Florida passes law requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

• Apple

  

  The law requires Florida welfare recipients to pass a drug test. I like the idea since in most cases, people who work for their money have to abide by some sort of drug-testing policy. The bill was passed with a veto-proof majority so the governor pretty much had to sign it (he was definitely for the law). From what I understand, Michigan has a similar law.
  
  Links from kind of both sides of the issue:
  
  Link (from Newsmax.com)
  
  Link (from morallowground.com)
• LJ

  

  #winning
• Belly35

  

  entitlement and drug texts .... what took so long... Hope for a better America is not lost...
• derek bomar

  

  nice
• ernest_t_bass

  

  I blame the public unions!
• Fab1b

  

  I was happy to see this!!
• bigdaddy2003

  

  Good call.
• believer

  

  As it should be....but you can bet some leftist group like the ACLU will fight it and beat it.
• redstreak one

  

  The first time a parent is tested and found positive and the kids are yanked from them people will be up in arms! I swear everytime I hear a story like this, I think of the episode of the Simpsons where the pastors wife keeps yelling, "What about the children, think of the children!" lol
  
  I hope this sticks and works.
• Glory Days

  

  to tie this in with the war on drugs thread, this only works if drugs remain illegal right?
• cruiser_96

  

  I blame Bush!
  
  (Admittedly, didn't read the links) Also, what is the cost for the tests? I like the idea, but hopefully it's cost effective. Also, what if someone fails? What then???
• dwccrew

  

  believer;787321 wrote:As it should be....but you can bet some leftist group like the ACLU will fight it and beat it.

  I doubt it.
  

  Glory Days;787365 wrote:to tie this in with the war on drugs thread, this only works if drugs remain illegal right?

  
  Incorrect. Alcohol is legal, however, if I am tested at work and have used alcohol I will be fired. Tobacco products are legal, however, it is illegal to smoke in public places in certain states. Just because something is legal doesn't mean certain places, programs or services can't require you not to use in order to have access to that place or service.
  
  People would have a choice to make in this case. I have no problem giving people the right to choose. What's more important to you, receiving gov't aid or using drugs. They choose to receive aid, be drug free. You want to use drugs, fine but no govt aid. See how easy it is?
• Bigred1995

  

  dwccrew;787407 wrote:I doubt it.
  
  
  
  Incorrect. Alcohol is legal, however, if I am tested at work and have used alcohol I will be fired. Tobacco products are legal, however, it is illegal to smoke in public places in certain states. Just because something is legal doesn't mean certain places, programs or services can't require you not to use in order to have access to that place or service.
  
  People would have a choice to make in this case. I have no problem giving people the right to choose. What's more important to you, receiving gov't aid or using drugs. They choose to receive aid, be drug free. You want to use drugs, fine but no govt aid. See how easy it is?

  I agree with you dwccrew! I work for my paycheck. I am free to do anything I wish with the money I make, but one of the requirements for me keeping my job is that I stay drug free! So if I'm found to have taken drugs, I lose my job and by extension, my paycheck! It's no different than employers implementing a tobacco free workforce. Tobacco is perfectly legal, but in some workplaces, if you want to keep your job you're not allowed to smoke!
• ernest_t_bass

  

  DW - yes, I see how easy it is, but what if they refuse? Govt. going to let them go homeless?
• Bigred1995

  

  ernest_t_bass;787487 wrote:DW - yes, I see how easy it is, but what if they refuse? Govt. going to let them go homeless?

  Short answer, yes! Kids are taken and placed in homes or with willing family members and parents are on their own to seek assistance anyway they can! If I fail a drug test, how do you think my employer would react if I asked, "Okay, but are you going to let me go homeless?"
• Bigdogg

  Why stop here? Lets expand it to all companies who get a tax break, everybody who receives social security, and all other forms of government assistance. I bet we can save a bunch of money!
• Belly35

  

  Bigdogg;787548 wrote:Why stop here? Lets expand it to all companies who get a tax break, everybody who receives social security, and all other forms of government assistance. I bet we can save a bunch of money!

  WOW! Bigdogg getting a little testy
  Time to worry Bigdogg is when unemployed union members are tested. Can’t keep your entitlement for ever… Good news this could be the first test you ever take with a positive result.
• BGFalcons82

  

  Bigdogg;787548 wrote:Why stop here? Lets expand it to all companies who get a tax break, everybody who receives social security, and all other forms of government assistance. I bet we can save a bunch of money!

  
  In my business, I can't think of one contractor that doesn't employ some sort of drug testing. The State of Ohio has virtually made it necessary if you are going to bid on any State work as well. Drug testing in the workplace has become quite commonplace over the past decade...except for those on the gubmint teet. On a positive note, construction accidents and deaths have severly decreased due to inebriation/drug use being tested.
• wkfan

  Bigdogg;787548 wrote:Why stop here? Lets expand it to all companies who get a tax break, everybody who receives social security, and all other forms of government assistance. I bet we can save a bunch of money!

  Slow down there, sparky.
  
  Let's not forget that many (most?) people receiving Medicare and Social Security have paid into that fund during thjir working years and, therfore, are just getting their own money back. (yea, I know that they are, in most cases, receiving more than they paid in....)
  
