HIGH(ER) EDUCATION

Drug Provision Inflexible, Excessive

As the U.S. Congress prepares to vote on the reauthorization of the Higher
Education Act, one of its more controversial provisions has fallen under
renewed scrutiny.

The legislation's drug provision, which delays or denies federal aid to
applicants with past drug convictions, has been singled out as unfair and
misguided.

Much of this criticism is entirely justified. HEA's drug provision is
clumsily devised and should be eliminated from the reauthorization process.

The Higher Education Act was passed during the Johnson administration with
the intent to create opportunities to attend college for all would-be
students, regardless of their financial status.

Many of the federal loans and grants used by students today were created by
HEA. The fact that the legislation itself should be reauthorized is not
under dispute.

However, the drug provision in question was added in 1998 and has since
denied financial opportunities to approximately 175,000 students, not
counting those who did not apply after learning of the provision.

The provision is another misguided aspect of the federal government's
overzealous waging of the War on Drugs and is causing more harm than good.

The drug provision delays federal aid for one year for one offense, two
years for two offenses and implements a life-time ban after three.

However, it in no way accommodates for the severity of a conviction. This
is not to mention that those victimized by this provision are being unduly
punished twice for their crimes.

Whatever sentences offenders are handed in court should be the extent of
their punishments. Instead, they are subsequently denied opportunities to
better themselves because of the inherent failings of a poorly designed
piece of legislation. This provision is another in a series of backward,
misguided laws that need to be recognized as such and challenged.