STUDENTS FIGHT DRUG PENALTY ACT

The Student Senate voted in favor of a bill that was in opposition to
an act which made students with drug convictions ineligible for
financial aid

Three student senators from the 86th session of the Student Senate
passed a resolution calling on the U.S. Congress to repeal a law that
limited the financial aid students with drug convictions were eligible
to receive.

Matt Potter, a student senator and the president of Students for
Sensible Drug Policy, wrote the bill and said the current law doesn't
work, and it ends up just making the drug problem worse for students
who may no longer have access to higher education. According to
Potter, the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee
and Senator Richard Burr will be deciding whether or not to keep the
penalty as is within the next two weeks.

"There is already a GPA requirement attached to [FAFSA]," Potter,
sophomore in political science and nonprofit studies, said. "This
[drug penalty] removes good students' access to financial aid just
because of something they may have done in the past."

President Lyndon Johnson signed the Higher Education Act in 1965, and
the amendment, which was added in 1998, is according to Potter, a
contradiction to Johnson's original act. Potter said the act was
written to aid students who would not normally be able to pay for
college to receive federal aid.

Since the amendment was introduced, 200,000 college students have been
stripped of financial aid, according to the Students for Sensible Drug
Policy Web site. In North Carolina, one out of every 357 student aid
applicants is rejected due to drug convictions.

Cameron Gower, a freshman in nuclear engineering and president of
College Libertarians, was one of five who signed the resolution. He
said he feels that the current bill is unfair because it is stripping
qualified students of financial aid based on a personal issue.

"These scholarships aren't about personal life," Gower said. "They are
based on educational performance. Drugs are a personal issue."

According to Potter, the policy is unfair because the government has
already punished the individuals for previous drug
convictions.

"These students have already gone through the criminal justice
system," he said. "This is like punishing them twice."

Potter said Congress heavily opposed the amendment when it first came
into existence, but that there is increasing heat now probably because
of the Democrats' control of Congress.

He said another reason the policy is unfair is because it only affects
students with drug convictions and does not apply to students
convicted of other crimes such as rape and arson.

He said this policy adversely affects lower-income families and
minority groups because of "the disproportionate ways drug laws are
enforced."

According to Greg Doucette, a junior in computer science and another
of the bill's sponsors, the penalty amendment affects a lot of people.

"It cuts across all racial and social economic lines," he
said.

Gower said the legislators making the laws cannot sympathize with the
students being affected.

"The amendment roots from the people that make the laws," he said.
"They don't use these drugs, so they have little to no understanding
of what this is like. It comes down to a misunderstanding and a lack
of experience. They don't use the drugs they're legislating against."

Student Government is one of more than 125 other organizations and
coalitions that have adopted resolutions calling for the repeal of
this penalty.

The majority of schools that have Students for Sensible Drug Policy
[chapters] have opposed it," Potter said.

Potter said for students who have first and second offense drug
convictions, there is a limited time period where they are not allowed
to receive aid, but can reestablish eligibility by taking certain
measures such as enlisting in private drug rehabilitation programs
that the government endorses. According to Potter though, these
programs are expensive and can cost anywhere from $500 to $2,000. He
said he called several of the programs listed to receive price quotes
and left messages, but within a week and a half time period, he only
received one response.

Doucette agreed with Potter. He said when a student has a drug
conviction within the University, it is easier to appeal it than on
the federal level, and through this bill and further initiatives
within the Senate, he said he hopes they will be able to make a difference.

According to Potter, the national SSDP's Web site offers students an
opportunity to edit a letter asking Congress to appeal the policy,
which SSDP will send to the students' representatives.