Pubdate: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 Source: USA Today (US) Copyright: 2001 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc Contact: 1000 Wilson Blvd., Arlington VA 22229 Fax: (703) 247-3108 Website: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm Author: Mary Beth Marklein, USA TODAY Cited: Students for Sensible Drug Policy http://www.ssdp.org/ PROTESTS RISE OVER ANTI-DRUG LAW THAT DENIES COLLEGE LOANS A law that denies federal college financial aid to applicants convicted of drug crimes is igniting a nationwide campus movement urging reforms in the nation's drug policy. Meanwhile, as college-bound students gear up this month to apply for financial aid for the fall, U.S. Education Department officials hope to avoid repeating last year's applications mess, in which 810,000 of the more than 9 million aid applicants left the controversial drug question unanswered. Most applicants either forgot to fill it in or didn't understand it, Education Department officials say. But they also suspect that a small percentage of applications were incomplete as part of an organized protest against the law. They also worry that some students may have lied. All applications were eventually processed and aid distributed on schedule. But a "backlash is creating a lot more work," says Karen Freeman, spokeswoman for the Education Department's financial aid office. The controversy and confusion center on a provision in the 1998 Higher Education Act, in effect since July, in which applicants convicted in adult court of possessing or selling drugs may be ineligible for federal loans, grants or work assistance for a year or longer from the date of their conviction. The law doesn't cover state or campus-based aid. Nearly 8,000 of the more than 9 million people who submitted the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) for the 2000-01 academic year failed or lost partial eligibility because of the law, the Education Department says. Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., says the provision is a way to deter students from using or selling drugs, encourage abusers to get treatment and hold students accountable for taxpayer money. But critics argue that the law unfairly penalizes poor students, who are most likely to depend on aid, and minorities, who studies show are disproportionately convicted of drug crimes. They also note that the application asks no other crime-related questions. "A murderer or rapist (would) have the door wide open for them," says Marisa Garcia, 20, a California State University student in Fullerton who acknowledged paying a $415 fine after police found a pipe with traces of marijuana in her car. It was a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, says Garcia, who saw a drop in federal aid last fall. To make up the difference, she is working longer hours at a floral shop, leaving little time to study for her 12-credit course load. Students with convictions may regain eligibility if they successfully complete a drug treatment program, but the law "offers no way of helping families pay for that, and if a student can't pay for college, the chances of their being able to pay for a drug abuse problem are very slim," says Rochester (N.Y.) Institute of Technology senior Daniel Renkas Jr., 21, who co-founded Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) in late 1997. That organization, which argues that access (rather than obstacles) to education is a better solution to drug abuse problems, now boasts representation on more than 50 campuses, including large state schools, community colleges and small religious schools. In addition to awareness campaigns, student government associations on 33 campuses -- and statewide associations in New York and Wisconsin -- have called for a repeal of the provision. Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass., has set up a $10,000 fund to help affected students. Yale University students are pressing for similar assistance. Campus groups, along with other national drug-reform and civil rights groups, are petitioning lawmakers to support a bill by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., to repeal the drug law. SSDP national director Shawn Heller says the group does not encourage applicants to leave the question blank but acknowledges that some students may have done so. Souder, meanwhile, says he hopes Congress will amend the law this spring so that it applies only to students who are convicted while they are receiving financial aid, not before they applied. For now, education officials say incomplete applications will again be processed. But forms for the 2001-2002 school year simplify the drug question, and highlight it with this warning: "Do not leave question 35 blank." An electronic form available online won't let applicants proceed if they don't answer the question. Those who leave the question blank or acknowledge a drug offense will be contacted for follow-up questions. Applicants who don't answer the question or lie could be subject to legal action if a drug conviction is later discovered. "We don't want innocent students to be penalized, so we will process their application," Freeman says. "We are counting on people to be honest." - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake