Since 1998, the government has denied more than 157,000 people federal financial aid because of an amendment in the Higher Education Act barring assistance to all students with drug convictions, according to Students for Sensible Drug Policy.

This policy does nothing to deter potential students from committing drug-related crimes, said Tom Angell, communications director for the group, which is working to repeal the legislation.

Angell said the act makes it difficult for drug offenders to break out of the cycle of criminal behavior, meaning the provision actually causes more crime.

“We haven’t seen rates of substance abuse go down,” Angell said. “It only worsens our national drug problem.”

A release from the SSDP also says a recent FBI report states the number of arrests for marijuana violations last year was 755,187, the highest in U.S. history and double the number from 1993.

The group claims the increased number of arrests could mean more students are being denied financial aid.

University of Wisconsin Student Financial Services Director Steve Van Ess said few students on the UW campus are denied federal financial aid under this provision.

“It affects very few people,” Van Ess said.

The question on financial aid forms about drug convictions complicates the process of applying for assistance and should be removed, Van Ess said. He added many want the process simplified and questions such as drug offense records are “a lot of bells and whistles” unnecessary to the application.

Van Ess said he is against drug abuse and there should be laws punishing drug offenders. But he said consequences from drug violations should be part of criminal sentences and should not extend to eligibility for financial aid.

Angell said the Higher Education Act was written to assist those in poverty to get an education, but maintained the provision dealing with drug offenses discriminates against poor people. Angell explained those in poverty are at a disadvantage, because richer drug offenders have both the ability to pay for college on their own and are able to pay lawyers to get them out of their charges.

Van Ess said he agrees the provision is “harder on poorer students.” He added there is an assessment program through which students can regain eligibility for financial aid, but not all students can afford it. Van Ess also said there is a free assessment program, but many are not aware of the program when it is available around the time of their sentencing.

There are efforts to change the provision to only affect students committing drug offenses while enrolled in college, both Angell and Van Ess said, but neither think this would completely solve the problem.

“It doesn’t address the fundamental problems with the law,” Angell said.

Van Ess said revising the Higher Education Act would be helpful and he hopes if the Higher Education Act was reassessed, the drug offender provision would be removed entirely.

“Certainly that [would be] better than the current situation,” Van Ess said.