[top]Student Drug Testing
According to SSDP’s research, currently less than 5% of high schools in the U.S. perform random drug tests on students. However, the federal government has recently ramped up its campaign that encourages schools to put drug-testing regimes in place, even offering grants to fund such regimes. Drug company representatives are making presentations to many local school boards to promote their products and turn a profit. An increasing number of schools are mandating students to take drug tests just to participate in extra-curricular activities.
SSDP believes that drug testing is ineffective, counterproductive, expensive, and invasive. Science has shown that drug testing simply does not work to reduce drug use, and drug testing may even be counterproductive as such programs might aggravate existing drug problems by excluding students from extracurricular activities that are proven to help lower drug use.
Drug testing brings with it rights violations of the Fourth Amendment, SSDP believes, based on the inherent intrusiveness of forcing a student to urinate into a cup while a school official is right outside the stall. This is particularly true for body-conscious adolescents who might feel this to be a humiliating experience.
The government’s promotion of student drug testing is part of an emerging trend where students seem to be losing their privacy and rights. For example, at many schools, unannounced searches are conducted where students' belongings are searched through, regardless if there is cause to do so.
SSDP provides substantial information on its website to help promote its campaign by letting the public know how they can help students maintain their rights and privacy.
[top]Call 911 Good Samaritan Policies
Call 911 Good Samaritan Policies (also known as Medical Amnesty Policies) are life-saving measures that encourage responsible decision making by removing to threat of punitive policies when medical help during drug or
alcohol related instances is needed. Threat from punitive policies can often prevent individuals from getting life-saving medical help. According to SSDP’s research, there are at least 91 schools with Good Samaritan Policies. More than half of these policies cover situations involving all substances, while just under half cover only those involving alcohol. At least 11 states have enacted some form of Good Samaritan legislation. Five states, including New Mexico (2007), Washington (2010), New York Connecticut (2011), and Illinois (2012) grant some degree of immunity of prosecution for people who obtain medical help during an overdose. Four other states extend limited immunity with regard to underage alcohol consumption and possession, including Colorado (2005), New Jersey (2009), Texas and Pennsylvania (2011).
In 2005, Students for Sensible Drug Policy launched its Campus Change Campaign to address these issues. SSDP’s efforts in this campaign have played an important role in promoting the adoption of Call 911 Good Samaritan Policies across the country. SSDP chapters that have recently worked with their schools to pass the policies include the College of William & Mary, Franklin Pierce University, University of Connecticut, University of Maryland, Ithaca College, Columbia University and University of Georgia.
[top]The Higher Education Act
Beginning in 2000, students with drug convictions no longer have access to federal financial aid due to the provision of the Higher Education Act (HEA). In 1998, the Aid Elimination Penalty seemingly slipped into the 257-page HEA reauthorization bill without a debate or a recorded vote. Many congress members and financial aid administrators were actually oblivious to this change in law until long after it came into existence. As a result, over 200,000 students have not been eligible for federal loans, grants, and work-study because of the HEA Aid Elimination Penalty.
To take action, SSDP and its allies forced Congress to adjust the law in 2006, so that only students attending college and receiving financial aid who are convicted will have eligibility withdrawn. SSDP reports success with this campaign, as now people who were convicted before they decided to attend college will be able to get an education and move on with their lives.
However, problems still exist with the provisions of this law. For one, college students that do get convicted lose their aid and will most likely have to drop out as a result. SSDP believes that, based on statistics and common sense, pulling students out of school will not reduce drug abuse and young people will have little encouragement to become successful citizens.
In July 2009, the Removing Impediments to Students’ Education (RISE) Act was introduced into the 11th Congress. The bill would repeal the aid elimination penalty. In September 2009, The House passed the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which included language allowing for repeal of the Aid Elimination Penalty for students convicted of drug possession.
In July 2009, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) introduced the Removing Impediments to Students’ Education (RISE) Act into the 111th Congress. The bill, which had substantial support, would repeal the aid elimination penalty. Unfortunately, attempts from Rep. Souder (R-IN) to enact a law that would only take away a student’s aid eligibility if convicted of drug distribution offenses were unsuccessful. SSDP continues to make efforts to defeat the Souder Amendment, and provides resources on its webpage to help others repeal this law as well.
