home

Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Drug Offenses

By Jeralyn, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Tue Mar 21, 2006 at 11:43:54 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The ACLU and Students for Sensible Drug Policy are filing a federal lawsuit today against the Department of Education and Secretary Margaret Spellings. The suit challenges the constitutionality of the law that strips college financial aid from students with drug convictions. The New York Times wrote about it here.

The policy has already derailed or destroyed the academic careers of nearly 200,000 would-be students since being enacted in 2000. Drug offenders are the only class of people automatically denied aid - murderers, rapists, arsonists, burglars, etc are still eligible.

A full copy of ACLU/SSDP's complaint is on the site, for your perusal.

Most importantly, they are looking to find more plaintiffs for this class action lawsuit. More information on the case is on their site.

< Moussaoui Lawyers Ask Judge to Clarify Ruling | Tackling Material Witness Abuse >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Drug Offenses | 74 comments (74 topical)
    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:44:01 AM EST
    More power to them. In the meantime, we should pass a law banning anyone with a drug or drunk-driving conviction from serving in Congress.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:18:10 AM EST
    I tend to doubt that would be legal. I also tend to doubt that it would merely affect people named Kennedy as you intend it to, JP.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#3)
    by swingvote on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:25:27 AM EST
    I tend to doubt that would be legal. I also tend to doubt that it would merely affect people named Kennedy as you intend it to, JP. New day, same stupid lies, same old Charlie. You're Dismissed now.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:08:51 AM EST
    As if.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#5)
    by swingvote on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:36:08 AM EST
    Okay Charlie. I'll make one final good-faith effort, just to see if you have it within you to even make a cogent argument on anything that is not patently obvious to everyone in the universe. You claim that such a law would be illegal. How so? If it's legal to deny the right to vote to convicted felons, it should be legal to deny certain public positions to convicted felons. We already have done the former, so why can't we do the latter? Please be specific. You then claim that I intended for any such law to affect only Senator Kennedy? How so? To the best of my knowledge, Senator Kennedy has no DUI or drug convictions to his record. Your appear to be claiming otherwise. Pease provide dates for when these convictions occurred. Please be specific. I won't hold my breathe waiting for any sort of serious response to these questions, Charlie, as your history here has shown that you fling mud, make accusations, then scamper off when confronted and asked for any kind of proof about what you said, only to return later and claim that you have been vindicated by comments you never made or comments you made which have nothing to do with the issues raised. Barring such a serious response from you (which I suspect will come some time after the end of the world, if ever), you are permanently dismissed Charlie. Rant on all you like. Post all of the attack comments you please. The last few days have shown once again that your comments aren't worth responding to, and I'm not going to waste anymore time or bandwidth doing so. So flail away, Charlie. I'm sure Jondee will appreciate all the backup he can get. Cheers.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:43:07 AM EST
    You claim that such a law would be illegal. How so? If it's legal to deny the right to vote to convicted felons, it should be legal to deny certain public positions to convicted felons. We already have done the former, so why can't we do the latter? Please be specific.
    Emphasis mine. In what state is a first or second offense DUI a felony?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#8)
    by Slado on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:50:03 AM EST
    Doesn't the legality of this rest with whether or not the student knew that being drug free was a requirement of the scholarship? We suspend athletes for drug use. If I fail a drug test at work I loose my job. If you get a 1.0 two semesters in a row you loose your scholarship. I'm sorry some on this site think drug use is a constitutional right but an agreement is an agreement. Scholarship or finiancial support is not a right but a privelidge. If the contract or agreement says that you can't get convicted of a drug crime whats the problem? Why should money be given to drug users when it can be given to non drug users?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:51:21 AM EST
    There are plenty of hardworking students who have never touched drugs who are more deserving. I would say give the money to the more deserving students.
    Narius, What part of the following statement confuses you?
    Drug offenders are the only class of people automatically denied aid - murderers, rapists, arsonists, burglars, etc are still eligible.
    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#10)
    by swingvote on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:54:07 AM EST
    In what state is a first or second offense DUI a felony? That's an interesting point, Macro, but how does it change the overall question? If we assume that one must be a felon to have one's eligibility for membership in Congress, revoked, then no DUI conviction which is not a felony conviction would be grounds for revocation of that eligibility. If we assume that the revocation of the right of convicted felons to vote is merely a precedent for denying other people other rights based on other convictions, there is no obvious requirement that such convictions be for felony offenses. It may not seem "fair" to deny eligibility for membership in Congress based on a non-felony offense, but much of what Congress has done in the past also seems "unfair" to some, and it was a question of legality, not fairness, that was at stake. If such a law is illegal, there must already exist a prohibition against such a law. Where is it?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:55:39 AM EST
    Why should money be given to drug users when it can be given to non drug users?
    Slado, See my above question to Narius. Also,
    Doesn't the legality of this rest with whether or not the student knew that being drug free was a requirement of the scholarship?
    Scholarship? This lawsuit pertains to Federal student loans.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#13)
    by Slado on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:43:36 AM EST
    The TL thread says "financial aid". That's not a loan. As to your point I agree murders probably shouldn't get financial aid but that's not the point. My question still stands. If it's part of the deal that is agreed to what's the problem with denying aid to someone who violates the agreement? Other then some wish drugs to be legal and are using this case as an excuse to push their real agenda.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#14)
    by swingvote on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:54:28 AM EST
    The TL thread says "financial aid". That's not a loan. Slado, At many colleges, the term "financial aid" does indeed refer to loans, as well as to grants and scholarships. The "Financial Aid" office usually works to assist students with securing all three forms of tuition assistance. As to the rest of your argument: I just see this as wasted effort, and it makes me wonder why these offenses were singled out when much more serious offenses were not. I think this is just another case of the people making up these rules never having had to live under them, and therefore focusing on the wrong things.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:11:39 AM EST
    There are plenty of hardworking students who have never touched drugs who are more deserving
    Why are non- illegal drug users more deserving? Because they prefer alcohol to reefer? Or chocolate? Or coffee? Or Zoloft? Or Ritalin? If you catch my drift. Besides, it has nothing to do with drug use. As long as you don't have an arrest record, the current policy allows to use all the drugs you want and still qualify for aid. Just don't get caught. Another example of our society rewarding deviousness and secrecy as opposed to honesty and integrity.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:16:44 AM EST
    Because the prefer a legal substance as opposed to one banned (Rightly or wrongly) by society.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:33:57 AM EST
    I won't hold my breathe waiting for any sort of serious response to these questions, Charlie, as your history here has shown that you fling mud, make accusations, then scamper off when confronted and asked for any kind of proof about what you said, only to return later and claim that you have been vindicated by comments you never made or comments you made which have nothing to do with the issues raised.
    Barring such a serious response from you (which I suspect will come some time after the end of the world, if ever), you are permanently dismissed Charlie. Rant on all you like. Post all of the attack comments you please. The last few days have shown once again that your comments aren't worth responding to, and I'm not going to waste anymore time or bandwidth doing so. So flail away, Charlie. I'm sure Jondee will appreciate all the backup he can get.
    Cheers.
    And still you darken my door. How many times have I heard this song and dance from you, JP? Every time I bust ya on your blatant hypocrisy for your just pedestrian psychoanalysis as you try and tell everyone what they're really thinking and what their true motives are and then ya go through the roof when someone gives ya a dose of your own. None of you shrub shills are exactly challenging but you and bb are particularly "see spot run" and have your regular photo finishes. So, if you'll recall, I said, I don't believe that would be legal and I don't believe that would merely affect people named Kennedy. Teddy's not the only Kennedy in Congress. If I'm wrong, it shouldn't take ya that long to prove it. Knock yourself out. Oh, you don't have an ounce of good faith in ya but you wanna go where everyone can feed ya lines.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#18)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:51:53 AM EST
    Patrick, By the "rightly or wrongly it's the law" rationale you'd have supported arresting people for being in interracial marriages when that was illegal. I simply cannot get a sense of what you really believe. Do you really think a kid busted for weed oughtta be punished educationally while a kid who likes to get drunk shouldn't? Do you really think throwing people in jail for just getting high is justified on a rational basis? Not getting high AND driving. Not getting high AND harrassing someone. Not getting high AND defecating in public. Or whatever. Just getting high. Is that really something a supposedly free country wants to use as a reason to deny someone a federal student loan? I just don't get it, I don't see how that helps anything. Education is ALWAYS valuable, and denying it should never be used as punishment. Education should never be denied or made more difficult for anyone, much less people who have simply used drugs.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#19)
    by HK on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:52:28 AM EST
    There are some people who have commented on this thread who seem to think that this law applies to drug users. It does not. It applies to those with a drug related conviction. We are talking past tense here. In other words, someone who has cleaned up their act and is looking to eventually find sound employment and contribute in a positive way to society will under this law be prevented from doing so. How is this good? We are not talking about giving those with previous convictions special treatment that others do not get. We are talking about giving them the same opportunities as everyone else. But wait...lets make them lie in this bed they made for themselves, continue in a their immoral and illegal lifestyles, coerce them into crime in order to support themselves (and possibly their children), because at least then we know that we are good and they are bad. And that's the main thing. Isn't it...?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#20)
    by HK on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:54:45 AM EST
    And well said, Dadler, kdog et al.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#21)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:02:36 AM EST
    By the "rightly or wrongly it's the law" rationale you'd have supported arresting people for being in interracial marriages when that was illegal.
    Dadler, That was an attempt to avoid the whole drugs should be legalized argument, and I should have been more clear.
    I just don't get it, I don't see how that helps anything. Education is ALWAYS valuable, and denying it should never be used as punishment.
    Education is valuable I agree, but no one is denying anyone an education, just student aid, my tax dollars, to pay for it. I think I've posted in the past that I would support academic probation or some sort of program where people denied aid based on their past could get it as long as they maintained a certain GPA or some other measureable criteria
    But wait...lets make them lie in this bed they made for themselves
    Exactly! It should be harder to unmake that bed, then maybe they won't be so willing to risk their benefits and rights with further criminal activity.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:12:24 AM EST
    Patrick, Let me be more clear: why do you want to make it harder for people who do something that in no way harms you or anyone else? There are infinitely more poorly, if not entirely wastefully, allocated tax dollars that would have a rational and logical basis for your scorn. Making it harder to get the least burdensome higher educational aid, for doing something that has no rational basis for being illegal, doesn't seem to have a point, except a stubborn prejudice. Hey, I have my own prejudices, we all do, but I don't think they make for sound education financial aid policy.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:14:29 AM EST
    Exactly! It should be harder to unmake that bed, then maybe they won't be so willing to risk their benefits and rights with further criminal activity.
    So incarceration (varying lengths) and the fact that these individuals will have a felony conviction appear on a background check isn't enough? From the SSDP Website:
    The law punishes individuals twice for the same infraction. Affected students have already been dealt with by the criminal justice system. Taking away their access to education after they've already paid their debt to society is unnecessary. This violates the "double jeopardy" clause of the Fifth Amendment.
    Emphasis mine...

