Neb. bill would tie welfare benefits to drug tests

Originally posted by Libertygal
When you apply for a job with a lot of companies, you have to undergo drug screening.

At any time during your employment with some companies, you may be asked to take a drug screen.

When you have an accident on a lot of job sites, you have to undergo mandatory drug screening.

Yes, I know. Wal-mart does this all the time.

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by Jessicamsa

 

btw, I was wanting to find the actual bill on the gov website, but I guess I didn't make myself clear lol. I'll try searching it down later. I just assumed you knew the bill already is all.

I did misunderstand. It is here:

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
frwebgate.access.gpo.gov...:h1enr.pdf

and here:

en.wikipedia.org...

Okay, thanks.

I often like to read the real thing.

Anyone know what the job market is like in Nebraska?? I hear little about that place.

You guys are missing the whole point!

This has nothing to do with drugs. If one group of people takes money from another group of people by force (involuntary taxation), then those people at the very least should be able to place stipulations on the use of that money. Isn't that only fair? Hell, I should be able to require all recipients of my money dye their hair red and wear clown makeup. If that price is too high, you don't get my money.

[edit on 17-1-2010 by Guidance.Is.Internal]

I debated this with The Vagabond a while back. Michigan already tried this a nd shut down after a fairly short time period. I also found the following...

The rationale for drug testing is based on myth, not fact. According to a federal study, "[t]he percentage of welfare recipients using, abusing, or dependent on alcohol or drugs [is] relatively small and consistent with the general US population and those not receiving welfare benefits."

Other studies indicate a somewhat greater rate of overall drug consumption among welfare recipients -- mainly use of marijuana - but indistinguishable rates of drug abuse, especially for drugs other than marijuana. Link; My Emphasis

The ACLU unfortunately took the page down but if you copy/paste the first sentence or two from the link and google it then you will see that it was a valid link per the search results...

Now if we could only drug test the corporate executives that get hand outs or sweat deal contracts from the government, We could really start taking a dent out of the drug users abusing the system.

reply to post by apacheman


Love it, no only them but how about the congress whores screwing the people.

What one does in his or her privacy is his or her's own business. Why should anyone be subjected to the morals of someone else? This is just politics because one's addiction should never interfere with the quality of their life, i.e. eating.

If these morons and those who agree with them REALLY wanted to do good, they would provide help for the people instead of taking away the means in which many people rely on as their only source for food, healthcare etc.

The issue of drug testing for welfare is a ploy to incite emotions for other causes.


[edit on 17-1-2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by mikelee
What one does in his or her privacy is his or her's own business. Why should anyone be subjected to the morals of someone else? This is just politics because one's addiction should never interfere with the quality of their life, i.e. eating.

They're taking tax money from hard working people. They absolutely should be held to a high standard. If they can afford drugs, they shouldn't be getting tax money.

If these morons and those who agree with them REALLY wanted to do good, they would provide help for the people instead of taking away the means in which many people rely on as their only source for food, healthcare etc.

Yes, we should enable their self-destructive habits .. with tax money. Good call.

Originally posted by Guidance.Is.Internal
They're taking tax money from hard working people. They absolutely should be held to a high standard. If they can afford drugs, they shouldn't be getting tax money.

If someone would give us jobs, then we'd be "hard working people" too. Where are the jobs??? They went to China, India, and Mexico!

reply to post by Guidance.Is.Internal

They're taking tax money from hard working people. They absolutely should be held to a high standard. If they can afford drugs, they shouldn't be getting tax money.

Even if they paid taxes themselves? Many people who recieve "welfare" do work some type of job and can still get benefits. So by your hypo-critic statement, even if THEY pay taxes they still can't get benefits uh?

Do you realize that if those who are getting welfare right now were disqualified for getting benefits let's say because they smoke bud, that YOU and I would still pay for their healthcare because hospitals cannot turn anyone down for care who operates as a non profit hospital? Do you realize that even if they couldn't get benefits that YOU and I would still have to pay for their children's healthcare and food because it is explicitly against the law to deny a child healthcare and food under many of the state's welfare diqualifying guidelines including the federal government?

