Bills Would Require Michiganders To Work For Welfare, Pass Drug Test

Really, it's not a whole lot different than "convict leasing" which is illegal for very good reason. It's just a way to exploit the weak, and make all you "strong" people feel good about paying some of your wages in taxes for someone else, but those welfare recipients are not the ones you're paying the majority of your taxes to.

Go ahead, pick on the weak, it's the American way!.

I think its a GREAT idea! To those who see this as a band-aid, I don't disagree, but even a band-aid can help in some situations, at least its a beginning. Its been far too long in coming. I only hope that they focus on keeping the help in the areas that those people receiving welfare benefits live, rather than shipping them from the U.P. to Detroit to work, only to add the cost of 'housing' them. Although many of them receive a housing allowance, IF because it may be seen as 'temporary' situation, they pay for further housing, that is an additional burden to taxpayers. There will most likely be a lot of bugs to work out, but I totally agree that they need to do something to "earn their keep', (an old appropriate saying). So many of them feel ENTITLED to everyone else supporting them. What happened to the honest man, even from the depression era, who was willing to do something for a simple loaf of bread, usually a hard days work!

I further agree with the drug testing. Working men and women, from all walks of life: forestry workers, factory, food industry, medical, etc, all have to agree to mandatory random drug testing in order to keep their jobs. In turn a portion of their check goes toward the very taxes that pay for those receiving welfare benefits of all kinds. I think it is just and fair that those recipients likewise should have to pass drug testing to receive those benefits. They don't pass? Uh oh.... benefits are removed... PRONTO, no if's, and's or buts. I"m pretty sure that in doing so, there would be an excess of money available, after the first 6 months alone.

If put to a vote.... I WILL vote that they MUST work & agree to mandatory random drug testing. _javascript:icon('')

rickymouse
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

The drug testing just makes more business for the medical industry. They are behind pushing for this. You have to look at motive, the medical industry wants a piece of the pie. The government's rationality has been compromised, their people cannot see properly.

Actually rickymouse, the medical industry wouldn't stand to gain anything in this. Every single county has a Health Department, perfectly capable of drawing blood and taking urine sample, even snippets of hair in some drug testing. Many of those tests can be run right there by your local people. It's not like they will be flooding every Health department... it will be random (or should be). Let me also remind you.... who is the Health department run by? That's right.... the government. They already pay those employees. Worst case scenario?..... they might need to hire a few more people in some counties...I don't see that as a bad thing.

I am against drug tests, a person should be free to put in their body whatever they want. They are not fair for a variety of reasons and I do not want to derail this explaining my position.

However I am all for requiring someone to work for welfare, even if it picking up trash on the side of the road. To me it seems like many American's either lost or never knew the value of working and we have too many who expect handouts and never contribute, just complain when they do not get what they want.

reply to post by VindiVin


I dont think you fully understand the implications of what your talking about.

This is just another step in a long line of steps to totalitarianism. Keep making more rules guys, eventually youll be ruled into only working and only sleeping.

Great ideas.

reply to post by TDawgRex


Good idea about doing the volunteering, plenty of places could do with the help, esp animal rescues... but about the drug test... If I were to use cannabis for medicinal purposes(un-prescribed) would that be a problem? also what about prescription pain meds? I presume it would be a case of just providing them with the prescription to prove it ya??

btw I dont live in USA, I'm just curious

onequestion
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

This is a deeper infringement on civil liberties.

If you believe in this give me a break, whats the difference between this and background checks on guns? Non they are all infringements on civil liberties. Its non of their business what i do in my free time as long as i am not hurting anyone, period.