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#25)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:32:20 AM EST
    Let me be more clear: why do you want to make it harder for people who do something that in no way harms you or anyone else?
    That assumes what they do harms no one. I have a different perspective on that issue and disagree. And the reason I think it should be harder is so that they will have an incentive to obey the law. Apparently the incentives most of us have to obey the law were insufficient.
    There are infinitely more poorly, if not entirely wastefully, allocated tax dollars that would have a rational and logical basis for your scorn.
    Yes, but that's a lesser of two evils argument. Don't assume they don't get my scorn, they are just not on point for this thread. Such as my tax dollars spent caring for addicts who were unable to obey the law and got addicted to drugs and now can't, or claim the can't, hold a job, care for their children and become a burden on society. Those tax dollars?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#26)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:34:19 AM EST
    Narius, Why is a "drug conviction" in general more serious than your reprimand at school? What were you reprimanded for? Did your actions affect another person? Genuinely curious. Also, how would you differentiate punishement in the student loan area along the spectrum of "felonies"? Drugs get you what? Assault gets you what? Grand theft gets you what? Is the personal non-violent use of drugs REALLY something you want to use as the basis for denying or making it much harder to get educational aid? You'd rather they stay high and dumb? Not to be flip, but I just don't get what you hope to achieve with this. Withholding financial aid for education as a form of punishment is NOT a basis for a more drug-free society.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#27)
    by roy on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:40:10 AM EST
    narius,
    People should understand that their past affect their future, no matter how hard they wish it does not.
    That's a cop-out. So is the rest of what you've written. Your arguments only support the non-controversial claim that there is some appropriate consequence; you haven't tried to distinguish the appropriate from the inappropriate. How do you know that denying them aid is the right way to make "their past affect their future" and not overkill? Yeah, the criminals decided to get involved with drugs and they're accountable for that decision. But We the People decided to hold them accountable for it in this particular way, so we're accountable for our decision.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#28)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:45:54 AM EST
    I think people should start taking responsibility of their lives instead of making excuse for everything.
    I wish people would stop making excuses for the utter failure of our drug policy, of which the assinine financial aid ban for drug convictions is a particularly assinine part. Dadler...What do they hope to accomplish? Great question. Beats the heck out of me.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#29)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:53:28 AM EST
    But We the People decided to hold them accountable for it in this particular way, so we're accountable for our decision.
    Very well put roy. That's what I was trying to get at.
    What do they hope to accomplish?
    I have a theory. Conservatives hate the concept of financial aid anyway (social program), this is simply a way to limit the amount of aid given without much complaint from people that support financial aid. No politician will stand up for "druggies", lest they be labelled "soft on crime".

