Yale Drug Offenders to Keep Aid

April 12, 2002 -- Under federal law, college students with drug convictions are denied financial aid bankrolled by taxpayers. But Yale University students who run on the wrong side of the drug laws will now get a helping hand.

Yale is the fourth and most prestigious college so far to announce it will provide its own assistance for students who lose federal financial aid because of drug-related offenses. Hampshire College, Swarthmore College and Western Washington University have already adopted similar guidelines.

The federal law at issue, a rallying point for angry student groups in the last few years, denies all or partial aid for students convicted of offenses involving drug possession or sales. Penalties are extended for multiple offenses and are harsher for dealing drugs than for drug use.

Students may shorten the penalty by completing a rehabilitation program and passing two drug tests.

"The main thinking was that federal taxpayer dollars that come out of the pockets of many people who never had the chance to go to college shouldn't have to pay for the college educations of people who use, abuse or sell illegal narcotics," said Seth Becker, press secretary for U.S. Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., sponsor of the legislation.

Helping Students Stay in School, Get Help

Under Yale's new policy, students who qualify for federal assistance but lose it because of a drug possession conviction can receive temporary aid to stay enrolled in school while also completing a rehabilitation program provided by the university.

Tom Conroy, a Yale spokesman, said the university's move was not an implicit statement of disagreement with the federal law, but an assurance that students who lose aid and face the often prohibitive expense of a private rehabilitation program will be able to stay in school.

"One of the central aims of the federal law is to encourage students to seek rehabilitation," he said. "Certainly, that's what the Yale policy does."

So far, no Yale student has been penalized for a drug conviction, but student groups who lobbied for the policy change hailed the administration's move. In itself, the school's action shows the flaws of the federal law, said Andrew Allison, a Yale sophomore from Scarsdale, N.Y.

"By replacing federal aid, Yale has shown its opposition to the law, and has shown this law is unjust and unnecessary," Allison said.

Souder's spokesman said the congressman had no real opposition to Yale or any other private college's move to supplement student aid, although he questioned whether the money would come from funds that could help other needy students through school.

"Yale's money is Yale's money. It's not up to us to tell them how to spend it," Becker said. "Our main concern was with federal taxpayer dollars."

Stricter Enforcement Grabs Campus Attention

The controversy stems from question 35 on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, the required form for every college student who wants federal assistance. "Have you ever been convicted of possessing or selling illegal drugs?" it reads.

The provision in question sailed through Congress with little fanfare as part of the Higher Education Act of 1998, but has recently caused a furor on college campuses as the Bush administration has enforced the law more stringently than its predecessors under former President Bill Clinton.

For the 2000-2001 school year, the first school year the law took effect, 279,000 applicants left the question blank. For the most part, the Clinton administration processed those answers as "no."

It's a different story in President Bush's education department, though. Enforcement is more thorough and strict, leading to fewer blank answers but more students being denied at least partial aid.

During 2000-2001, 9,114 students were denied at least some aid. Last school year, 15,389 students were denied aid for all or part of the year, according to the U.S. Department of Education.

Now that the law is being more stringently enforced, the debate over its fairness has become more vociferous on college campuses.

Change Ahead for Law?

So far, 85 student governments have called for the repeal of the law, according to Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a group that is spearheading the national effort against the provision.

"We see education as a solution to many of our nation's social problems," said Shawn Heller, the group's national director. But the federal law serves in effect as "double jeopardy" for students who have already been convicted, he said. Further, the law unfairly impacts low- and middle-income students who need financial aid.

There are also efforts underway in Congress to reverse or alter the student aid provision. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has sponsored a repeal of the law, and has 60 co-sponsors so far.

Even Souder is trying to change the provision because of what he says is a misinterpretation of its intent. His efforts could result in fewer students being affected by the law.

The language of the provision refers to "a student who has been convicted of any offense," which lawyers at the Department of Education have interpreted to mean both applicants and current students.

Souder now says he never had any intention of targeting students who were convicted of drug offenses prior to applying for aid, and has negotiated with senior administration officials to narrow the scope of the law's enforcement to exclude convictions occurring before a student applies for or receives federal assistance.

"A lot of his politics comes from his religion. He's an evangelical Christian," Becker said of his boss. "The basic element is forgiveness, that people can change, that someone who had a drug conviction five years ago can be different now. We're not trying to kick kids out of college."

Souder has proposed an amendment of the law, which was approved by the House of Representatives but failed in the Senate.

For its part, the Department of Education says it will continue to enforce the law as written. "Our role is to make student financial assistance available to the maximum number of eligible students seeking access to postsecondary education," reads a department statement. "The department does not set, modify or alter eligibility criteria."