Krazy.... I"m sorry, but I need to say this. If you are working and supporting yourself and your family ON YOUR OWN, you're correct in that statement. But the moment you set back on your backside and start letting other people foot the bill to provide housing, food, and utilities for you and your passel of kids, your drug use and free time are very much the business of those providing that support. You have to buy illegal drugs, so you'd be getting the money somewhere... and rather than doing a job and supporting your family and paying your own way, you're taking the support from others working to support your lazy backside and then working to earn money to buy drugs to use in your 'free time'. Sorry pal, that's wrong and this mindset is the problem. What civil liberties are you entitled to that the rest of us are not? If you can work to earn money for drugs ... you can work to afford housing and food for yourself and your family. It's called... Priorities!

onequestion
reply to post by VindiVin

 

I dont think you fully understand the implications of what your talking about.

This is just another step in a long line of steps to totalitarianism. Keep making more rules guys, eventually youll be ruled into only working and only sleeping.

Great ideas.

I fully understand the implications! If we all worked, rather than sitting back waiting for the next handout, which is the way things SHOULD be, there would be less government involvement. Totalitarianism is a political system in which the state holds total authority over the society. I think you don't see the forest for the trees here, but this would get more people into the work force being contributors rather than takers from those of us willing to contribute. That or perhaps they would relocate to another state that wants to support them TOTALLY. I don't mind helping those less fortunate or those who deserve it, but the aim to rid the system of the abusers.
Not sure what your plan to do that would be, but I"d be interested in reading alllllll about it.

reply to post by VindiVin


A drug addict collecting welfare will likely use someone else's urine to pass a drug test. This happens all the time for work place drug tests. I do not think anyone should be given free money, but I am okay with food stamps, housing, and clothing vouchers for the needy. It makes no sense to give someone a paycheck who does not work and in most cases have demonstrated they are financially irresponsible.

Florida attempted to drug test those on welfare and it was a fail. Less than 1% tested positive and it cost more to administer drug test on all the recipients that it saved by kicking the positive test recipients off welfare. Also drug tests can and do produce false positives

reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner


Their more worried about paying some welfare which isn't much then funding world wide wars and military campaigns, which is where the majority of our taxes go.

Keep going at it though people.

reply to post by VindiVin

So when their not following your rules, then they have to wait.... what?

So if they aren't living the way you think they should be living we have to force them into poverty?

Your ridiculous... live and let live.

reply to post by VindiVin


Oh, how are they all suppose to work?

Go get jobs at Mcdonalds you lazy slobs! Then get second and third jobs at warehouses!

If you haven't noticed the economy isn't what it was 10 years ago. There isn't a way for all of us to be gainfully employed.

I would love to be a farmer but guess what, ain't happenin. You know why? Because i cant afford to be a farmer.

Figure that one out.

jrod
reply to post by VindiVin

 

A drug addict collecting welfare will likely use someone else's urine to pass a drug test. This happens all the time for work place drug tests. I do not think anyone should be given free money, but I am okay with food stamps, housing, and clothing vouchers for the needy. It makes no sense to give someone a paycheck who does not work and in most cases have demonstrated they are financially irresponsible.

Florida attempted to drug test those on welfare and it was a fail. Less than 1% tested positive and it cost more to administer drug test on all the recipients that it saved by kicking the positive test recipients off welfare. Also drug tests can and do produce false positives

Ok, first of all I never once said to give any of them a paycheck.... they already get that, in the form of food stamps, housing, etc. I simply agree that they should be made to do SOMETHING for said benefits.
As far as the drug testing goes, I don't think they would offer bring a friend days to those being tested any more than they do for for employees being tested, unless you're advocating they would have a drug free friend regularly donate urine for them to keep on hand in the event the random day hits. There are also other ways of drug testing. Using a snippet of hair would work, or assuming to avoid this, they shave their heads bald, there is the blood test, not likely a friend would do them any good in this case. Do I think its invasive? No, not given the fact that they are willing recipients of benefits being paid from taxpayers dollars. I also think they should be given the opportunity to OPT OUT. Meaning, they go to apply for bennies and it is fully explained to them that, there will be MANDATORY random drug testing done. At that point, they can elect to opt out or continue. Now they know to expect this and have no right to complain about it later, sure it's not 'fun', but how badly do they need to eat and need a roof over their heads. You realize yes, that it's only a problem for those who are using illegal drugs? Otherwise, it's a no brainer and not a surprise. Period, the end.