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:58:05 AM EST
    And the reason I think it should be harder is so that they will have an incentive to obey the law.
    By default, it already is harder for someone with a felony conviction to make their way in the world. Why single out individuals with drug related convictions? Your logic makes no sense.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 12:10:08 PM EST
    Heck macro...it's a lifestyle choice that makes some folks uncomfortable, hence their first reaction is to punish it. It's the puritan way.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#32)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 01:17:04 PM EST
    Some more info:
    The law allows students to resume receiving financial aid if they attend a treatment program that includes two random drug tests. Congress last month revised the law, saying it applies only to convictions occurring while the student is in school. Prior to the provision's enactment, judges had the ability to revoke student aid as part of the sentence for a drug conviction, but chose not to do so in 99.8 percent of cases. Congress added the aid elimination provision to the HEA in 2000 in order to make denial of aid mandatory in all cases.
    Personally, I don't think any of the ACLU's action points in their suit has much merit, although I'm certainly no lawyer. I think the law should be struck down because it treats drug-offenders differently from any/all other criminals, but apparently the lawyers at the ACLU think that issue's a non-starter.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#33)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 01:25:18 PM EST
    ...and more:
    Posted on February 13, 2006 - 2:41pm Some people with drug convictions may soon regain access to federal financial aid. The latest budget bill passed by Congress included changes to completely restore federal financial aid eligibility to people who were not enrolled in school when they were convicted for drug crimes. People convicted of possession while they are students will continue to lose federal financial aid eligibility for one year, with a second possession conviction resulting in a loss for two years, and a third conviction resulting in indefinite loss of eligibility. Penalties remain harsher for people convicted of selling drugs while in school. The government began using drug conviction information to disqualify people for federal financial aid for college in 2000. About 175,000 people across the US have been denied aid because of drug convictions. In twenty-four states that base financial aid eligibility on the federal forms, people denied federal aid are also denied access to state loans, grants and scholarships. The president is expected to sign this limited change into law.


