible to continue receiving it! Drug infractions are the only convictions covered by the amendment, so while a convicted rapist might get out of prison and get enough federal aid to go back to college, the talented artist or brilliant chemistry student who gets caught with a dime bag in his dorm room could be booted out of school.
Moreover, due to the nature of American race relations, the Aid Elimination Penalty is an inherently racist biased piece of legislation. Students from low-income families, who are often minority students, tend to use drugs more often, and racial profiling guarantees minority students are far more likely to be convicted on drug charges. According to SSDP, only 13% of American drugs users are African American, but they account for 67% of drug user convictions. The amendment’s one saving grace is that it allows students to regain their aid following rehab or counseling. But, most of the low-income students subject to losing their aid in the first place don’t have the money for these expensive programs. It is an established fact that minorities in America tend to have less access to higher education, and much effort has been put into providing them with equal chances in recent years, yet the Drug-Free Student Amendment seems poised to strike back at those gains.
Organizations like SSDP (and 250 others) are appealing the amendment’s validity but with little success so far. Many universities across the country are doing their part in keeping drug-convicted students in school. The University of California at Berkeley, Yale University, Swarthmore College, Hampshire College, and Western Washington University all have established school-funded scholarships for students who have lost financial aid from drug convictions. These are small measures, but they display solidarity with those of us who think this law ought to be thrown out with all possible speed.
RSS



3 Comments, Comment or Ping
"A Mom"
I think it’s unfair. It sounds like they are being punished for past mistakes. That’s the problem with our society. People deserve a chance to do better, that is what I thought our society was all about. We have politicians involved in all kinds of illegal dealings that affect us as a society, but they are not treated this way. I’m sure if we did a percentage on their activity it would be much higher yet they are the one who make the laws. I think this is just another way of pushing us back instead of forward.
[Reply]
Alwayswrite
Man, that is fucked up. I’m a college student and we all need money. The fact that there are certain individuals within the college student community who can not receive aid because of a mishap is ridiculous. The whole amendment fails to recognize rehabilitation in an individual.
With the new face of college students, returning college students, they might have a few blemishes on their records. And what about criminals just getting out of jail or prison from a long stint? Do they not have the right to change their lives? Yes, but with help in paying for college, “Nawww.” But, maybe that’s the plan. U.S. has a tendency to want to keep “the bottom” at the bottom and “the top” at the top.
The fact of the matter is that college is TOO FUCKING EXPENSIVE. PERIOD. Even the aid isn’t enough to really do shit nowadays. But, it’s better than nothing. It’s funny, I can picture Congressman Gouder being a rich, white kid who doesn’t even need the financial aid system. I might be wrong, but that’s my picture. So, it’s probably easier for him to just scrap money from people in need.
[Reply]
TROUBLMan
Thank you for lacing us with some critical information. I wanted to comment earlier on this post, but I was hoping more people would speak out before me. This is another example of how there are people who profit from our ignorance.
In no way do I condone drug dealing, but what if someone convicted f a drug a offense wants to straighten up there life? The government shouldn’t help them? Fuck that. It’s the people who’ve had hardships but then made a better life for themselves that young kids, especially those in the hood look up to. What better way to promote college to kids that look at school as being corny than to do it through these resilient individuals.
[Reply]
Reply to ““Chronic” Suffering”
SEE ALSO
♦ TROUBLMan - Kill Famous
February 15, 2008
♦ Boosy - Pay Off
February 22, 2008
♦ SB - Walking the Stage
May 28, 2008
♦ Lag - Pay Grade
September 8, 2008
♦ TROUBLsome - Post Baccalaureate Bullshit
January 30, 2008