By Deanna Tran
A provision to the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) known as the Aid Elimination Penalty, was amended by Congress under the 1998 reauthorization of the act.
The drug provision asks all students who file a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form about past drug charges. According to the drug provision, the type of conviction and the number of offenses determine a student’s eligibility for financial aid from the federal government. The ineligibility periods range from one year to indefinite.
The provision also provides that drug rehabilitation is to be completed in order to resume eligibility, but it does not address funding for treatment programs. Nearly 200,000 students have been denied federal financial aid due to past drug convictions since 2000.
According to Mike Abboud, associate director of the Student Financial Aid Office at the University of Louisville, the university’s policy on federal financial aid is in accordance with the drug provision. “The United States Department of Education makes that determination as to whether or not students receive federal aid,” said Abboud.
The provision has been attacked by student political groups that argue the amendment has been ineffective and harmful towards education and drug prevention.
The Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), an international grassroots network of students focused on the impact of drug use and the improvement of drug lawas, believes the 1998 drug provision is more detrimental than helpful. Tom Angell, SSDP’s communications director said, “it’s a counterproductive Drug War policy.”
According to Angell the provision is “fiscally irresponsible.” He believes it “violates the American principle of local control, [because] it steers at-risk students away from education and into a cycle of failure and recidivism.”
Angell also noted that the provision does not fund the drug abuse treatment programs, allowing for an individual to restore financial aid eligibility. “It simply isn’t going to solve our nation’s drug problem,” said Angell.
Phuong Tran, a graduate student studying political science, thinks blocking federal financial aid to students with prior drug convictions will only “perpetuate” the cycle of drug use. “How can someone improve their life if they don’t even have money to go to school? You have to give people a second chance,” Tran said.
As for the university’s policy on institutional aid, Abboud said, “A student’s answer to the federal question [about past drug convictions] does not impact how the university gives out their funds to students.”
In March 2006, SSDP and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), an organization that provides legal assistance to cases dealing with civil liberties, filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the 1998 Aid Elimination Penalty is unconstitutional; the lawsuit is still pending.