    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#35)
    by peacrevol on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:30:49 PM EST
    Patrick
    Because the prefer a legal substance as opposed to one banned (Rightly or wrongly) by society.
    I wonder if you're confusing "banned by society" and banned by the law. I really wonder if the law reflects society's views.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#36)
    by swingvote on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:33:06 PM EST
    I wonder if you're confusing "banned by society" and banned by the law. I really wonder if the law reflects society's views. And I wonder what the law would be if coca plants grew well in Iowa.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:03:22 PM EST
    kdog - "Conservatives hate the concept of financial aid anyway.." Bingo.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#38)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:05:11 PM EST
    Narius, I still don't see what you hope to accomplish. Obviously no one wants to give dangerous felons priority here. Should we give people with anger issues a chance? The grossly overweight? I just don't get it. The point is not to lessen drug abuse but to predict who will and will not resist drugs??? The percentage of people who use drugs and are caught, convicted, whatever, is a FRACTION of the actual users, "offenders", who never get caught. So you simply want to punish that small fraction? And are you fine giving financial aid to an alcoholic as long as you don't know about it? I...don't...get...it. You gotta think beyond the surface of your disdain for people who use "drugs" you don't like. There's many more facets to the issue. And I hate to break it to you, but your tax dollars support plenty of people on drugs. Including soldiers fighting the "war on terror". How do you think often they keep soldiers awake and alert? They drug them up. I'll also ask again out of real curiosity: what were you reprimanded for in school?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#39)
    by SeeEmDee on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:13:50 PM EST
    I'm sure most of the people here would recognize the term, 'social engineering' a practice engaged in by both Left and Right. In this case, it is social engineering on the part of a minority that seeks to force acceptance of it's views regarding what it perceives as morality upon young people to mould them into what that minority believes they should become. For a glimpse into the mind of the progenitor of the law in question, I'd recommend the curious go here and read the interview with Representative Mark Souder. It is his view of 'the way things s'posed t'be' that this law is reflective of.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#40)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:17:17 PM EST
    I wonder if you're confusing "banned by society" and banned by the law. I really wonder if the law reflects society's views.
    Peace, I don't think so, but if you have more current information, please let me know. This is 3-4 years old.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:30:41 PM EST
    The point is NOT to use this to induce a drug-free society, but to use this to SORT OUT (abate imperfectly) people who can resist and who cannot resist drugs.
    So you favor punishing the weak for their weakness rather than helping them? You're not sorting out who can and cannot "resist drugs" (whatever the hell that means). You are simply sorting out those who got caught and those who didn't. You are in fact rewarding those who are better at breaking the law.
    BTW, I don't want my tax dollars anywhere close to someone who is on drugs.
    They're not _your_ tax dollars. They belong to the goverment. Or do you work for a company that expects you to get their permission before you spend _their_ payroll dollars (which would make your tax withholdings the company's tax money)? This is the kind of nonsensical thinking that leads people to equate insurance premiums with health savings account deposits. I don't want my tax dollars anywhere near Iraq or faith-based initiatives. I wonder how the government would set policy, or how long the war in Iraq would last if we could all make such specific choices about our taxes. Hey! Take my Iraq and faith-based taxes and send them to aid students who've used drugs.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#42)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:34:27 PM EST
    Hey! Take my Iraq and faith-based taxes and send them to aid students who've used drugs.
    It's simple matter, get enough support and back a candidate that espouses those values and wins an election.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#43)
    by jen on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:35:15 PM EST
    a puritan response would be to help the repentant person get an education to be able to work and become a useful member of society. The puritans loved both education and work.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#44)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:40:05 PM EST
    a puritan response would be to help the repentant person get an education to be able to work and become a useful member of society.
    If they are truly repentant they won't mind maintaining an acceptable GPA and other restrictions for a period time, then I say give it to them. It's not like it the beneift of student aid was arbirarily taken away. They had to be found guilty in a court of law, that's beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:58:16 PM EST
    Scholarships, education credits should go to people that have the capacity to learn. Having been convicted of a drug offense does not entail a lack of such capacity. Contrary to popular belief, college is not a retreat for good kids.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:07:25 PM EST
    BTW, I don't want my tax dollars anywhere close to someone who is on drugs.
    Too late buddy...half the WH staff is on Ambien. Also known as a drug. Who knows what Congress is on, but it's some strong stuff. I don't want the distribution of my tax dollars as financial aid to be discriminatory against those with petty drug convictions. Minority and working class kids are affected the most, because the suburban kids smoking joints get off with a warning, while the city kids smoking joints don't often get that luxury.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:10:07 PM EST
    The government obviously has an interest in detering drug use among minors. This law provides a powerful incentive that does just that. Let the law stand.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:30:33 PM EST
    Yeah, I'm sure this will have all the bite of "Just Say No" and puttin' Laura Bush in charge of Gang Outreach 'cause nobody's got more street cred than Laura Bush.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#50)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:46:41 PM EST
    People who support this kind of punitive action have some kind of inferiority complex. There can be no other understandable explanation for this kind of deep seated resentment of other members of our society. They desire to hold someone down just to satisfy their own craving for some unimportant piece of the moral highground. Stop trying to incarcerate everyone and start trying to solve the problems. IMHO

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#51)
    by SeeEmDee on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 03:55:39 AM EST
    Che, the word that encapsulates that attitude is schadenfreude and it means to take pleasure from someone else's pain or misfortune. You have to wonder at the psychological make-up of those who actively seek out positions where they get the opportunity to exercise the power of The State in causing such misery. People like Mark Souder, who wrote the law to begin with. People like him are always saying that they "hate the sin but love the sinner" but they have weird ways of expressing that 'love'. Schadenfreude at work, apparantly...

