Second chance for collegians with drug offenses?: The Swamp
 
The Swamp
-
Posted November 15, 2007 3:38 PM
The Swamp

by Gabrielle Russon

It's a crime that Marisa Garcia said she's being punished for twice.

Seven years ago, police found a pipe with marijuana residue in her car. "I went to the court, pled guilty and figured I'd pay my fine and that would be done," said Garcia, who was then a freshman at California State University at Fullerton.

Instead her financial aid form was returned, and Garcia, hailing from a single parent household, was stripped of her federal funding because of the drug conviction. To keep Garcia in school, her mother refinanced their family home and charged her textbooks on a credit card.

On Wednesday, Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) announced an amendment for the reauthorization of Higher Education Act that would allow college students with drug convictions to keep their financial aid. It was later withdrawn.

Had the amendment passed, the question on the FAFSA form - if students have ever been convicted of drug offenses - would become irrelevant. The FAFSA form is what’s filled out to determine federal funding.

"It's not fair. You don't have this prohibition for people convicted of rape, armed robbery, child pornography, drunk driving," Scott said in late October. "You just get caught with a little bit of pot, you lose your college education."

But some politicians argue that the law shouldn't change – people with drug convictions are undeserving of tax dollars to subsidize their education, they say.

"I believe that students who are dealing or abusing drugs probably aren't making the most of their educations," said Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.), who opposed the amendment, in a statement. "It's one thing if they are going to do it with their own money…but it's something else to ask the American taxpayer to fund this kind of behavior."

Plus, the current law is forgiving for those with drug convictions, said Martin Green, Souder's spokesman. If students are convicted for possession, they're ineligible for financial aid for one year; for dealing, it's two years. Completing a drug rehabilitation program with two drug tests also reinstates funding, Green said.

Currently, the law only affects students who have been convicted of drug offenses while enrolled in a university. High school seniors with drug convictions who haven't stepped onto a college campus can still fill out the FAFSA form without losing their financial aid.

Some demand the withdrawal of the penalty because they say it unfairly targets people with low incomes. Without financial aid, many fall back into a habitual cycle of crime because they can't afford a college degree, said Hilary Shelton, director of NAACP's Washington bureau, last month.

"They've paid their debit to society," Shelton said. "They're back on America's streets, indeed, they should be giving the opportunity to get a college education.

"Those Americans that are able to get a college education are much less likely to get in trouble again, which means we've cut the recidivism rate significantly."

Almost 200,000 people have lost their financial aid because of how the law currently stands, said Tom Angell, a spokesman for Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a grassroots organization that lobbied on Capitol Hill last month.

"This is affecting people," said Garcia, now a junior, who aspires to perhaps be a sociologist. "I'm one of the lucky ones. I didn't have to drop out of school."

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

The law is the law, and I wouldn't want to see anybody unduly excused from paying for what they do.

That being said, I'd kind of wonder whether stopping student aid to students convicted of crimes goes to society's best interests. If she keeps her assistance and gets a degree, she's going to be more productive to society in the long run (will pay more taxes if she gets a better job, will put more back into the economy by having a higher salary, will be more likely to engage in work that in and of itself will provide a benefit for society...) than if she winds up NOT getting an education.

Of course, if we made more of the drugs legal in the first place, such as we do with alcohol (one of the worst of the addictive drugs and one that's caused enormous damage by people under its influence), this would be less likely to be an issue -- plus there'd be tax benefits to think of.


Well, pot needs to be legalized. I'm a libertarian on that one.


I tend to agree with you, Op109, especially with nonviolent crimes such as MJ possession. It seems silly to me to punish someone twice for a youthful indiscretion, and if this young lady has to drop out of college and can't get a job, the tax payers will have to pay a lot more than tuition; they will have to pay for her welfare.

As for MJ being legal, the problem is the years of stigma associated with it more than any actual danger of using the drug. I agree that it is tough to justify alcohol being legal and MJ not.


In the 60's and early seventies I smoked pot and tobacco.

When Mrs. Morris became 'with child' we decided to quit both.

We put the grass down overnight. It took me 10 years to quit the tobacco.

No one should be in jail for a MJ offense. It makes no sense.


Drugs have been the muse of some of the brightest and most creative educators in history.

Smoke a bowl and you're screwed yet it's ok to guzzle booze, maintain a four hour erection and "fix" your otherwise normal child by pushing pills at adolescence.

This country needs a 300 million hosed hookah.


I wonder if the failure of this amendment to pass has anything to do with Souder flat out lying to Congress, saying it was an attack from a "small but determined coalition of drug-legalization groups."
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_souderletter.html

A list of the 500+ organizations supporting repeal of the HEA drug provision:
http://www.raiseyourvoice.com/supporters.shtml

The democratic process is broken, and the yellow press isn't helping to fix it.


****MOVE TO ALLOW THE COURTS TO EXPUNGE "FIRST-TIME NON-VIOLENT" EXOFENDERS WHO HAVE DONE THEIR TIME!!!!!!!! Sorry legistlation like Davis's Second Chance Act is worthless. This legislation is only going to serve to make those who run the programs rich and richer and help no one but themselves. Some bills on this issue is legislation that is going to be our tax paying money wasted as money on other worthless programs have been in the past. Stop the House and Congress trashing good bills like Congressman Rangel's HR 623 that has been set aside for 7 long years now that removes some the stigma for ex-offenders to really get a job and housing and work for theirs as we all do everyday.


America needs to grow up and stop looking down at people.It"s help me now, or I"ok help myself to you and yours latter. Stop being stupid, and
wake-up.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "t" in the field below: