States Consider Drug Tests for Welfare Recipients

States Consider Drug Tests for Welfare Recipients

www.foxnews.com

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 Viginia 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.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I like this idea.

Many jobs in this country require random drug testing, so why not welfare and state assistance recipients?

People from all walks of life receive government assistance, so they can't say it is profiling or racist or prejudiced. It does send the message (hopefully) that if you are a drug addict or test positive for drugs when you are assisted by the government and the tax payers, you might not have that assistance for much longer.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

If you are on welfare, how would you afford illegal drugs?

Just how many people that get welfare, can buy that stuff when they need food, and other things.

Can there really be that big of a problem of welfare people on drugs.

the lawmakers should also include those receiving unemployment insurance.
those individuals also benefit from a form of public assistance.
it's the fair thing to do.

Originally posted by andy1033
If you are on welfare, how would you afford illegal drugs?

Just how many people that get welfare, can buy that stuff when they need food, and other things.

Can there really be that big of a problem of welfare people on drugs.

Yes.

It may be surprising, but people find ways to afford it. Even on public assistance.

Originally posted by andy1033
If you are on welfare, how would you afford illegal drugs?

Just how many people that get welfare, can buy that stuff when they need food, and other things.

Can there really be that big of a problem of welfare people on drugs.

yeah, just go walk into the food stamp office and take a look. It makes it easier to buy your fix when you have a supplemental income.

I agree with the most part of this just because if you're getting free food/cash just because you are under the line, you shouldn't have such luxary things until you get your act back together. I do not support drug testing for unemployment benefits though. In order to recieve unemployment, you must work and pay the taxes...and you only get it for so long, depending how much time you put in. IMO that is earned money already, so there shouldn't be a restriction like drug testing.

reply to post by andy1033


Oh Andy, you don't get out much do you? You should talk to someone from the hood. You would be amazed at what goes on there. This will never pass due to the bleeding hearts out there. I am all for it. When I was in the millitary and working for other companies after that, if I tested positive, I would no longer be able to support my family.

reply to post by andy1033


The world and it's mother are on drugs of one sort or another.
I suspect some people aren't even aware of it!

Should those on benefit's be tested for it?

I don't know, I certainly understand the sentiments but the whole drug taking topic is much more complex than some admit and to discuss it here probably contravenes T&C.

Unfortunately random drug testing is not the right thing to do.
If you think this is the right thing, then you should submit to it to.
All people should, which its unconstitutional.
So no one should have to.
Lets start drug testing Politicians and Police officers as well?
Or do you only get drug tested, based upon how you are judged and discriminated against by the wealthy elite pieces of garbage?

reply to post by aLiiEn


In my job, it is a requirement that I get tested on a random basis.

I have no problem with that.

Why should there be a problem with people who are being supported/partially supported by the tax-payers being randomly drug tested?

So someone who likes a little bit of weed shoud be banned from state welfare benefits but someone who abuses alcohol or has been convicted of theft or other crimes should be allowed to receive them.
A bit discrimatory isn't it?

reply to post by Freeborn


If you were on a job where random drug tests were administered, would you lose your job if you tested positive for that "little bit of weed"?

It isn't discrimination......if it applies to everyone.

And, IMO, convicted felons and career drunks should face strict guidelines for public assistance, as well.

It seems like a no-brainer. If you are recieving welfare you should face random drug testing. I would guess that a decent percentage of welfare reciepients are drug users, in some cases it may be the reason they are on welfare in the first place.

If you have to take a drug test for a job you should take a drug test for welfare. IF you recieve welfare and spend some of it on drugs regulary what is the incentive to stop using? If you are afraid to seek assistance because of a drug habit it gives you more reason to stop.

There needs to be a program to help people who fail though, Maybe there needs to be a sort of counselling provided for people who need to be on welfare and also have a drug habit they need to quit. If you fail you have to attend counselling and after a certain time being clean you could reapply?

There is a element that could abused. I admit that, but I think the benefit may outweigh the possibility of abuse.

Drugs are illegal at the moment and should not be rewarded. I personally do not break the law in my daily life and feel like if you are breaking the law and getting assistance its just not fair to everyone else who isn't.

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by aLiiEn

 

In my job, it is a requirement that I get tested on a random basis.

I have no problem with that.

Why should there be a problem with people who are being supported/partially supported by the tax-payers being randomly drug tested?

Yes I understand, same with me.
I have no problem having it done.
However to do it on a mass scale, it will actually find and publish the discrepancies and major problems in the tests themselves.
Someone who has eaten poppy seeds, or taken prescription medications, can test positive to heroin and opiates.
Someone who has had gastro problems, and gall stones, can show elevated liver enzymes indicative of alcohol abuse.
This is why its best to keep these tests to a minimum.
To at least specific people who have signs and symptoms or past history's of abuse to detect it.
Just by you saying, that people who are down on there luck, being helped out, should be tested for illegal or legal substance abuse.
Is discrimination.
Whether you or I like it or not, that is what it is.
How about we test all lesbians and gays on a global scale for HIV?
You see where its going?
And I should add, that someone who is on welfare.
They need to attend certain appointments with people to keep getting it to be assessed.
And if those professionals suspected a reason of there welfare dependency was due to this.
They would have them tested, promptly.

[edit on 26-3-2009 by aLiiEn]

There is always a way to defraud the system. In years prior when the Govt. actually issued food stamps or basically scrip. Recipients would sell the scrip for pennies on the dollar to generate cash to buy alcohol/drugs etc. Anything to get that bottle of MD 20/20 or Brass Monkey.

Those buying the discounted stamps would make out like bandits in the grocery stores.

I'm sure they have figured out a way to abuse the cards they now use.

I say test away. Unfortunately, alcohol doesn't sit in the system long enough and isn't illegal.

If I am subjected to drug testing at work then so should the recipients of federal assistance. They are receiving a portion of my hard earned dollars.

Originally posted by skeptic1

Why should there be a problem with people who are being supported/partially supported by the tax-payers being randomly drug tested?

I do like this idea, also.

In addition, I think that people who receive these benefits, should have to perform community service while they are getting money from the government, such as picking up trash from roads, working at food banks, or homeless shelters.

How is if fair for people on assistance of tax payer money to be sitting on their rears, getting paid for doing nothing, and not being held accountable for it?

Whether Cannabis shoud be legalised and then controlled like alcohol is an arguement for another time or place.

Of course if someone uses a little bit of weed then they should be restricted from performing certain jobs / duties, whilst under the infuence, if not under the influence then I personally don't see where the problem is.
Alas, as previously stated, that arguement is for another time.

The whole benefit system needs reviewing, however, you advocate limiting benefits for those that don't fit into your particular opinion of how people should live their lives.

I am aware that the benefit system here in the UK is much different to that of the US, however, it was designed for the same reason; to be a crutch for the needy and a helping hand back into work.
I suspect that in both countries it has become open to numerous abuses and some see it as a rightful alternative to working despite having contributed little or nothing.
IMO, therein lies the problem with the benefit system and the issue that should be addressed, not the imposition of restrictions of free will.

Awesome post!

Now if we can get our elected officials taking drug tests too.

We ALL have to do them. If I had a dollar for ever gallon of wiz I had in testing... Made me want to eat some poppy seed muffins just to see what a failure would look like...

And while we're at it; how about some testing of the Wall Street crew... LOL I'll leave the speculation of those results to your imagination.

Originally posted by aLiiEn

To at least specific people who have signs and symptoms or past history's of abuse to detect it.
Just by you saying, that people who are down on there luck, being helped out, should be tested for illegal or legal substance abuse.
Is discrimination.

Sorry, I don't agree with this one. When going for a drug test with an employer, you are asked to disclose any medications you are on, and give your health history. How would it be different to answer the same questions for government money? If people have to worry about it, they shouldn't be eating poppy seeds, either!

edit for quote 'fixin


[edit on 26-3-2009 by Blanca Rose]

Originally posted by skeptic1
In my job, it is a requirement that I get tested on a random basis.
I have no problem with that.
Why should there be a problem with people who are being supported/partially supported by the tax-payers being randomly drug tested?

Another thing I would like to understand with you is this.
Why is it, because you are forced to pay an illegal tax on your income.
That you find people who don't earn an income to pay the tax on.
To be inferior to yourself?
And subject to additional "Measures".
Do you not understand, that everyone pays tax?
In some form or another?
People on welfare, pay tax, every time they buy something.
Food, cigarettes, alcohol, gas.
A crack head pays tax, on the crack they buy.
The CIA bring most of the coc aine into the country.
Just using paper money, you are paying tax.
The fact that you are being forced to hand over a chunk of your own hard earned money.
To an illegal private bank.
Does not constitute a reasoning for you looking down upon others, who are not so fortunate to even be able to have this money stolen from them.
I think you should understand this and possibly look into it.
Because, you are just the same as them.
You could be them, tomorrow, in the blink of an eye.
I think miss, that you should just be really really happy and glad.
To have a job to have money stolen from.