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 06:26:29 AM EST
    The government obviously has an interest in detering drug use among minors
    Really? I think it's obvious the govt. has an interest in limiting the amount of financial aid available. At least a conservative majority govt. That is an unpopular interest, as Americans overwhelmingly support financial aid programs, so they go after an easy target like drug war victims.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#53)
    by swingvote on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 07:03:30 AM EST
    I think it's obvious the govt. has an interest in limiting the amount of financial aid available. That's possible, Che, but unlikely. It would require that the conservatives running our government today really are fiscally responsible, and there is almost no evidence for that over the last 5 years. This is just some drug warrior's latest scheme to win praise from the folks back home as being touch on crime, and it works because most of those people raised kids who are smart enough to not get caught smoking pot (they've fooled mom and dad so far).

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 07:03:37 AM EST
    I think it's obvious the govt. has an interest in limiting the amount of financial aid available.
    I disagree. I think they have an interest in insuring the aid is disbursed to the most worthy parties. Drug using minors are less worthy than otherwise law-abiding non-drug using college hopefuls. I wouldn't mind seeing the law also include more crimes: DWI, assaults, minor in possession of alcohol, etc. Personally, I don't agree with our drug laws in general. I am of the opinion that adults should (more or less) be permitted to behave as they see fit in their own homes. I'm less convinced this kind of libertarian freedom extends to children (who are less capable of making informed decisions, for a number of reasons). I also think the government has the right to determine the conditions under which their funds can be awarded (dubious? see FAIR.) I also truly believe this kind of condition can have a *true* deterrent effect on college bound kids. If you're a high schooler with college aspirations, you know you must avoid drugs if you will need gov't assistance to pay for school. If you're independently wealthy, by all means, toke away.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 07:24:17 AM EST
    This ain't financial aid for junior high...this is for college. No children in college.
    who are smart enough to not get caught smoking pot
    It's only part smarts to avoid an arrest jpaul...a lot of luck involved as well. And a lot of where you live. A kid in Bushwick, Brooklyn can run into cops several times a day, they are everywhere. A kid in the suburbs might go weeks without running into a cop. Bottom line, since drug laws are unfairly applied and enforced, it is also unfair to use drug arrests as a determining factor in financial aid applications.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#56)
    by swingvote on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 07:30:59 AM EST
    Kdog, I didn't say luck had nothing to do with it, and I wouldn't dispute that it does. But I still believe even a small amount of savvy goes a long way toward not getting busted. Knowing how to behave when confronted by the police, not running away when you see a cop, even if you are stoned out of your mind, and not lighting up in places that are quite likely to get you caught are great ways to avoid jail time.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 07:32:32 AM EST
    This ain't financial aid for junior high...this is for college. No children in college.
    Yes, but the drug offenses in question were most likely committed as a minor. And minors shouldn't be using drugs.
    ...A kid in Bushwick, Brooklyn can run into cops several times a day, they are everywhere. A kid in the suburbs might go weeks without running into a cop...
    Yes (again) but you are assuming they are using drugs. And I'm assuming they shouldn't be. If you run into cops 25 times a day or twice a year, if you aren't in possession of drugs, you won't run be jeopardizing your aid (at least as a result of a drug conviction).
    Bottom line, since drug laws are unfairly applied and enforced, it is also unfair to use drug arrests as a determining factor in financial aid applications.
    That's an excessively bold statement. Drug laws may be unfairly applied (though I wouldn't agree to this) but the "bottom line" is if you are caught with drugs, you are engaging in illegal behavior and thus avail yourself to punishment at the hands of the state. The withdrawal of the ability to seek federal financial aid is merely one of those punishments.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#58)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 09:09:02 AM EST
    Interesting that these "tough on crime" grandstanding candy asses have no problem continuing to hand out multi-million contracts to companys already convicted of defrauding the govt or allowing convicted felons, like some of the Iran Contra thugs, to hold positions in higher govt.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#59)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 09:13:02 AM EST
    the drug offenses in question were most likely committed as a minor.
    Actually, most likely not.
    Congress last month [in 2000, I believe] revised the law, saying it applies only to convictions occurring while the student is in school [college].


