Wisconsin Govenor moving ahead with plan to drug test food stamp users

I guarantee the number will be higher than .3% if they go through with this.

In the city I'm standing in right now, I'd wager it's closer to 50%. Dead beats who game the system for "free" food are everywhere. They'd rather spend that money on drugs.
Hell, they even got the local taxes buying them free needles and supplies to shoot up with. It's like they run the damn place.

Only 1 percent year positive?
Riiiiight..

a reply to: carewemust


What drugs? That is hard saying.

I would imagine that Scott Walker may have gotten a call from certain pharma manufactures (lobby) and maybe their hugely profitable drugs would be omitted? Just a guess.

As was said above, it sounds good, but it costs more than it's worth. You catch a few but you end up spending way too much money to test.

originally posted by: Edumakated
I'd want to see the data and methodology. I have a hard time believing the positive rate is only 1%. It would be higher than that in the general population and I know you aren't asking me to believe the food stamp recipients are less likely to the drug users.

I need to do some digging around as something isn't passing the smell test imho with that hit rate being claimed.

most drugs pass out of the system relatively quickly, requiring users to only hold out for a day or two to test 'clean'. the big exception to this is marijuana, which can linger in the system much longer, especially for heavier users. casual users would probably still test clean by refraining for a day or two.

so this only catches people who smoke a lot of marijuana, and the real hardcore types of addicts who can't stop themselves... and who need society's support more than ever. it's a terrible policy.

I have known many people in the past who blew their food stamp money on drugs, trading them for half the value to people they knew, using excuses that they needed money to go to a doctor or to fix their car. Lots of time it was their parents or siblings that traded with them. Talked into doing it because they want to help out their kid or brother or sister.

But then there are the people who really need it and they rarely do any drugs, but once in a while someone comes over and offers them a hit off a joint. I can't see a person having a little pot occasionally as something that should disqualify them. What about the people with medical marijuana cards?

I am thinking they should give them one free ride for one test occasionally, it is hard to say no sometimes if people go to something like a bachelor party or bridal shower with their friends.

originally posted by: fiverx313
so this only catches people who smoke a lot of marijuana, and the real hardcore types of addicts who can't stop themselves... and who need society's support more than ever. it's a terrible policy.

And let's be real here, those people aren't on welfare anyways.

Still, if you can afford booze and pot and cigarettes, you shouldn't be getting money from the government.

originally posted by: amazing
Still, if you can afford booze and pot and cigarettes, you shouldn't be getting money from the government.

totally disagree.. i don't think we should expect poor people to live an ascetic lifestyle. sometimes those little pleasures are what makes it bearable to keep going.

Forget food stamp users, test politicians!!!!

originally posted by: lordcomac
I guarantee the number will be higher than .3% if they go through with this.

In the city I'm standing in right now, I'd wager it's closer to 50%. Dead beats who game the system for "free" food are everywhere. They'd rather spend that money on drugs.
Hell, they even got the local taxes buying them free needles and supplies to shoot up with. It's like they run the damn place.

That is one reason why president Trump says that welfare reform will be a big item for 2018.

And in certain Michigan Town's, it looks like everybody who is on food stamps also has a handicap parking sticker. They fight over the few handicapped spots at Walmart.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

Here is a link that provides a bunch of graphics that show total number of people tested versus positive results across seven different states. You can do the math yourself. No methodology needed. Just good ole fashioned division.

What 7 states discovered after spending more than $1 million drug testing welfare recipients

You guys really need to stop being so gullible. It took all of 30 seconds to figure out how misleading that link was and the obvious attempt to make it seem like the positive test results are lower than they really are...

The article compares total number of recipients to those that test positive. For example, in Missouri, it states 38,970 welfare recipients, but only 48 tested positive. The liberal mind will say see, less than 1/10th of a percent tested positive! Of course, the real question is HOW MANY WERE TESTED?

If you read in the article, in Missouri to keep with the example actually tested only 446 people! In other words, 48 / 446 = about 10% testing positive. See what they are doing is only testing a very small subset of the population based on a questionnaire, not actually testing all the recipients so we really don't know what the actual positive rate may be.

Here are some numbers from TN to show what I mean... More than 10% testing positive. Only tested 279 out people out of 16,017 applicants. Of the 279 tested, 37 were positive!

From July 1 to Dec. 31, 2014

16,017 people applied for Families First

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

25 were referrred for a substance abuse evaluation

5 enrolled in drug treatment or support group programs

8 refused to take the questionnaire and were disqualified

81 were denied benefits because they dropped out of the application process

$4,215 spent on drug tests

Source: Tennessee Department of Human Services

a reply to: Krazysh0t


They tried this in Flori-Duh until they found out the Governor was charging $34 for drug tests in His 'personal business' (strip mall/Quick-Care- This turd owns them) while the average Florida hospital was charging $150.00 remember the recipient had to pay for their own tests.

The initial results were 3.2% and some government turd said those numbers were low, so the re-shuffle showed only 2.7% tested positive..

Carl Hiasson, a write/reporter from the Miami area offered to pay for ALL the tests to the Florida House and Senate and they declined...

This is nothing more than another boondoggle, along the lines of Major cities that get told if a Stadium is built it will provide jobs for those who will be 're-housed'...

It would be interesting to see which politician owns or has an interest in places where the tests will be sold/administered..

Stay Hydrated...

originally posted by: lordcomac
I guarantee the number will be higher than .3% if they go through with this.

In the city I'm standing in right now, I'd wager it's closer to 50%. Dead beats who game the system for "free" food are everywhere. They'd rather spend that money on drugs.
Hell, they even got the local taxes buying them free needles and supplies to shoot up with. It's like they run the damn place.

I just demonstrated it is closer to 10%. The .3% number is based on faulty math. All one has to do is look at the food stamp fraud that goes on in the hood and you know it is higher than the numbers they are claiming.

a reply to: Edumakated

So your argument then would be that a 10% hit rate is acceptable?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

So your argument then would be that a 10% hit rate is acceptable?

Uh no. 10% is high as hell which means testing is more than justified.

a reply to: JimNasium

Yeah this is ALWAYS a bad idea. Getting masking agents or fake pee setups is stupid easy. Especially since these things tend to not be random either.

a reply to: Edumakated

Food stamp fraud is hardly a reason the drug test people who paid into the system.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

So your argument then would be that a 10% hit rate is acceptable?

Uh no. 10% is high as hell which means testing is more than justified.

No it isn't. It is an AWFUIL hit rate. It is stupid low for the amount of drug users that proponents of these bills suggest will come through. You just don't want to admit this is a bad idea.

So dumb, do they know how easy it is to fake a test also how is wasting money going to save money?