U.S. WRONG TO DENY DRUG CONVICTS SECOND CHANCE AT SCHOOL, LOANS

The student government at University of California, Berkeley created
a school-funded scholarship Jan. 24 that would provide financial aid
to students with drug convictions.

This comes nearly 10 years after the 1998 Higher Education Act
Amendment that denies federal financial aid to drug offenders.

It's about time someone wises up and realizes the importance of
giving students who may have made a few dumb mistakes a second chance
in life, rather than condemning them to a difficult existence.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) is a nationwide organization
with chapters on college campuses that fight for the rights of
students who can't get financial aid because of previous drug convictions.

According to the group's website, ssdp.org, 200,000 college students
have been forced to put their education on hold or discontinue due to
federal law.

SSDP filed a class-action lawsuit against the Department of Education
Feb. 8, claiming the law allowed the government to "use financial aid
as a means by which to punish people convicted of a criminal offense."

Previous to the law's enaction, federal financial aid was provided
based on need and the cost of an education at any specific school.

But these days, no matter how severe your conviction, if it involves
drugs, you're out of luck. What this law doesn't take into account is
the severity of the offense. One-time pot smokers can't be equated to
cocaine dealers by any stretch of the imagination.

Drug use can't be condoned, but there's more to a person than a drug
conviction brought about by hanging out with the wrong crowd or being
in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Even if the law could be justified as punishment for students
involved in drug-related crimes, it could never be fair. Wealthier
students with drug convictions are able to pay for college and those
with little help from mom and dad get screwed.

No matter how you look at the law, it's unfair to the portion of
those students who actually turned their lives around after their
conviction. On the contrary, this law provides no reward for rehabilitation.

It would be more appropriate for the law to deny financial aid for
one or two years following a conviction. Then, if a student has no
drug convictions within that period, he or she can be eligible for
federal financial aid again.

Add a three-strikes rule, and you've got a responsible drug policy.

That way, instead of punishing students with drug convictions and
giving them no hope, the law actually rewards good behavior following
drug convictions.

In a way, the current law perpetuates drug use by disillusioning
students with previous drug convictions. Some students who can't pay
for school on their own may just slip deeper into the drug culture
and assume higher education is an unachievable goal.

The Berkley scholarship fund is just a small step toward an
acceptable solution to this issue. Changes must be made at the
federal level to allow students convicted of drug charges a fair
opportunity to be successful in life.