  BTW....I am very much in favor of this legislation.
• sleeper

  

  +1
• Ty Webb

  

  I like it
• oberhaus

  

  Apple;786554 wrote:The law requires Florida welfare recipients to pass a drug test. I like the idea since in most cases, people who work for their money have to abide by some sort of drug-testing policy. The bill was passed with a veto-proof majority so the governor pretty much had to sign it (he was definitely for the law). From what I understand, Michigan has a similar law.
  
  Links from kind of both sides of the issue:
  
  Link (from Newsmax.com)
  
  Link (from morallowground.com)

  
  Outstanding!
• BoatShoes

  wkfan;787618 wrote:Slow down there, sparky.
  
  Let's not forget that many (most?) people receiving Medicare and Social Security have paid into that fund during thjir working years and, therfore, are just getting their own money back. (yea, I know that they are, in most cases, receiving more than they paid in....)
  
  BTW....I am very much in favor of this legislation.

  
  Why assume that somebody on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families...especially when we've had >10% unemployment for 3 long years haven't paid any type of tax dollars that they might now be getting back...if we apply your reasoning and that people shouldn't be drug tested for spending your own dollars than most people on TANF should not be drug tested either.
  
  I agree with it in principle but largely this is grounded in zombie lies about the people on TANF who are assumed to be worthless scum spitting out babies doing drugs all day. The CBPP has estimated that states who have instituted such policies (and other states have and have scrapped them because they aren't cost-efficient) spend on average around $20,000 before they find a Beneficiary that is using and kick him off despite drug tests being relatively cheap because, oh wait...MOST TANF BENEFICIARIES CAN PASS A DRUG TEST. But then, they have the option of getting tax payer funded drug rehab in the Florida law (at one of Rick Scott's clinics I'm sure) if they want to get their benefits back.
  
  Most TANF users, just like most private workers will gladly take a drug test if they can keep their benefits or their job...but that doesn't mean it's efficient to do so.
  
  Never mind that Michigan's law was ruled to violate an individual's reasonable expectation's of privacy under the Fourth Amendment by a Federal Appellate court...
  
  
  I mean, since 1996 people have only been able to be on "welfare" for 60 months for their entire life. It really does what it was meant to do now...help people out temporarily. If people want to reform they welfare state they need to look at SSI.
  
  Nevermind that it would be much more efficient to do EBT to payment cards that can only be used for certain purchases. Then the taxpayer money couldn't be used for drugs (at least directly). If they want to use it to by groceries and then quid pro quo for meth...at least somebody is getting food off of them. But either way that isn't happening and is largely a myth that will not die.
  
  But it's just another day and Republican's are expanding government and invading reasonable expectations of privacy despite their claims that such type of action is always wrong. I agree in principle but it's an impractical waste of time that doesn't do anything to solve the long-term problem of people who aren't contributing to economic growth and end the suffocatingly high unemployment that has haunted us for three years.
• Apple

  

  BoatShoes;787691 wrote:Why assume that somebody on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families...especially when we've had >10% unemployment for 3 long years haven't paid any type of tax dollars that they might now be getting back...if we apply your reasoning and that people shouldn't be drug tested for spending your own dollars than most people on TANF should not be drug tested either.
  
  I agree with it in principle but largely this is grounded in zombie lies about the people on TANF who are assumed to be worthless scum spitting out babies doing drugs all day. The CBPP has estimated that states who have instituted such policies (and other states have and have scrapped them because they aren't cost-efficient) spend on average around $20,000 before they find a Beneficiary that is using and kick him off despite drug tests being relatively cheap because, oh wait...MOST TANF BENEFICIARIES CAN PASS A DRUG TEST. But then, they have the option of getting tax payer funded drug rehab in the Florida law (at one of Rick Scott's clinics I'm sure) if they want to get their benefits back.
  
  Most TANF users, just like most private workers will gladly take a drug test if they can keep their benefits or their job...but that doesn't mean it's efficient to do so.
  
  Never mind that Michigan's law was ruled to violate an individual's reasonable expectation's of privacy under the Fourth Amendment by a Federal Appellate court...
  
  
  I mean, since 1996 people have only been able to be on "welfare" for 60 months for their entire life. It really does what it was meant to do now...help people out temporarily. If people want to reform they welfare state they need to look at SSI.
  
  Nevermind that it would be much more efficient to do EBT to payment cards that can only be used for certain purchases. Then the taxpayer money couldn't be used for drugs (at least directly). If they want to use it to by groceries and then quid pro quo for meth...at least somebody is getting food off of them. But either way that isn't happening and is largely a myth that will not die.
  
  But it's just another day and Republican's are expanding government and invading reasonable expectations of privacy despite their claims that such type of action is always wrong. I agree in principle but it's an impractical waste of time that doesn't do anything to solve the long-term problem of people who aren't contributing to economic growth and end the suffocatingly high unemployment that has haunted us for three years.

  
  The morallowground.com article says that all adult recipients are required to pay the $35 fee for the drug tests. I don't know what kind of clerical or other expenses will be incurred with the new law, but it obviously doesn't include the cost of the test. The same article also states that the law provides zero funds for substance abuse treatment programs, though I guess it's possible that unemployed drug users have other treatment options.
  
  It was interesting the article says that only 10% of the Michigan unemployed recipients have been found to be illegal drug users. To put a guess at the total number of Florida recipients at 50,000 means 5,000 will be booted off the assistance. At an estimated $350 per month per 5,000 recipients, thats a savings of $1.75Million a month.
• Y-Town Steelhound

  

  Good for Florida. If people want to use drugs they can get a job and pay for them themselves...not on the taxpayers' dime.