Arts Fest begins this week and with it comes droves of current and former students' names arriving in the police log. In the years that I've spent as a Penn State undergraduate and law student, I have known students arrested for minor drug offenses. Many thought that it would just mean a night in jail, a fine, and a minor criminal record. Actually, it could mean leaving the university.

A federal law, the HEA Aid Elimination Provision, states "a student who has been convicted of any offense under any Federal or State law involving the possession or sale of a controlled substance shall not be eligible to receive any grant, loan, or work assistance..." So, if convicted, the student will lose the ability to receive federal educational loans and grants for at least a year.

If the conviction happens to be the student's third possession offense or second conviction for sale of a controlled substance, the student will lose their federal aid eligibility indefinitely. This can amount to thousands of dollars in lost aid and can effectively end a student's ability to attend an expensive institution like Penn State.

For example, say a student is in the back seat of a car that was pulled over by the police. The police discover a small amount of marijuana in the car. Even though the marijuana was not found on the student, he is indicted on felony charges for possessing a controlled substance and pleads guilty to a misdemeanor possession charge. Because the student was receiving federal aid at the time of the arrest, he is no longer eligible for any federal financial aid and his future at school is in doubt.

This exact scenario occurred to a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison last year and is currently the subject of a federal law suit. Students for Sensible Drug Policy Foundation (SSDP) and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed the suit on behalf of a number of students across the country that have lost aid under the provisions of this law.

Many of you may think that if you're convicted of a drug offense, then you deserve to lose the right to receive federal aid (taxpayer money) to pursue a higher education. But why single out minor drug offenders? Under this law, murderers and rapists can still receive federal aid. And, in perhaps the most ironic twist, former drug offenders can receive aid as well.

The law only prevents aid from being received if the offense occurred while the offender was enrolled in school. So, if someone committed say, half a dozen drug offenses prior to attending college, and none while in school, they can still receive federal aid. But a freshman, who makes a mistake as an eighteen year old, can have his whole life derailed when they lose the funding needed to attend school.

Federal financial aid is available for those who cannot pay for their own educational endeavors. In effect, this law only harms those students who require financial assistance to attend school, thus leaving students from wealthy families immune from the effects of this law, as they require no help to fund their education. It also increases the burden on poorer students as college costs rise and the funds with which to pay those costs diminish.

Barring young people from an education will lead to more crime and will make our population less educated.

I don't quite see how the greater good is served by this law. Student aid was never intended to be wielded by the state as a weapon for use against drug offenders. The SSDP's complaint states that approximately 35,000 students per year are denied student aid due to the HEA Aid Elimination Provision. Over the past six years, more than 200,000 students have had their educational and professional dreams derailed, if not destroyed, by the HEA Aid Elimination Provision.

Until this harmful and unfair policy decision is amended by Congress or is defeated in the courts, please be aware of it and don't take chances with your future by acting foolishly.