    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#60)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 09:19:07 AM EST
    Kiss up and kick down is a real crowd pleaser with a certain demograph. Schadenfreude indeed. More than likely, the ones pushing this kind of legislation are the same ones who want to privatize jails and prisons; give it a few years and - abracadabra, we've got our own homegrown Chinese labor force.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#62)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 09:50:05 AM EST
    Stop trying to incarcerate everyone and start trying to solve the problems.
    According to Steven Levitt, increased incarceration levels are responsible for almost 1/3 of the decrease in crime across the county. Seems like a good solution to me

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 10:09:42 AM EST
    The withdrawal of the ability to seek federal financial aid is merely one of those punishments.
    That's the crux of the argument. Sane people in possesion of commonn sense realize that the student busted with a dime bag shouldn't be excluded from receiving financial aid, when convicted rapists and murderers have no problem getting financial aid. It makes no sense, like most of our drug laws. Only a very vindictive person with confused priorities could support this policy...in my humble opinion.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#64)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 10:10:39 AM EST
    Has there been some kind of dramatic decrease in crime that nobodys heard about? And who is Steve Levitt; ceo of Prisons Incorporated ? Thats what we need, more of that famous conservative out-of-the-box thinking.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#65)
    by roy on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 10:41:15 AM EST
    Jondee & Patrick, Steve Levitt is an actor, you might remember him from such hits as "Airplane 2" and "The Incredible Hulk Returns". Patrick might mean Steven Levitt, economist and co-author of Freakonomics, a book a highly recommend. It's rather controversial because it shows evidence that real estate agents lie, sumo wrestlers cheat, and legalized abortion contributed to a drop in crime. I remember his claims a bit differently, I don't think he found that prison population reduced crime. You can read one of his studies on that topic here (PDF).

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 11:00:20 AM EST
    Sane people in possesion of commonn sense realize that the student busted with a dime bag shouldn't be excluded from receiving financial aid, when convicted rapists and murderers have no problem getting financial aid.
    Maybe I haven't been clear enough: they should all be ineligible for federal financial aid. Law abiding kids should be rewarded for their behavior with the opportunity to receive aid. While I feel for the kid busted with a dime, the fact remains that he was busted with a dime. Do not pass go, do not collect financial aid check. It's easy enough to just not do drugs while you're in high school and thus avoid the whole issue. Just out of interest, do you know of any "convicted rapists or murderers" who have received federal assistance? If these folks "have no problem getting financial aid" as you've suggested, surely there are a few examples out there. Or are you just saying that, because there is no statutory prohibition to their being offered aid, they "have no problem" actually getting it?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#67)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 11:29:17 AM EST
    Roy, I'm familar with who he is, although I admit I don't know if desires the use of his full christian name or not. One need only to read the conclusion of your link to see that that's exactly what he was referring to. He also has a slightly different study in the book which has similar results