[top]Campus Change Campaign
This campaign is based on the premise that young people are forced to live with the implications and consequences of drug policies for the rest of their lives. SSDP takes a proactive stance in getting the message out that it is up to those who want change to create more sensible and effective ways to handle the real and complicated issues caused by drug abuse and
addiction. Students on campuses hold a unique position in being able to take the lead in addressing existing drug policies and encouraging the adoption of alternative drug policies. SSDP’s webpage features its
Campus Change Campaign Grassroots Guide, as well as links to talking points and editable materials for some of the most popular campaigns that SSDP activists are running on campuses across the country.
[top]On the Record Project
The On the Record Project is SSDP’s campaign to get politicians on record about their stances on drug policy. SSDP has recently taken this project a step up; SSDP chapters in GOP primary states have had the opportunity to put candidates front and center about their positions on all drug policy issues, not just
medical marijuana. Some of the project’s recent successes are from students who managed to get GOP frontrunners Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum on
video answering questions related to drug policies.
HISTORY
Right before the state primary from January 4th-10th, 2012, roughly forty SSDP chapter members
followed presidential candidates throughout New Hampshire in efforts to put these candidates on the spot. Within less than a week, videos of Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul were created and posted on Youtube, resulting in huge media hits. The “On the Record” Project will bring drug policy reform onto the national political agenda.
SSDP was also involved in a campaign called Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana, which was responsible for Sen. Barack Obama’s promise to end the federal raids in the states with medical marijuana laws. This was done with the help of sick New Hampshire medical marijuana patients, who captured video footage of presidential candidates discussing medical marijuana laws.
[top]Pell Grants for Incarcerated Students
Students for Sensible Drug Policy is partnering with the College and Community Fellowship and The Fortune Society as part of the Education from the Inside Out Coalition to help remove barriers to higher education funding for students in prison.
The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act dismantled higher education in prison by eliminating inmate eligibility for Pell Grants. SSDP believes that when individuals in prison have access to higher education, there is a ripple effects of benefits that surpasses the rehabilitation of incarcerated individuals; higher education has a positive impact on society by reducing recidivism, increasing public safety and strengthening communities. Incarceration without education is a bad investment.
- Nationally, correctional costs consume $68 billion each year. One in every 31 people in the US is under some form of correctional supervision: jail, prison, probation or parole. More than two thirds of incarcerated people are re-arrested for a new offense within three years of their release, a clear indication that current correctional policies are failing.
- Increasing incarceration rates does not pay off. Despite the significant rise in the correctional population over the past 25 years, rising rates of imprisonment have not been shown to reduce crime or increase public safety. Education is proven to lower re-offense, thus lowering incarceration costs. For every dollar invested in correctional education programs, two dollars are saved through prevented recidivism.
[top]Drug Education and Counselling
Drug abuse and addiction are very real and serious problems in many schools. Unfortunately, more often than not, government-sponsored programs aimed at solving these problems actually make them worse, alienating students in the process.
Currently, the largest such program is the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) program. Science shows that D.A.R.E. is not effective in achieving its mission of reducing drug abuse among students. Some reports even show that the D.A.R.E. program has a “boomerang” effect, where the prevalence of drug use actually worsens.
SSDP views such a program as doomed to fail since it fosters a culture of fear and distrust between students and drug counselors. The D.A.R.E program actually employs uniformed police officers, not health care professionals, to teach students about drugs. Rather than providing students with science-based information about drugs, the students are scared with horror stories about drug addiction.
SSDP understands the significance of providing effective education and counseling to students, but it needs to be accurate, non-judgmental, and have scientific support. The goal is to get educators to create an atmosphere of trust with their students to discuss ways to reduce the harms associated with drug use, not try to scare them into abstinence by bringing in the police.
[top]End Zero Tolerance
SSDP has been witness to the unintended harm caused by zero tolerance policies, and is working to educate the public about the failure of zero tolerance policies, and their predictable, fatal consequences when targeted at youth, and the violations of basic human rights when zero tolerance policies are enforced.
One example of the harm zero tolerance policies possess is the case of a boy named Nick Stuban who ultimately took his life after expulsion from his school for possessing a legal drug. He and his parents hoped that he would receive redemption upon a hearing before the Fairfax County School Board, but his treatment was comparable to a criminal in an adversarial courtroom with a hostile prosecutor. It was shortly after his expulsion that his life was turned upside down as a result of the negative consequences the ordeal had on his surroundings and social networks. Sadly, this is not an isolated case, as another teen committed suicide in Fairfax County for very similar reasons.
[top]Global Drug Policy
SSDP is United Nations recognized and takes part in international meetings including the Commission on Narcotic Drug and the General Assembly. Students and youth are affected by drug policies, and SSDP International works towards a vision of having policies that “respect human rights and focus on public health and harm reduction”. SSDP has presence all over the globe which lends to diverse experiences that provide it with an advantage in many different forums; for example, international chapters have held debates related to harm reduction. Other examples of how SSDP is advocating for reform is through participation in the peace caravan across the United States and involvement the United Nations General Assembly Thematic Debate on Drugs and Crime.
[top]Government Anti-Drug Ads
The federal government has spent more than $1 billion since 1998 on anti-drug advertising campaigns that have been found to be misleading and even offensive. These campaigns are run by the Office of National Drug Control Policy. According to scientific studies, it's been repeatedly shown that the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign is not only ineffective at reducing drug abuse, but that the ads may actually increase pro-drug attitudes in teens.
SSDP understands the importance of educating young people about the effects of drugs and drug abuse, but finds these government ads to be an abysmal failure. There is a demand from young people to get to the truth of the facts about drugs so that they can know the real risks, but when they are presented with obviously exaggerated and far-from-reality for political purposes, anything the government has to say loses credibility.
An internal White House review gave the campaign a score of just 6 out of 100 for “results and accountability”. Responding to this mounting evidence against the ads’ effectiveness, Congress has cut the program’s funding by 47% since 2001. However, Congress still plans to spend more than $100 million on the ad campaign next year.
Examples of Propaganda Ads
[top]Lower Drinking Age
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 is a federal policy that undermines the ability of state legislatures to enact policies that address the legal drinking age. The Act uses federal money for infrastructures (mostly roads) to coerce states into complying with a legal minimum drinking age of 21 and is a disincentive for states to enact legislatures that are responsive to local circumstances, which may need different approaches. Local circumstances include the landscape of young people’s alcohol use more locally and in correlation with the laws and policies tailored to the particulars of a state. SSDP believes this federal policy conflicts with the principles of harm reduction because State Legislatures are void of policies that could reduce the overall harm of alcohol use.
By 21 years of age, people are legally allowed to drive, get married, enrol in the military, and have had the ability to vote for several years, yet American youth alcohol policy criminalizes alcohol consumption by those under the age of 21. SSDP sees this as counterproductive and not realistic, and that the many economic resources needed and used to support this minimum drinking age or needlessly wasted. This policy seems even more ineffective when more than half of high school seniors reported of having drank in the previous month, and more than 90% claim it is ‘very easy’ or ‘fairly easy’ to get alcohol.
SSDP views other problems associated with this law. Those under the drinking age are likely to unsafely experiment with alcohol in situations of isolation and other riskier environments, resulting in outcomes like binge drinking. Pressure on schools to provide ‘abstinence-only’ education arises based on the effects this law has on people under the age of 21, which leaves no ream for harm reduction information. Ultimately, SSDP does not declare one official position on the appropriate drinking age, as it believes it is up to each state to determine what works best in consideration of local circumstances; however, 18 or 19 years of age seems to be preferred over the legal drinking age of 21.
SSDP does not have an official position on what the best minimum drinking age is because the organization feels it is up to the states to find what works best, and this may not be the same everywhere, but many believe 18 or 19 years of age should become the minimum.
