Students protest drug offense question on FAFSA

Students will have the opportunity to voice their opinions as to whether those who have committed a drug offense should be able to receive federal aid.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy will provide computers and phones from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Oct. 15 on the Quad for students to contact their representatives to comment on whether or not the drug offense question should be on the FAFSA form. The demonstration is part of a larger national campaign by SSDP chapters on college campuses across the country, said Kevin Richardson, executive director of the University's chapter of SSDP.

Students who are convicted of a drug offense while already receiving federal student aid currently are not eligible to receive more government-financed aid, according to the FAFSA Web site. The length of time students are suspended from aid eligibility depends on the drug offense, Richardson said.

"If you're caught with just possession, you lose [federal aid] for one year," Richardson said. "The second time it's two years. The third time it's permanently."

Richardson said the penalty is more severe for those convicted of selling drugs.

In July the Senate passed the Higher Education Access Act of 2007, which expands funding for federal aid, with the question still on the FAFSA form, according to Library of Congress Records. SSDP members hope to convince enough members of the House of Representatives to keep the question off of the FAFSA form before the bill is passed sometime in October or November.

Richardson said he thinks there is a good chance the question will be removed because the House drafted an earlier version of the bill that did not include the amendment containing the question.

"We're hoping there's a good chance that it will go through the House without the question, and then when it comes to the committee that decides on the final bill, they'll end up siding with the House version," Richardson said.

Rep. Rebecca McClanahan, D-Kirksville, said she is open to discuss the issue with students, even though she is not involved directly with the legislation.

"I've been concerned about some of the enforcement of very minor offenses that sometimes appear to be overblown when we could be using our energies on things that are more of a problem," McClanahan said.

She said her experiences working as a nurse with individuals who had substance abuse disorders has given her a broad understanding of the issue.

"[The question] doesn't even speak to the issue that a person that's even addicted has perhaps gone through treatment and has achieved sobriety after a significant addiction," McClanahan said. "I assumed that would still apply to them, which seems like an unfair restriction when a person is doing well."

Ryan, a former Truman student who asked for his last name to be withheld, was found to be in possession of marijuana on campus his freshman year at Truman. He said there still are ways to find funding to cover education costs. Ryan said he has been able to keep his scholarships and would have been able to keep the scholarships offered to him through the University by completing a program that included writing a paper and attending meetings, had he not opted to go to another college.

"I honestly think Truman has the right idea with the writing of the paper, and I had to go to a counseling meeting, like a group counseling session," Ryan said.

Completing a drug rehabilitation program like the one Truman requires after a student commits a drug offense involving illegal substances is part of the criteria for regaining eligibility for federal aid, according to an amendment in title IV of the Higher Education Act that went into effect in 2000.

"The scholarship that I have kept four years now is A+, and drug offenses are not, I guess, considered a reason to lose it," Ryan said.

Ryan has not had to file for federal aid to cover his college expenses but said that even though he understands where the government is coming from, it seems like it violates personal rights to ask whether or not students have been convicted of a drug offense.

"I think that it should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for repeat offenders perhaps," Ryan said. "I don't think on a first time basis you should lose your scholarships or federal money."

Data the national SSDP chapter received through the Department of Education shows that more than 189,000 applicants have been disqualified nationally since the question was added to the FAFSA form in 2000 because of their responses, including about 2,800 applicants in Missouri.

Lou Ann Gilchrist, dean of student affairs, said it is important that students are active on campus and that she hopes students will be inspired to study the issues in preparation for a bigger decision: who they will vote for in the presidential election next year.

"What you're dealing with is a place where people have broken the law," Gilchrist said. "I think their target is a better one this time if they're going after the legislature and the lawmaking process rather than to ask the University to do something independently of the law because we are a state institution, and we have an obligation to be supportive of the laws of our state."