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#68)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 11:31:53 AM EST
    Has there been some kind of dramatic decrease in crime that nobodys heard about?
    There's certainly been a decrease in crime since the mid-late 90's, I'm pretty sure it's not a secret, so if you think nobody's heard about it, perhaps you should look at your sources of information.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 12:55:54 PM EST
    I was saying the govt. singles out drug offenses as the only criminal criteria to deny aid. That is odd to me when drug offenses are relatively minor. What's next, denying financial aid to those with traffic tickets? In some localities, a drug conviction is treated similar to a traffic conviction. If I may, why be so quick to deny some kid with a drug conviction on his record a shot at financial aid? Isn't a day or two in jail and the fine enough punishment? I just don't get the motivation for the excessive punishment. Or do you just oppose financial aid on principle?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    What's next, denying financial aid to those with traffic tickets?
    CAUTION!!! SLIPPERY-SLOPE AHEAD!!!
    In some localities, a drug conviction is treated similar to a traffic conviction.
    Those kids are lucky: they got a slap on the wrist from local law enforcement. That doesn't mean federal funding rules are suspended. Likewise, even in those locales where drug laws are lenient, the DEA can bust your ass just as hard.
    I just don't get the motivation for the excessive punishment. Or do you just oppose financial aid on principle?
    I'm far from an opponent of financial aid. Without extensive aid, I would not have been able to attend and graduate from college. I'm grateful for the program and would love to see it expanded to help more kids from less-than-wealthy families. When I was in high school, no one would have confused me with a goodie-goodie; far from it. But I did recognize the consequences of legal trouble and the negative effect it would have on my future in general. That was among the many reasons I kept my nose clean, stayed away from trouble that would stand in the way of my goals, etc. etc. etc. The point is, there are hundreds of thousands of deserving kids without the means to pay for college that stay out of trouble in order to go to college to better themselves. I have no problem saying they are more deserving of the limited federal funds than kids caught using, possessing or selling drugs.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#71)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:30:18 PM EST
    The only problem Chase..sometimes trouble finds you. Victims of circumstance and what not. I'd prefer the govt. offer financial aid to any kid serious about getting an education. Our country can only benefit from it. And it pays for itself because a better educated populace makes more money in the workplace, and then pays more taxes. Everybody wins. Besides, I seriously doubt the threat of lost aid will stop anybody from using drugs, when the threat of arrest itself doesn't.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#72)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:32:21 PM EST
    As I said before most of this kind of "tough on crime" grandstanding is candy ass politicians trying to look like tough guys. And almost always against some group that cant make trouble, unlike the aforementioned fraudulant contractors.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#73)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:47:36 PM EST
    Pretty much all laws are the result of "candy ass" politicians. So what's your point? People disagree on whether this is the right way or wrong way to administer student aid. I'm thinking they're on the right path, perhaps some adjustment for student aid is appropriate if the students in question are willing to prove their worthiness. They've already proved they weren't, beyond a reasonable doubt, but keep a 2.5-3.0 GPA, have a goal, and maybe take a few drug tests along the way and I would give them a 2nd chance. That's of course providing there are still funds available that have not been used by students who had a clear criminal history.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:52:30 PM EST
    kdog: I definitely agree a better educated populace is better for everyone. But we have a classic example of economics: the most efficient distribution of a scare resource. In this case, I would think those that have shown themselves to be diligent and dedicated to avoid trouble are probably more likely to dedicate themselves to their studies. And I strongly disagree with the assertion that "trouble finds you." I never had a joint jump in my pocket when I wasn't looking or a bottle get shoved to my lips as I drove down the highway. Some kids might get "caught up" in drugs, but they did make the choice to start in the first place, and there are consequences to pay. And you're right, there might not be an excessive deterrent effect but I can't help but believe the brighter kids in high school will recognize the potential detriment being stuck with a drug charge can be to them. The kids that are less intuitive, that don't put two and two together, well, they are likely to be the better students anyway, so we aren't losing as much by denying them federal money. I know it's cold and harsh, but when you only have so much to disburse in the first place, you've got to start drawing lines somewhere. Don't look at this as a "punishment" for drug users--it's a benefit for kids who stay out of trouble. Federal aid is not a right, it's a privilege.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#75)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:54:13 PM EST
    maybe take a few drug tests
    Why not test all aplicants beforehand to prove their worthiness? Better do a blood check too, we don't want to waste all that money on a kid that might be predisposed to some disease. Check their genes too for a predisposition to criminal behavior. Monitor their diet, we don't want a bad diet to affect their study habits. Is this the world you want?

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#76)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:56:57 PM EST
    I know it's cold and harsh
    It sure is brother....and honestly, not the kind of society I want to live in. If there is a shortage of funds for financial aid, we can always cut the defense budget. A heck of a lot more money wasted on defense than financial aid.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#77)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 01:57:18 PM EST
    Kdog, Well, I'm not advocating suspicionless testing. Once convicted of a crime, and if applying for federal student aid, yeah, that is the world I want.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 02:03:03 PM EST
    ..not the kind of society I want to live in.
    You are always free to leave. If there is a shortage of funds for financial aid, we can always cut the defense budget. There's a lot of things I would cut before that. Elections dictate how monies are spent. I implore you to vote your conscience for those candidate who would spend your tax dollars how would like them spent.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 06:39:20 AM EST
    You are always free to leave
    Leave my home...never. I'm also free to change it.
    I implore you to vote your conscience for those candidate who would spend your tax dollars how would like them spent.
    I wish such a candidate existed. But we have a two party system where both parties have already been purchased.

    Re: Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Dr (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 06:57:12 AM EST
    But we have a two party system
    And thank God we do. Are you aware of the benefits of a two-party system? Primarily, IMHO, it prevents single-issue fringe parties from gaining broad power. If there are enough people out there that share your views, one the parties will necessarily adopt them. But so long as you're in the fringe, you won't be able to illicit enough support and your proposal, no matter how "right" and "fair" you think it is will fail. Such is democracy.
    I'm also free to change it.
    In this effort, I wish you the best of luck. Although I am free to challenge you fully. It this reason why I usually take umbrage when policy is determined by the elected branches--it implies public support, and whether or not I agree, it must accept it.

    Students to Sue Feds Over Denial of Aid for Drug Offenses | 74 comments (74 topical)