News (Media Awareness Project) - US OH: OPED: Keep the Doors of Education Open |
Title: | US OH: OPED: Keep the Doors of Education Open |
Published On: | 2004-03-08 |
Source: | Cincinnati Enquirer (OH) |
Fetched On: | 2008-08-23 09:54:09 |
KEEP THE DOORS OF EDUCATION OPEN
Since 2000, more than 128,000 students have been ineligible for
federal aid because of their response to one question on the Free
Application for Federal Student Aid. That question asks applicants to
indicate if they have "ever been convicted of possessing or selling
illegal drugs."
The drug question wasn't always on the form. The Department of
Education added it after Congress last updated the Higher Education
Act in 1998. During that reauthorization process, a rider amendment
was added that made students with drug convictions ineligible for aid.
In an unfortunate irony, this provision has harmed the same students
from low-and middle-income families the Higher Education Act is
intended to assist.
While this landmark 1965 law opened the doors of education to millions
who could not otherwise afford it, the drug provision runs contrary to
the act's purpose. Even as those dependent on student aid are forced
to leave school after receiving a drug conviction, those wealthier
students able to afford the full cost of tuition remain unaffected.
Minorities, too, find themselves disproportionately impacted by this
law. For instance, African-Americans account for 13 percent of the
population, 13 percent of drug users, but more than half of all drug
convictions. That higher conviction rate translates into a higher
ineligibility rate for aid.
Clearly, those who break the law should be held accountable. Our drug
laws are highly punitive, and judges take them seriously. In fact,
judges already have the authority to deny federal benefits - including
student aid - to those convicted in their courts. But penalizing
students who have already been convicted, sentenced by a judge, and
disciplined by their schools just doesn't make sense. Not only does it
undermine the authority of the criminal justice system and the school
administrators who know the students best, but it dooms them to
failure as well. Such a blanket policy from Washington cannot possibly
take into account the best interests of the student or society at large.
Congress is set to review the Higher Education Act this spring, and
Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, sits on two committees with jurisdiction on
the drug provision. He should take a lead role in fully repealing it
and correcting the mistake Congress made in 1998. Let's keep the doors
of education open to at-risk young people who want to become
productive members of society.
Ross Wilson is a Hyde Park native and a 2002 graduate of the
University of Notre Dame. He is working in Washington as legislative
director for Students for Sensible Drug Policy.
Sound off
Want your voice to be heard? Send your column or proposed topic to
assistant editorial editor Ray Cooklis at rcooklis@enquirer.com or
call (513) 768-8525.
Since 2000, more than 128,000 students have been ineligible for
federal aid because of their response to one question on the Free
Application for Federal Student Aid. That question asks applicants to
indicate if they have "ever been convicted of possessing or selling
illegal drugs."
The drug question wasn't always on the form. The Department of
Education added it after Congress last updated the Higher Education
Act in 1998. During that reauthorization process, a rider amendment
was added that made students with drug convictions ineligible for aid.
In an unfortunate irony, this provision has harmed the same students
from low-and middle-income families the Higher Education Act is
intended to assist.
While this landmark 1965 law opened the doors of education to millions
who could not otherwise afford it, the drug provision runs contrary to
the act's purpose. Even as those dependent on student aid are forced
to leave school after receiving a drug conviction, those wealthier
students able to afford the full cost of tuition remain unaffected.
Minorities, too, find themselves disproportionately impacted by this
law. For instance, African-Americans account for 13 percent of the
population, 13 percent of drug users, but more than half of all drug
convictions. That higher conviction rate translates into a higher
ineligibility rate for aid.
Clearly, those who break the law should be held accountable. Our drug
laws are highly punitive, and judges take them seriously. In fact,
judges already have the authority to deny federal benefits - including
student aid - to those convicted in their courts. But penalizing
students who have already been convicted, sentenced by a judge, and
disciplined by their schools just doesn't make sense. Not only does it
undermine the authority of the criminal justice system and the school
administrators who know the students best, but it dooms them to
failure as well. Such a blanket policy from Washington cannot possibly
take into account the best interests of the student or society at large.
Congress is set to review the Higher Education Act this spring, and
Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, sits on two committees with jurisdiction on
the drug provision. He should take a lead role in fully repealing it
and correcting the mistake Congress made in 1998. Let's keep the doors
of education open to at-risk young people who want to become
productive members of society.
Ross Wilson is a Hyde Park native and a 2002 graduate of the
University of Notre Dame. He is working in Washington as legislative
director for Students for Sensible Drug Policy.
Sound off
Want your voice to be heard? Send your column or proposed topic to
assistant editorial editor Ray Cooklis at rcooklis@enquirer.com or
call (513) 768-8525.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...