FEDERAL LAWS RESTRICT FINANCIAL AID FOR STUDENTS WITH DRUG CONVICTIONS

The search for college funding can be a tough part of every student's
life. Financial aid is one effort aimed at providing federal and
state funding for those in need. Unfortunately, those convicted of
certain drug offenses while enrolled are ineligible to receive
federal financial aid.

As part of the federal government's ongoing effort to support the
success of students and increase the population's access to higher
education, the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965 was meant to
improve student access to resources and financial assistance. Part of
the initiative was a stipulation that required the HEA to be
revaluated and re-authorized roughly every four or five years.

As part of the ongoing re-authorization effort, a new provision was
added in 1998. This provision, introduced by Rep. Mark Souder
(R-Ind.), required adult students convicted of possessing or selling
illegal drugs to disclose their conviction by answering yes to a
question on their Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).
Students who answered yes to this question were then denied access to aid.

The penalty for those affected by the question range from short
periods of ineligibility to indefinite suspension of a student's
financial aid. However, students who agree to a rehabilitation
program may, in some instances, continue to be eligible.

In the 2000-01 school year, the provision went into effect and as a
result more than 175,000 students nationwide have been denied
financial aid, said Tom Angell, campaigns director for the Students
for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP). The SSDP, a non-profit organization
founded in 1998 with its head office located in Washington, D.C., has
around 100 chapters nationwide and lobbies the federal government on
behalf of student-related drug issues.

That figure does not include students who decided against filling out
an application after encountering the question or who may decide to
answer no but who have actually been convicted, Angell said.

"Congressman Souder wants to decrease drug abuse but encourages it by
blocking peoples' access to education. Federal studies show that
these efforts do not work. They're hurting our economy and society,"
Angell said.

The federal mandate effectively penalizes students repeatedly for the
same offense and also creates an atmosphere of mistrust between
students and campus administration, Angell said.

The SSDP has also been involved in an ongoing effort to receive
access to federal records showing the number of students denied
financial aid nationwide as part of the Freedom of Information Act.
After repeatedly being denied a fee-waiver by the Department of
Education, which claimed the SSDP might use the information to
subvert the war on drugs, the SSDP decided to file a lawsuit, the
outcome of which has is yet to be determined.

According to Angell, in the first academic year affected by the
question, 3 percent of students left the question unanswered. After
the first year, it was decided that students would be required to
answer the question or risk being denied financial aid.

After years of lobbying the federal government to remove the clause,
Congress recently voted to reform the provision. This reform,
scheduled for the 2006 school year, and supported by Rep. Souder,
will only affect students convicted while in school from obtaining
financial aid. Students previously denied due to convictions that
predated enrollment will again be eligible, Angell said.

At UWM, roughly 24,000 students applied for federal financial aid
during the 2004-05 school year, said Jane Hojan-Clark, director of
Financial Aid at UWM. Answering yes to the question requires that
students respond to a series of follow-up questions. Of those 24,000,
three students answered yes to the question, which automatically
disqualified them from receiving financial aid, and 21 answered "yes
or don't know." Although there is no way of cross-referencing a
student's answer with a database of convictions, the application does
mention various penalties for false information, Hojan-Clark Said.

"Any kind of requirements like that that aren't financial need
related I think can discourage students from considering higher
education," Hojan-Clark said.

Fortunately, it appears that the students here at UWM are not
substantially impacted but it is not known how many students may or
may not be applying because of certain assumptions about the
application process in relation to the drug offense question, Hojan-Clark said.

"It may discourage students who may be eligible," she said.

The provision also fails to take into account a student's academic
performance. Students are already required to maintain a
federally-mandated GPA. This provision only affects students who are
performing adequately and making sufficient progress towards a degree.

Individuals convicted of other crimes, such as murder, are still
eligible to receive federal financial aid. The exception would be
those incarcerated, Hojan-Clark said

According to Hojan-Clark, the state legislature has also
unsuccessfully attempted to pass related legislation a number of
times. Wisconsin is one state that still grants state financial aid
to those convicted of drug offenses, regardless of their federal status.

"The more non-financial need-related barriers that we connect with
the financial aid application process, (the more) we run the risk of
discouraging students from considering higher education," she said.