[top]2012 Annual Report Campaigns
- Activists in New York Save Lives:
On July 20, 2011, New York Governor Cuomo signed into law a statewide 911 Good Samaritan Policy. SSDP members met with dozens of state officials to lobby for A2063C, which gives legal amnesty to individuals who are in need medical treatment resulting from drug or alcohol use, as well as to individuals who seek help for someone else in need of medical assistance resulting from drug or alcohol use. The passage of this bill was the culmination of a collaborative effort of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), and the Long Island Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (LICADD).
- House Cuts Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign to Zero:
During SSDP’s 2011 Training Conference and lobby day, the focus was on asking Congress to defund the White House’s failed National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. SSDP has been advocating for the campaign to be eliminated since 2006, but had never seen a chamber of Congress actually cut all funding for the program, until now. In July 2011, a House committee eliminated all funding for the media campaign.
- Youth Representation at International Forums:
In March 2012, SSDP student and youth representatives from Mexico, Colombia and Poland attended the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs with special consultative status. Youth rarely attend such high-level policy meetings, even though such policies affect them. SSDP’s is campaigning to change this fact. Some efforts include the SSDP delegation screening a video produced by chapters in seven countries that highlight how the drug war impacts young people. SSDP, along with partners, will continue to campaign for greater youth voice at the United Nations.
- Illinois Enacts Statewide Overdose Prevention Law
On February 26, 2012 Illinois became the fifth state to enact a “Call 911 Good Samaritan Policy” when Governor Quinn signed S.B. 1701 into law. SSDP students and allies played an crucial role in promoting for this legislation, including those at Northern Illinois University and Roosevelt University.
- UC on SSDP Changes a Campus Marijuana Policy:
Following a meeting with student government leaders on January 30, 2012, the University of Connecticut’s Office of Community Standards altered its penalties for students found in possession of small amounts of marijuana, equalizing the punishment with underage drinking. The change is largely in response to 
Connecticut’s recent decriminalization of marijuana, which lowered the penalty for possession of under half an ounce of marijuana to a fine of $150 and a 60-day license suspension for those under 21, rather than up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. SSDP student board member Sam Tracy authored the endorsement as a Senator and later won the race for class President on a platform that included reforming campus marijuana policies.
- http://ssdp.org/news/blog/saving-lives-in-florida/]Florida Governor signs Florida’s 911 Good Samaritan Act:
On April 6th, 2012, Governor Rick Scott signed Florida’s 911 Good Samaritan Act (SB 278). Florida is now the 13th state to enact some form of Good Samaritan legislation. More specifically, Florida is now the 6th state to extend protection to possession of controlled substances (joining NM, WA, CT, NY, and IL) and the 6th state to add help-seeking as a mitigating factor (joining NM, AK, MD, WA, UT, and IL). SSDP students and allies in Florida played a contributory to pass this bill.
- Connecticut 17th State to Pass Medical Marijuana Law:
On May 6, 2012 Connecticut became the 17th state to pass medical marijuana legislation. Connecticut SSDP students worked to help gain support for this legislation. Such efforts from the students including hosting rallies, coordinating student lobbying efforts, testifying in front of lawmakers, and personally calling members of the House and Senate to express their support for the bill.
- http://ssdp.org/news/blog/house-votes-on-medical-marijuana/]House Votes on Legal Marijuana:
On May 9, 2012 in the first Federal vote on medical marijuana in the House since 2007, the House voted 262-163 against the Rohrabacher-Hinchey-McClintock-Farr amendment. This amendment would have banned the use of Federal funds to prevent States from implementing their own state laws that authorize use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana in the 17 states and the District of Columbia where medical marijuana is legal. 3,626 letters to Congress were sent through SSDP’s online action center in only a few days leading up to the vote; the amendment was ultimately defeated.
Posting Rules
Through partnerships with trusted organizations and aggressive social media outreach efforts, SSDP has more than doubled the number of alert subscribers in its database since 2010 (from 62,000 to 129,000) and has vastly improved the quality of its data as well.
