ACCOUNTABILITY COMES WITH AID

LAST FALL, Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law the Higher
Education Act, a five-year reauthorization of all federal higher education
programs, which will expand college affordability and promote academic
quality. The part that seems to stick in the craw of some special interest
groups is one of the provisions that increases accountability by
temporarily suspending federal financial aid for students convicted of drug
possession or sales. But these groups are hard-pressed to explain why
taxpayers should subsidize the costs of a college education for students
who violate the law and impede their own academic success by using and/or
selling drugs.

Let's be clear about what the law does. If a student who receives federal
financial aid is convicted of drug possession, his or her aid eligibility
is suspended for one year for the first offense, two years for the second
offense and indefinitely for the third offense. For drug sale convictions,
financial aid is suspended for two years for the first offense and
indefinitely for the second offense. Students may regain their eligibility
before the suspension period expires if they successfully complete a
rehabilitation program and test negative for drug use twice without prior
notice.

It is important to point out that the law is intended to apply only to
those students who are convicted of drug offenses while they are receiving
aid. In an effort to make implementation of the new provision as smooth as
possible, Congress gave the Department of Education wide latitude in
determining how to enforce this law.

Consider the elements of the Higher Education Act which make college more
affordable. The law lowers student loan interest rates to their lowest
level in 17 years, raises the per-student maximum amount for Pell Grants to
an all-time high, lowers the rate for loan consolidation, promotes college
cost cutting measures and restructures student aid delivery. The end result
is lower costs to students and a greater commitment of taxpayer dollars to
help people obtain a college education. I think most people would be
astounded to know that, in the face of all the effort and federal resources
that have been put forth to make college more affordable, some students who
receive this aid find it insulting that they should be held accountable for
using the money wisely.

How can you learn if your mind is clouded by drugs? Is the investment in
your education--indeed, in your future--going to pay dividends in the form
of your contribution to society if your time in college is spent using and
selling drugs? Most people respond with a resounding "No!"

There are those organizations, though, who work to create controversy and
twist common sense principles in order to advance their own agendas. Take
the Drug Reform Coordination Network, for example. My office has received
calls from college newspapers from all over the country who have been fed
propaganda by this group. If their website is any indication--the address
includes the manifesto, "stopthedrugwar"--their primary goal can only be
the legalization of drugs.

In the past, these organizations have used the sick and dying as a front to
promote the use of so-called medicinal marijuana in their continual effort
to weaken drug laws. Now, they see an opportunity to take advantage of
college students who receive financial aid by enlisting them in their
doomed campaign. Their latest tactic is to assert that the drug-free
student loan provision in the Higher Education Act is racist. Apparently,
they believe minority college students who receive financial aid are more
likely to use and sell drugs. They cite disparities in drug conviction
rates for blacks and whites as a basis for this position, but statistics
from the Department of Justice contradict their premise.

In 1995, among those arrested for drug abuse violations, nearly 62 percent
were white and 37 percent were black. At the same time, approximately 60
percent of defendants convicted of drug offenses were white and 38 percent
were black. Gross disparities in conviction rates do not exist.

Reducing drug use in America is a compelling national interest. Hiding
behind the issue of race to undermine that mission only serves the interest
of the small minority of people who would like to use drugs with impunity.
The relaxation of attitudes regarding drug abuse has made it easier for the
peddlers of this poison to devastate families and ruin lives, particularly
among young people, and those who advocate drug use contribute to this
destruction.

The bottom line, then, is this: Actions have consequences. If you receive
taxpayer assistance to pursue your college education, you will be held
accountable for investing it wisely. Don't use or sell drugs, and you have
nothing to worry about. If you are smart enough to go to college, you must
know this makes sense.