I actually agree with this, on various principles. For starters, no one forces you to take government money. It's a choice. If you are going to take THEIR money, you should expect to be conforming to THEIR policies. No such thing as a free lunch. If you are taking their money, it is only fair that you provide something in return. I don't see how this hurts anyone.

What they should do. Is provide a variety of volunteer opportunities, not just picking up trash. There are numerous state agencies, but there are also a number of private charities for every cause imaginable that could really use volunteer help. Let them create a list, then let the recipients of state aid choose their volunteer projects.

I say this as someone who not only is currently on some form of state assistance (I get food stamps, and live in a VA run transitional housing facility for the homeless), I also have volunteered for various things. I've done volunteer work at the VA. I've cleaned up and spread bark at a city park. I've volunteered with an environmental charity working to keep our rivers and salmon safe. I've volunteered at animal shelters, and will continue to do so. And I did this all of my own free will. I felt that if I am going to be taking something from the state, I should give something back, while I am working to rebuild my life. It's only fair. And I did meet a number of people while volunteering, networked quite a bit, and even got a job at one stage.

Yet the majority of people in my building, who are all on some sort of benefits, can be found milling around doing nothing at all, and have been doing so for the past few years. There are a number of people here who are genuinely disabled. And guess what. Even THEY do some sort of volunteer work. One guy, who is 100% disabled due to severe mental issues (schizophrenia, unresponsive bi polar, paranoia), plus had a few major strokes to the point where he has become unemployable, still manages to do things for the community. He helps the local charity restaurant clean up, escorts the workers to their cars, paints amazing artwork for nursing homes and charities (they buy it from him, too), returns shopping carts to the local store, and cleans up graffiti. And no one asks him to do it, either. He does it because he wants to. He said he can't stand sitting around doing nothing on days when he is feeling fine. And this is a guy who can't work in any job, even though he often wishes he could. There is also an elderly lady who is on social security, and she often takes part in block clean ups and beautification plantings. There are also a few other genuinely disabled or elderly residents who go out and try to contribute in some fashion to the community, even though physically or mentally, they are limited severely in what they can do.

Yet the majority of people in the building are perfectly healthy, yet don't do a damned thing except sit around their apartments all day, stuffing their fat faces with garbage, drinking and doing drugs, and complaining about the free handouts they are getting. I would love to see them booted off their buts and made to spend their time productively. I think it is perfectly fair. They are receiving help from taxpayers and charities. Until they become taxpayers themselves, they should be doing something in return for the communities that sustain them until they can sustain themselves. otherwise, stop taking money and help if you aren't going to do something in return.

To those who say most people on welfare really want to get off, and that the majority are not on drugs, I call BS. My own close up and personal experience has shown me the opposite. When I was staying in tent city, I had no income save for day labor jobs I would work so that I had money to live with. Yet about 2/3 of the camp were receiving checks from the state, either welfare or disability. These are also people who have been resident in tent city for many years. (One lady even bragged she had been in tent city for 7 years). So why is it, that despite the fact these people were receiving pretty decent sums of money every month from the state, were they still homeless? Because around the 1st of every month, they would disappear from camp to go buy drugs and booze. Then when the state money ran out, they returned to panhandling and stealing. Only a small number of us actually left camp every day to try and get out of that squalor by seeing case workers, going to workshops and appointments, and seizing every opportunity that was offered to us. And we got laughed at.

