OPPapers.com

Hea Act

In our society, there are many obstacles that face students who are trying to obtain a college education. First, the student has to do well in high school, pass the S.A.T.'s, and be able to afford to pay for a college education. For those who can't afford to pay for college there is Financial Aid. But what if financial aid was taken away from students based solely on one minor drug offense? I will address several reasons why I believe the Souder Amendment is unethical and why it should be repealed.
The Souder Amendment was developed by Rep. Mark Souder that denies financial aid to students with a drug conviction. This amendment is in total contradiction of the Higher Education Act which was developed in 1968 to provide financial aid to over 7 million students each year. Financial Aid was invented to provide financial assistance to students who come from low income families. Seeing how financial aid is solely based on the families financial household income, the money that is awarded to the family should not be in jeopardy if being taken away due to the students prior drug offense. By using this offense as a consequence to committing a drug related crime, it introduces many obstacles for middle class people,
2
minorities, and it ignores the most widely abused drug on college campuses - alcohol.
Working class students are the majority of people that
attend college on scholarships and financial aid. While in school, experimentation may introduce itself as something that should be done while attending college. The consequences of allowing yourself to fall victim to drinking or taking drugs previously only had the consequence of a tremendous hang over the next morning. If caught by an official abusing drugs or alcohol, detainment would normally occur and several minor measures would be met to ensure the diversion of attempting to "experiment" again. But now that the Souder Amendment has been drafted, that one offense prevents a student from obtaining...