Pubdate: Wed, 14 Feb 2007
Source: Daily Princetonian (NJ Edu)
Copyright: 2007 Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3735
Author: Jason Sheltzer

THE WAR ON DRUGS HITS THE 'ORANGE BUBBLE'

Test yourself, 'Prince' readers: What's the one crime that causes a 
student to automatically lose federal financial aid? It's not murder. 
It's not sexual assault. It's not treason. It's drug possession or 
distribution.While rapists remain eligible, someone who's found 
guilty of an insignificant crime like smoking a joint unavoidably 
loses his or her federal financial aid.

Under the Drug-Free Student Loan Act of 1998, a person who is 
convicted of possessing or distributing narcotics while receiving 
federal loans will have aid suspended for at least one year and 
possibly for as long as a lifetime.

This law is hurtful and unnecessary. Under its provisions, more than 
189,000 students have been denied federal aid, and many others have 
been discouraged from even applying for it. With the costs of college 
spiraling endlessly upward, the need for accessible grants and 
low-interest loans has never been greater. Yet, the law 
disproportionately affects those who need aid the most. Low-income 
students increasingly rely on federal assistance in order to attend 
college, but in many cases they lack the resources necessary to 
successfully fight drug charges in court. Moreover, rehabilitation 
programs that allow students to resume receiving aid are frequently 
too costly for underprivileged students to afford.

Undergraduates who lose their financial aid are often forced to drop 
out of college. Denying Americans the benefits of education is not 
the best way to help them become productive citizens, and it is more 
likely to make them burdens on the state. The Drug-Free Student Loan 
Act needlessly impedes access to higher education and all of the 
future benefits that it brings.

Proponents of this measure argue that it discourages college students 
from using drugs. In spite of this claim, a study by the U.S. 
Government Accountability Office found no evidence that the aid 
elimination law actually help[s] to deter drug uses.Obviously, 
extreme cases of drug abuse do exist, and the undergraduate Tony 
Montanas of America have no right to receive federal loans. However, 
trial judges have the discretion to withdraw federal aid on a 
case-by-case basis, and university administrators can suspend or 
expel students convicted of serious criminal offenses. The 
broad-based nature of this law, which treats cocaine dealers and 
occasional marijuana users as worthy of similar punishments, makes it 
especially egregious. This law is not even necessary to prevent 
slacking stoners from gaining free rides through college without 
doing any work: all federal loans already have clauses that require 
students to maintain certain minimum GPAs.

While we can't change the aid elimination law by ourselves, 
University officials can take steps to counteract its deleterious 
effects on current and future Princetonians. Harvard, Yale, and 
Swarthmore have already put in place policies to reimburse students 
who lose federal aid due to minor drug possession charges. I strongly 
believe that Nassau Hall should follow suit. Even if President 
Tilghman is unwilling to support this change, the USG should take 
action. At Berkeley, the student government created a scholarship 
specifically for those who lose federal aid after drug convictions. 
USG President Rob Biederman '08 and the USG would be making a strong 
and prominent stand against an unfair law if they enacted a similar 
measure at Princeton.

If a college student faces drug charges, then the decision to rescind 
financial aid should be done on a case-by-case basis by those who 
have the most information -- namely the trial judge and the 
university's administrators. Any law that applies a blanket ban on 
aid to drug offenders -- while leaving murderers and rapists eligible 
- -- is patently unjustified and ought to be opposed. I hope that 
Nassau Hall has the nerve to do so.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman