Pot rap can block college financial aid
January 19, 2006 - belleville.com
Question No. 31 on the free application for federal financial aid can be gut-wrenching for some college students.
"Have you ever been convicted of possessing or selling illegal drugs?" the question reads. A worksheet further explaining the question lets a student know a conviction counts only if it is in state or federal court.
If your answer is no, then you're on your way to qualifying for federal aid. But for students who must say yes because of that time police found a marijuana joint in their car, the answer hits hard.
A yes to question 31 could mean no federal financial aid.
That is one reason the Lawrence City Commission has spent the past several months debating a proposed ordinance regarding first-time marijuana possession. If the ordinance passes when it comes up again next month, possession cases would be sent to Municipal Court instead of District Court.
This switch, proponents said, would save time and taxpayer money because the process in Municipal Court runs more quickly than in District Court. Then comes the main reason for the ordinance: University of Kansas students caught the first time with small amounts of pot would not have a state conviction on their record.
That means their federal aid would not be in jeopardy until their second or third offense, which becomes a felony in District Court.
"If you want people to stop getting stoned all the time, you don't take their aid away and tell them they can't go to college," said Lawrence Mayor Boog Highberger. "That doesn't fit well to me."
Others, though, said offenders should pay the price, even if it meant missing out on financial aid.
"Breaking the law is breaking the law, no matter how silly I think the law is," said Kevin Corcoran, a 19-year-old University of Kansas student from Lawrence.
The move, although done in the name of saving financial aid, is the latest in what some view as a changing tide of attitudes toward marijuana.
In a Gallup Poll from October, on the question of whether possession of small amounts of marijuana should be treated as a criminal offense, 55 percent of respondents said no, up from 46 percent from just two years before.
More than a year ago, voters in Columbia, Mo., passed an initiative that put small-possession violations in city court but also reduced them to fine-only offenses.
Earlier this month, Rhode Island became the 11th state to allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Laws in 12 states have decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot. In November, Denver voters legalized small amounts of marijuana.
"What they are doing in Lawrence ... it's what's been done on a statewide basis in other areas," said Paul Armentano, senior policy analyst with NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, out of Washington, D.C.
"The public is becoming more in favor of this issue. Clearly, it seems to be a worldwide trend."
For Lawrence, where prosecutors and police are behind the switch, the issue is not necessarily a softening of attitudes about marijuana but a desire to keep first-time offenders from missing out on financial aid.
That was a key for Laura Green, director of the Drug Policy Forum of Kansas, when her group led the push for the ordinance several months ago.
"I think people deserve a second chance," Green said.
With that second chance, she also wants people who need help to get it. She wants the ordinance to include a mandatory evaluation to determine if those caught with marijuana have a dependency problem.
"The purpose of the ordinance is to get people help if they need it. Not to just zap their wallets," Green said. "We want a healthy community, and those who have an unhealthy problem, this is one way for them to be exposed to treatment."
Moving violations to Municipal Court would not be a free ticket to smoke pot. The offense would be a Class A misdemeanor, and though the case would be in Municipal Court, the proposed ordinance would carry a stiffer mandatory fine than in District Court, something with which neither Green nor Highberger agrees. The fine could be as high as $300.
Lawrence Police Sgt. Dan Ward said police don't see a down side to the switch, which would alleviate officers from spending hours on paperwork and court hearings. Officers will go after the crime just like they always have.
District Attorney Charles Branson said moving first-time offenses to Municipal Court was a matter of efficiency.
"It's a better way to marshal our resources, which are always limited," Branson said. "I don't know that it was the intent (of the Higher Education Act) to bust college kids found with a joint."
The discussion regarding the marijuana issue has become an emotional one, said city Commissioner David Schauner. Commissioners have grappled about fines. They have discussed the misconception that the move is lessening the penalty for the crime.
"Many still think, `Is this being soft on drug use in the first place?'" Schauner said. "Others say the town can't wait, because student aid is at stake. We're not decriminalizing it. I think that needs to be continually said."
Since the Higher Education Act went into effect in 2000, question 31 has stripped more than 180,000 students nationwide of their eligibility for federal aid. Drug-policy advocates said this was not counting the students who read the question, knew they would have to answer yes, so just hopelessly ditched their effort to get aid.
Chris Mulligan, campaign director for the Coalition for the Higher Education Act Reform, said that while he and others worked to change the law, communities were realizing the harsh consequences. The naysayers, though, will always be there.
"No matter what the intention is, you're always going to have critics say, `You're just trying to legalize drugs,'" Mulligan said. "Or you're making it easier for drug users to live in society."
At the University of Kansas, officials do not know how many students don't apply for federal aid because of question 31. Last year, of those that went through the process, three students were affected by how they answered the question, said Stephanie Covington, associate director of financial aid at the University of Kansas.
Some students don't realize that a possession offense disqualifies them.
"We've been raised in a `three strikes you're out' mentality," said University of Kansas student senator Leslie Eldridge, a junior from Norman, Okla. "It really does sneak up on some students. ... Most students wouldn't know they have one chance until it's up."
Several of Kansas' larger cities have ordinances where first-time, small-amount marijuana possession cases are processed in Municipal Court.
The student senate at the University of Kansas passed a resolution in late October in support of the city commission switching the first time possession charges to Municipal Court.
"It's very hard for students to stay in school once their financial aid is taken away," Eldridge said. "We're not advocating illegal activity. We just want as many students as possible to stay in school."
Student senator Ray Wittlinger, 20, a sophomore political science major, spoke with several students in favor of the switch.
"Quite honestly, we may not always know the full story of the charge," Wittlinger said. In some instances, a person's offense doesn't warrant losing financial aid.
Others, though, said Lawrence was sending the wrong message. Some of the critics are students.
"I think it makes it seem like it's OK to do it," said recent University of Kansas graduate Adriel Alstrom. Alstrom thought about it some more. "People convicted of a DUI don't get to keep their financial aid."
Well, actually, they do. The only offenses addressed on the aid application are drug crimes.
"Not large scale traffickers, but drug offenders," Armentano, said. "Hopefully that attitude will change. It is changing at the local level."
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale
veggie
Seuss
Edit 
Reply 
veggie
motaman
Organic