Slave labor? I don't think so. If you are getting money to live on, it's not slave labor. And if a wide variety of choices are offered for volunteer work, then there is no excuse why anyone receiving state benefits should not be doing something useful.

reply to post by wantsome


I empathize with you, however, please tell me that you don't think that the wealthy are the only ones paying taxes, or that they pay "more" taxes than the 'average joe'. Given that you understand that, lends no credibility to what you've just said. That would be the same as saying that it was perfectly "OK" with you that someone stole the hard earned money that your grandparents earned through all that 'back breaking work' you mentioned. Don't say its ok to be a crook or a thief, it's NOT and it never will be.

reply to post by VindiVin


Read the links I posted on the first page. Drug testing welfare recipients regardless of how you feel about it, wastes ALOT of money. I posted three different links from several different states that have tried this. All of them show tiny tiny amount of positive results and a LARGE amount of money wasted in giving these tests.

So let's talk about Michigan here, the state is practically bankrupt and leaching money to the welfare people. Now in order to the save money, the state decides to drug test the welfare recipients to kick the leaches off of support. Ok sound idea. However, these programs only result in very few people testing positive and the government ends up spending even MORE money (that it doesn't have) testing all these people. So this program instead of saving the state money, ends up costing the government more money.

So regardless of how you feel about welfare recipients and drug use, this idea is a terrible idea. It's not going to save the state money.

By the way I want to clarify my stance here, I don't think businesses should be allowed to drug test you, they have no business knowing about my drug use. To go to your example about spending your paycheck on drugs, I can just as easily do the same thing with alcohol. After having said that, I can understand requiring welfare receivers being required to be drug tested. They didn't earn that money. HOWEVER, the links I provided show that this program will just cost the state more money, and they won't kick many people off of welfare.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Not such an Evil Elf after all! :-) Thank you for your post, you hit it on the head! Thank you, well done and my hat is off to you my friend.

reply to post by VindiVin


They can just use their kid's urine. Believe me this happens very often. Drug tests are a joke and those who administer them make a killing. The drug test issue and suggesting that most people who collect welfare are addicts who get high off your tax dollars is just one of those knee-jerk kind of things that make the average dolt demonize the welfare system. It's not perfect, it needs improvement but to think that drug testing will fix any of those problems is a bit ignorant.

Food stamps, a place to live, and vouchers for clothes are not a paycheck that the recipient can use to buy whatever they want. Also I'm quite sure selling food stamps for cash is a felony for both parties.

reply to post by jrod


No. Oppress and regulate.

reply to post by onequestion


I"m guessing you becoming a rocket scientist is out of the question as well then?!!! Onequestion.... The jobs they do, are ones on a volunteer basis, what do you mean how are they suppose to live if they don't get paid? THEY ARE ALREADY BEING PAID! They have a house PAID FOR, they have food PAID FOR, their utility bills are PAID FOR, they have clothing allowances PAID FOR. HELLOOOOOOO! The problem is .... that in return for that, they do nothing!!! They should HAVE to do SOMETHING to earn what they are already being GIVEN. HOW do you NOT understand that. It's basic! I didn't suggest they should take jobs at places like FORD or LEARJET, or MICROSOFT, what this is suggesting is that they should do LOCAL volunteer jobs in their communities. Work in an animal shelter for a given number of hours per week, VOLUNTARILY. Work doing upkeep within state land VOLUNTARILY. Work building homes for Habitat for Humanity (oooo a good idea!). Work in a soup kitchen. Pick up trash along the highways, local roadways, etc. There are a million and one ideas. There is another benefit you don't see as well. In the process of doing this, they just might learn something! Something that would give them the experience, a job skill, and work ethic to move forward and find a job in a field they never had that opportunity to do before. This isn't meant to be punishment for them.... jeesh, you'd think that they would WANT to give back after being given everything. Would you prefer they just continue on for the rest of their natural lives and never dig their way out of that hole? Obviously they need help, or they wouldn't be asking, and no one is opposed to giving said help, but they must have some responsibility toward the blessings they are receiving. Those who are abusing the system need to be weeded out though.
As for your own employment status... sorry, can't help you become a farmer, but why don't you go to work for one? ALL kinds of em around!!! But don't plan to get rich doing it!