|
|
| Easing of Drug Rules Considered |
|
Posted by FoM on August 17, 2001 at 11:21:37 PT By Andrea Billups, The Washington Times Source: Washington Times 
The U.S. Department of Education may revamp the way it interprets and enforces a federal law that bars student aid to applicants who have been convicted of drug sales or possession. Under the 1998 law, a part of the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, close to 40,000 college students with drug convictions could lose student-loan eligibility this fall. The department is considering softening the statute by applying it only to those students who had drug offenses while in college, rather than convictions before they started school. Rep. Mark Souder, the Indiana Republican who wrote the original law, now is leading the charge to limit its scope. He has been meeting with Education Department officials in recent weeks about reducing the effect of the law on students. "We are confident that this is gong to happen and they are going to change the way the regulation is enforced," said Seth Becker, Mr. Souder's press secretary. "It really goes back to his basic philosophical and religious beliefs," Mr. Becker said of the congressman's initiative. "He's an evangelical and he really believes in the concept of redemption. For him to look at the regulation and see that someone who has made mistakes in the past but has completely turned their lives around is still being denied federal aid -- it goes against his fundamental beliefs." Mr. Souder has said that under his interpretation, the statute was meant to apply to students who committed drug offenses while they were receiving federal money for their education, not before. Jane Glickman, a spokeswoman for the Education Department, confirmed yesterday that discussions with Mr. Souder were continuing, but said no agreement on changes had been reached. "We don't have any projected date or time frame about changing the drug regulation at this time," Miss Glickman said. In April, the Education Department announced it was cracking down on enforcement of the student aid law, which first took effect last year. It was largely ignored under the Clinton administration amid concerns that the wording of the law was confusing and that the workload of investigating would hold up aid to those students who legitimately qualified. The law applies to federal grants, work study funds and student loans. At the behest of Congress, Education Department officials earlier this year changed the wording on the student loan application that asked students about prior drug offenses. Students who declined to answer the question and left it blank on the form, the department warned, would be immediately dropped from aid consideration. Those students who were able to demonstrate that they had successfully completed drug-rehabilitation programs, however, could retain their aid eligibility, the department said. Students who admit on the forms that they have drug convictions can complete a follow-up worksheet that allows them to explain their circumstances. Close to 280,000 students left the drug-offense question blank on the 2000-01 application, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, which first reported the department's negotiations with Mr. Souder. The current law states that student-aid eligibility will be revoked for one year for a first-time drug conviction and two years for a second conviction. A third drug conviction would disqualify a student for federal aid indefinitely. Newshawk: Nicholas Thimmesch II Related Articles & Web Site: Students for Sensible Drug Policy Drug Bust Can Smash Student Loan Federal Crackdown on Students Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
|
Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on August 18, 2001 at 14:24:29 PT:
|
| We shouldn't blame Souder for being an idiot. He can't help that. As the great sci-fi author Robert Heinlein put it (speaking about Communism) "All the work in the world will not change a lump of mud into an apple tart". To expect Souder to understand the devastating consequences of his half-baked legislation is akin to expecting someone with Down's Syndrome to calculate trajectories of interplanetary probes. He's just not up to the job. Nope, we can't blame Souder for his stupidity. After all, many of his constituents put him in the position where his idiocy can damage the entire country. And in this case, that’s certainly true. When you elect people into positions where their actions can affect your life, you have given them power. Souder has power. An idiot has been given power. How can we expect such as he to use it wisely? It is the moral equivalent of handing a fool a loaded weapon. Should you be surprised if he uses it on the very people who handed it to him? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by dddd on August 18, 2001 at 00:33:43 PT |
| ...the f*#%@g assh*$e Souder,and all his pals who carelessly made this sick law,,should be ousted from public service for life! This ,....."that's not how I meant the law to be interpreted",just dont Souder is a CREEP! dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by Patrick on August 17, 2001 at 13:03:01 PT |
| "What these self-righteous legislative types fail to realize is that they are not promoting "good behavior," abstinence or adherence to the law, but merely achieving disrespect for an unfair and repressive system. Everyone needs to rebel and battle against the machine." I completely agree Doc! Instead of spending time engaged in sports education with their peers, they will be spending their time deciding the difference between, "drug rehabilitation" education and the effects of smoking a joint with a close companion. On the outside, it appears they are being ostracized and victimized by a government by the government for the government. On the inside, the concept of freedom and individual liberty has left the heart of america. What land holds the bright new vision for the future elimination of Prohibition? [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on August 17, 2001 at 12:11:35 PT:
|
| "It really goes back to his basic philosophical and religious beliefs," I'm glad to hear that Souder's conscience is bothering him. What about the other kids who are suffering double jeopardy for his misplaced crusade? How reasonable is that? What about those of us whose basic philosophy and beliefs tell us that it is immoral to make a plant illegal? This idiocy has led to the following true story from Montana: High school kids get busted for being in possession of alcohol in early June. Law enforcement reports this to their schools and as a consequence, they cannot play their first games on their respective sports teams that fall. Reasonable? How? What these self-righteous legislative types fail to realize is that they are not promoting "good behavior," abstinence or adherence to the law, but merely achieving disrespect for an unfair and repressive system. Everyone needs to rebel and battle against the machine. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |