Support growing for random drug testing welfare recipients

Search

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,542
Tokens
States consider drug tests for welfare recipients<NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT><SCRIPT language=javascript>if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object();window.yzq_d['aw3BtkWTSS0-']='&U=13dsj4lpg%2fN%3daw3BtkWTSS0-%2fC%3d717158.13184153.13395403.5439043%2fD%3dFB%2fB%3d5592263%2fV%3d1';</SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>


<!-- end .primary-media --><!-- end .related-media --><CITE class=vcard>By TOM BREEN, Associated Press Writer Tom Breen, Associated Press Writer </CITE>– <ABBR class=timedate title=2009-03-26T06:28:11-0700>Thu Mar 26, 9:28 am ET</ABBR>
<!-- end .byline -->CHARLESTON, W.Va. – Want government assistance? Just say no to drugs.
Lawmakers in at least eight states want recipients of food stamps, unemployment benefits or welfare to submit to random drug testing.
The effort comes as more Americans turn to these safety nets to ride out the recession. Poverty and civil liberties advocates fear the strategy could backfire, discouraging some people from seeking financial aid and making already desperate situations worse.
Those in favor of the drug tests say they are motivated out of a concern for their constituents' health and ability to put themselves on more solid financial footing once the economy rebounds. But proponents concede they also want to send a message: you don't get something for nothing.
"Nobody's being forced into these assistance programs," said Craig Blair, a Republican in the West Virginia Legislature who has created a Web site — notwithmytaxdollars.com — that bears a bobble-headed likeness of himself advocating this position. "If so many jobs require random drug tests these days, why not these benefits?"
Blair is proposing the most comprehensive measure in the country, as it would apply to anyone applying for food stamps, unemployment compensation or the federal programs usually known as "welfare": Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Women, Infants and Children.
Lawmakers in other states are offering similar, but more modest proposals.
On Wednesday, the Kansas House of Representatives approved a measure mandating drug testing for the 14,000 or so people getting cash assistance from the state, which now goes before the state senate. In February, the Oklahoma Senate unanimously passed a measure that would require drug testing as a condition of receiving TANF benefits, and similar bills have been introduced in Missouri and Hawaii. A Florida senator has proposed a bill linking unemployment compensation to drug testing, and a member of Minnesota's House of Representatives has a bill requiring drug tests of people who get public assistance under a state program there.
A January attempt in the Arizona Senate to establish such a law failed.
In the past, such efforts have been stymied by legal and cost concerns, said Christine Nelson, a program manager with the National Conference of State Legislatures. But states' bigger fiscal crises, and the surging demand for public assistance, could change that.
"It's an example of where you could cut costs at the expense of a segment of society that's least able to defend themselves," said Frank Crabtree, executive director of the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Drug testing is not the only restriction envisioned for people receiving public assistance: a bill in the Tennessee Legislature would cap lottery winnings for recipients at $600.
There seems to be no coordinated move around the country to push these bills, and similar proposals have arisen periodically since federal welfare reform in the 1990s. But the appearance of a cluster of such proposals in the midst of the recession shows lawmakers are newly engaged about who is getting public assistance.
Particularly troubling to some policy analysts is the drive to drug test people collecting unemployment insurance, whose numbers nationwide now exceed 5.4 million, the highest total on records dating back to 1967.
"It doesn't seem like the kind of thing to bring up during a recession," said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "People who are unemployed, who have lost their job, that's a sympathetic group. Americans are tuned into that, because they're worried they'll be next."
Indeed, these proposals are coming at a time when more Americans find themselves in need of public assistance.
Although the number of TANF recipients has stayed relatively stable at 3.8 million in the last year, claims for unemployment benefits and food stamps have soared.

In December, more than 31.7 million Americans were receiving food stamp benefits, compared with 27.5 million the year before.
The link between public assistance and drug testing stems from the Congressional overhaul of welfare in the 1990s, which allowed states to implement drug testing as a condition of receiving help.
But a federal court struck down a Michigan law that would have allowed for "random, suspicionless" testing, saying it violated the 4th Amendment's protections against unreasonable search and seizure, said Liz Schott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
At least six states — Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Virginia — tie eligibility for some public assistance to drug testing for convicted felons or parolees, according to the NCSL.
Nelson said programs that screen welfare applicants by assigning them to case workers for interviews have shown some success without the need for drug tests. These alternative measures offer treatment, but can also threaten future benefits if drug problems persist, she said. They also cost less than the $400 or so needed for tests that can catch a sufficient range of illegal drugs, and rule out false positive results with a follow-up test, she said.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
are the companies that are getting welfare payments from the government being submitted to drug tests.

dumb idea imo.
 

AIG Bonus Recipient
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
17,848
Tokens
Great idea. Would prove once and for all that most welfare recipients are worthless wastes to this country.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
there talking about people who get unemployment to so your boy rightside would be forced to get drug testing as well.

my whole gripe with the deal is suspicion or thought that people who are on government assistance are somehow bad people. i dont really think someone who got laid off is a bad guy like whalewager does.

if you show me a picture with AIG executives being forced to pee in a cup since they are on the government payroll, then i would agree with this.

to me though this is more class warfare, rich taking advantage of the poor/misfortunate. more then 1/3rd of this country abuses drugs, so good luck with that.

i also laughed at the comment where the guy said these are voluntary programs, you arn't forced to use them. yea, don't use them and starve you and your family to death.

of course you're going to use the program. now the guy who loses his job and is unemployed with a family of four who needs government assistance may be a worthless waste in whalewager's opinion, i am not going to play the suspicion card just because they are getting government money.

this is just another way for the government to control you like a puppet.

i know if i lose my job first thing i'll do is get on unemployment heh.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
How about testing CEO's they're getting billions and snorting like fools.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,542
Tokens
you mean the CEO's of Fortune 500 companies, of which 97 percent have drug-free workplace policies?

right that's what i thought.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
drug free workplace don't apply to CEO's. you honestly think a CEO submits to drug testing? like i said, you show me a picture of these AIG execs peeing in a cup i'll buy it.

if not, it's just another way for the government to determine who's suspicious without any proof of suspicion. its another hurdle for the poor and people who got layed off while the AIG execs sit in there penthouses on the government payroll with no strings attached.

god i wish i was rich and had puppet butlers like rolltide defending me.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
you mean the CEO's of Fortune 500 companies, of which 97 percent have drug-free workplace policies?

right that's what i thought.

Why should they not piss up before we pay up? Thats what you want poor people do.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
punter, rolltide believes in the bildeburgers, vast conspiracies, presidents not being in control and the like.

but he believes CEO's of fortune 500 companies, who make millions of dollars a year, have to submit to drug testing. like i said, i'd love to be rich and have a puppet butler like rolltide defending me.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,542
Tokens
Why should they not piss up before we pay up? Thats what you want poor people do.

before we pay up? wtf are you talking about?

if you are saying that CEO's of companies accepting federal money (our taxes) should pee in a cup then actually I'd agree with that if in fact they will make welfare recipients do the same. Both getting Gov't $$ so treat them the same, eh?

My point was not about bail-out CEO's specifically but that the vast majority of CEO's do put a drug-free program in place at their companies. Whether or not they adhere to the standards themselves is a different story.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,542
Tokens
punter, rolltide believes in the bildeburgers, vast conspiracies, presidents not being in control and the like.

lol, tell me who the nutjob is here

1) GTC - the guy who believes BHO, who has absolutely no economic experience, never had P&L responsibility, invested in the markets, or owned a company is making the vast majority of these economic decisions including bailouts and stimulus packages

or

2) ME - the guy that knows BHO would not have the slightest idea where to start looking at the economic recession and relies solely on folks from the Treasury and Federal Reserve (largely made up of CFR and Bildebergers) to come up with their own self-serving plans

@)
 

Everything's Legal in the USofA...Just don't get c
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
2,199
Tokens
DON'T WE HAVE ENOUGH FRIGGIN DEBT???

AREN'T WE WASTING ENOUGH FRIGGIN MONEY??

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THEY TEST POSITIVE, CUT OFF THEIR CHECKS AND LET THEM STARVE TO DEATH????

You'd think by now the idiot pandering politicians would give us something in the way of solutions besides their idiot pandering.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
who cares if they put a program in place. they can get around it and you don't seem to put as much emphasis on them breaking that then the people on welfare having to pass it.

you publish there results, make it public info since we own it now, or most of it.

see, rolltide will believe these ceo's submit to drug testing, and then runs with alex jones and all that conspiracy crap.

he picks and chooses what to run with instead of going conspiracy the whole way which renders his argument useless.

why do you think he posted this now? he wants them to submit to drug testing. he didn't even think about these ceo's until it was thrown back at him.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,542
Tokens
wtf are you talking about and how is making welfare recipients pee in a cup related to a conspiracy?

Do I think CEO's piss in a cup? no probably not which is why I said " Whether or not they adhere to the standards themselves is a different story." Can't you fn read?

and then you say "he wants them to submit to drug testing". I could care less I'm just saying that if you are going to drug test welfare recipients accepting government funds then sure, go ahead and test CEO's of bailed out companies. Will it happen? Of course not, nor could I care less.

I would, however, love to see the %% of welfare recipients with tainted urine.

however you want to spin that with Alex Jones is up to you.

I see you completely ignored the "tell me who the nutjob is here" post. congrats, well debated

lol
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
before we pay up? wtf are you talking about?

if you are saying that CEO's of companies accepting federal money (our taxes) should pee in a cup then actually I'd agree with that if in fact they will make welfare recipients do the same. Both getting Gov't $$ so treat them the same, eh?

My point was not about bail-out CEO's specifically but that the vast majority of CEO's do put a drug-free program in place at their companies. Whether or not they adhere to the standards themselves is a different story.

When was the conversation ever about people not receiving public monies?
 

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
1,450
Tokens
Been thinking about this one for a bit. I agree with the notion that if your on welfare your ass should get a drug test. On the other hand if you lost your job and are collecting unemployment then no, you shouldn't have to take a drug test. So why the difference you ask. Well if your collecting unemployment then you have paid into that service. Your company has X amount of money budgeted for you. Its goes to healthcare, social security, 401K, and services such as unemployment. That company simply takes that money from you and passes it on to the federal/state govt. So for those people collecting unemployment your just getting your money back, and IMHO shouldn't be subject to drug testing. I also think you should only draw welfare for 3 months before your cut off. But thats a different debate for a different day.
 

Officially Punching out Nov 25th
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,482
Tokens
DON'T WE HAVE ENOUGH FRIGGIN DEBT???

AREN'T WE WASTING ENOUGH FRIGGIN MONEY??

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THEY TEST POSITIVE, CUT OFF THEIR CHECKS AND LET THEM STARVE TO DEATH????

You'd think by now the idiot pandering politicians would give us something in the way of solutions besides their idiot pandering.

So true...a politicians only job is to get re-elected...
 

Officially Punching out Nov 25th
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,482
Tokens
Just curious how much would another bloated government program cost the taxpayers? At what point would it be no longer cost effective...Test everyone on welfare multiple times to catch and cut off 10-20%?

No to more bloated government programs...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,832
Messages
13,573,835
Members
100,876
Latest member
kiemt5385
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com