Opinion: Federal aid opens doors

With a narrow reading of a 1998 law, Secretary of Education Rodney Paige is blocking the road to a better future for thousands of young people. The law denies federal financial aid for education to anyone convicted of any drug offense -- though arsonists, murderers and armed robbers still may apply.

Under the Clinton administration, applicants for federal grants and loans were allowed to leave the application question about drug convictions blank and be assumed innocent. No more. Paige has decreed that a blank response to the drug question now amounts to an admission of guilt. And for those students who fess up, a single conviction -- even for a misdemeanor possession charge -- disqualifies them for a year, while three convictions result in a lifetime ban on aid. It is hard to see how the law could be more counterproductive.

Supporters of the policy argue that with a limited federal aid pool, drug convictions are as good a way as any to weed out applicants. They favor expanding the ban to include other offenses, too. But what of the convicted drug user who wants to gain the skills for a better life, or the single mother swept up in a drug sting against her boyfriend? Should they be barred from trade schools and community colleges that might prepare them to become contributing members of their communities? Without federal aid, those doors are closed to many young people of limited means. Certainly subsidizing a college education makes more sense than seeing them continue to sell or use drugs, which eventually could land them in a state-funded prison cell.

The law even prevents inmates with drug convictions from attending federally subsidized classes on prison grounds. These classes often provide the only opportunity for inmates to get an education behind bars, and prison officials say some inmates have declined transfers from county jails to lower-security federal or state facilities so they can continue their education. That kind of dedication to learning should be rewarded rather than punished.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has introduced a bill to repeal the ban. The measure has even gained the support of one of the law's original sponsors, U.S. Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind. Souder said the law was never intended to be applied retroactively. "The last thing I want to do is reach back and punish" applicants with prior records, he said. "That's like saying once a criminal, always a criminal." And that is not the message Congress should be sending to young people at all.

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright