It would seem that only the fanatics, the kind of people whose
response to failure is to close their eyes, plug their ears and push on with
still more gusto, would remain enthusiastic warriors in the war on drugs at this
point.
As if denying medicinal marijuana to cancer patients wasn't enough, we now have
an Associated Press story about thousands of applicants being turned down for
college aid because of past drug offenses.
First some background: In 1998, as part of our broader campaign against the use
of illicit substances, U.S. Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., successfully sponsored
legislation that would deny federal financial aid for college for one year to
recipients convicted of drug possession.
Second offenses, or a first drug-sale conviction, would make the offender
ineligible for such aid for the next two years.
As bad as the logic of such a law might be, things got worse when the incoming
Bush administration, beholden to social conservatives intent upon restoring
their conception of "traditional morality," decided to interpret the law as
meaning that anyone with any kind of previous drug conviction, however minor,
and regardless of circumstances, be judged ineligible for college financial aid.
The end result is that over 40,000--43,436, to be exact--college students or
would-be college students are being denied such financial aid for the current
academic year because of prior drug convictions.
How many of these young people have been forced to abandon their dream of a
college education altogether we don't know, but one also assumes that the law
has hit those on the lower end of the financial ladder with the fewest
alternative sources of funding, i.e. the poor, the hardest.
Virtually nobody in Congress, including the law's sponsor, wanted this to
happen, as the original idea was to simply use the threat of lost financial aid
as a means of deterring drug use among current aid recipients. But then, one of
nature's more immutable laws is that all laws have unintended consequences,
especially when imprecisely written and motivated by a crusading mentality deaf
to common sense.
One would like to believe that having violated one of our country's many and
inconsistent drug laws would have little bearing on one's prospects of acquiring
a loan for college, or, better yet, that we might even wish to encourage past
drug offenders, as part of the broader concept called rehabilitation, to attempt
to improve their lives and become more productive citizens by attending college.
Going further, one would think that denying someone financial aid because of a
past drug conviction represents an unfair form of double punishment, one that
would make about as much sense as denying people with criminal records the
opportunity to subsequently find gainful employment or to obtain mortgage loans.
But the law denying college aid to drug offenders is still there, and a Bush
administration loathe to risk the wrath of anti-drug social conservatives
appears unwilling to support proposals in Congress to reform it in a more
lenient direction.
To criticize the war on drugs isn't, of course, to endorse drug use in any way.
It simply suggests that it should be philosophically repugnant in a free society
to criminalize the voluntary ingestion of substances which are, more often than
not, and when used in moderation, no more harmful than a bottle of Miller Lite.
And also logically ludicrous to then spend scarce law enforcement resources to
arrest and possibly ruin the lives of those who violate such laws.
As columnist Steven Chapman recently put it, "We don't send cops out to arrest
alcoholics because they abuse liquor; or imprison smokers because they have a
tobacco habit. Why, then, is the use of marijuana or cocaine a law enforcement
matter?"
If nothing else, Sept. 11 should have taught us that freedom has real enemies
and that college kids sitting in their dorm room sharing a joint and listening
to Pink Floyd aren't remotely among them.
As things stand, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the war on drugs
has become a greater threat to our lives and freedoms than even the most rampant
and irresponsible drug use could ever be.
Bradley R. Gitz
Bradley R. Gitz teaches politics at Lyon College
at Batesville.
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 1/13/2002