Of course you don't know anything about it. You just want to voice off about how YOUR taxes are being wasted when you actually do not know how they are spent in the first place. The ignorance of America's drug policys especially regarding cannabis are not only stupid but manifest that very stupidity in people who back them but do not understand them except for their face value sentiments.

Another fact you more than likely do not know but should, is that 70% of the people who get welfare benefits are elderly. They either cannot work or are living alone and have no one to help them other than "welfare'.

[edit on 17-1-2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by Guidance.Is.Internal

Originally posted by mikelee
What one does in his or her privacy is his or her's own business. Why should anyone be subjected to the morals of someone else? This is just politics because one's addiction should never interfere with the quality of their life, i.e. eating.

They're taking tax money from hard working people. They absolutely should be held to a high standard. If they can afford drugs, they shouldn't be getting tax money.

If these morons and those who agree with them REALLY wanted to do good, they would provide help for the people instead of taking away the means in which many people rely on as their only source for food, healthcare etc.

Yes, we should enable their self-destructive habits .. with tax money. Good call.

How do know this is even necessary?

Is there a study and or any non govt (credible) evidence these folks, so called "drug users", use of "drugs" in fact leads to "self-destructive habits"? Even if there was, which there isn't, assistance these US citizens get might offend due to being at your expense, but given the billions upon billions wasted on foreign aid welfare to people that are not even american (like 30 billion wasted on israel).. this money that helps you brother / sisters citizens, who you live with, is hardly the most offensive fleecing of tax dollars.

Go ahead, further reduce already poor and angry peoples livelihoods because they choose non big pharma stress relief by taking bong hits... rather than using politician sanctioned drugs like alcohol or dexedrine.. just don't complain where these desperate people do desperate things.. like rip you off

Are we free or what?, shouldn't this type of thing be judged on an individual basis? FREE people are either responsible or not.. cut off the irresponsible and turn the responsible into big pharma drug abusers.. like it or not people who like it WILL obtain a drug vice, alcohol being legal does not mean it's not worse than others.

More pill poppers and fewer bong hitters is better off for politicians who will reap the benefits via campaign donations... the whole war on drugs hysteria is a game, a farce, an illusion.. like everything else that emanates from the DC mafia & MSM ("TPTB") anus of propaganda.

They pay jack sh!t in taxes, and you know it. They don't pay federal income taxes, and often get to opt out of state income taxes (if any). They pay property taxes and sales tax, if applicable. The poor don't pay their fair share, of course. That's why tax brackets are in place. I'm not arguing for or against graduated brackets, only that you are flat out wrong, period.

And look at what this guy is writing - justifying one wrong for another .. arguing that if we don't buy these people off with drugs, they'll just end up in a hospital where they can't be turned away. You remind me of the people who believe the poor should be paid off as insurance against riots.

If you can afford cannibus, you can afford to get off your ass and support yourself. The fact that people on aid feel entitled to luxuries is disgusting. It's a slap in the face to people who get up every day, work hard, and don't expect anybody else to fix their problems. You're nothing more than another person standing in the way of every man's right to economic freedom.

One more thing. We live in a country where you can buy a can of beans for under a buck, live with a roommate, and get your clothes at Goodwill. Life is cheap in the U.S. if you want it to be. Running water, electricity, internet .. things most people in the world can only dream about. Americans have it so good, and you've got the balls to complain about it?

This politician wasn't listening to the people. He's simply doing this because so many people are exhausting their unemployment benefits and can't find a job so their only option right now is to go on welfare. The states are starting to see record numbers of people applying for stamps and welfare. There won't be any money saved by this either, they have to spend money for the drug testing. How often are they going to test people once a year (won't be very effective), every three months ? every month? that could be very cost consuming.

Even Janssen admits it would be a costly endeavor.....

Janssen acknowledged that the cost of creating such a drug-screening program would likely make it difficult to pass the bill this year, with the state facing tough economic times. But he said the measure might save the state money in the long term.

And yes it could very well be a violation of people's constitutional rights.....

A potential court challenge could be another concern.

The congressional overhaul of welfare in the 1990s authorized states to implement drug testing as a condition of receiving help. But the only state that has adopted such a measure, Michigan, had the law thrown out by a federal judge because it allowed for random testing without justification. The judge ruled that Michigan's law violated constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

"You have to be fairly savvy about designing a program that will withstand constitutional challenge," said Christine Nelson, a program manager with the National Conference of State Legislatures.

As far as this goes....

Janssen said he thinks the measure would help make sure that welfare benefits are helping people improve their lives instead of just providing handouts.

"When a taxpayer gives assistance to somebody, it's assistance so they can get back up on their feet," Janssen said. "It's kind of a slap in the face to the taxpayers when they say, 'We're going to get up on our feet while we're doing drugs.'"

Welfare benefits don't give people enough money to improve their lives, or get back up on their feet, it doesn't even give them enough money to pay their rent. All welfare does is what it was intended to do and that's to keep people down and out and in the system as long as possible.

hosted.ap.org...

I don't understand why it bothers people so much to think that welfare recipients may be doing drugs, but it doesn't seem to bother some people that they pay our politicians a ton of money and a good many of them are doing drugs on their dime. Or what about the teachers that teach their children and are not tested for drugs, or the janitors , teachers aides, anybody that is in that school with their children all day everyday, none of them are drug tested. How about the doctors that hold our lives in their hands, are they drug tested ?

And since it's so bad for welfare recipients to do drugs (mind you I'm not saying they should) why is it that no one is trying to put an end to the mulitude of drug addicts and alcoholics that receive social security disability specifically because they are drug addicts and alcoholics (and believe me they receive way more money than welfare recipients) ? And if you work and pay into social security yes they are receiving your money just as welfare recipients are.

Why doesn't this bill include people on section 8 that's paid for with tax dollars, so is public housing ?

How about students that are receiving a pell grant, That comes from tax money ? How are people going to feel when they have to pass a drug test to receive help to attend college ?

This is a very slippery slope that we're headed in and if allowed to go through it just may be you that is mandated to be tested for drugs for any reason the deem fit.

The government is already intrusive enough they have their noses in almost every aspect of our lives, they already have more than enough power over us, do we really want to give them more ???



reply to post by Asktheanimals

What really gets me is when you see people using wic checks for their food driving away in shiny ford explorer.

WIC offers healthy food, nutrition education, and health services for low-income new and expecting mothers and their young children. Studies have demonstrated that WIC increases participation in prenatal care, reduces the occurrence of low birth rate and fetal mortality, and reduces anemia (FRAC). The program is also very cost effective; for every federal dollar spent on WIC, $1.33 to $3.13 in health care costs is saved for mothers and their children.

Persons eligible meet three criteria:

■Pregnant, breast-feeding, or post-partum women, infants, or children up to age five.

■Below 185% of the federal poverty level. Persons receiving food stamps, TANF, or Medicaid (or family members of pregnant women or infants who receive Medicaid) meet this requirement.

■At nutritional risk. Includes high-risk pregnancy history, child growth and development problems, inadequate diet, and homelessness or a migrant lifestyle.

■The average food benefit is $38 a month per person, and the nutrition education and health services are valued at $14 a month per person.

www.catholiccharitiesusa.org...


The money that is spent on the WIC program saves money in the long run. And I seriously doubt that the small amount that they receive from WIC (on average about $52. per person for food and medical) is helping them pay for that shiny vehicle, and WIC hasn't got anything to do with welfare.

In Canada, you can get welfare or disability for drug addiction.

So testing positive means you can stay on welfare as you are still a disabled drug addict.

We do things different up here - backwards like

This is a clear violation of the fourth amendment. Will somebody please tell these people that the Constitution isn't a menu and it affords equal protection under the law.