Denied! Judge Blocks New Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law

[Bass v 2.0]

I think it is funny that the applicants are less likely to use drugs than the general population. Something like only 2% are testing positive. I guess it is worth the millions in drug testing fees. Lol

I think it's funny how stupid libturds can't do simple math. The percentage of applicants who didn't pass the test is (1600 + 32) /(7000 + 1600 + 32) = 19%

1600 didn't fail the test, they refused it jackass, reading comprehension!

 

[Rinata]

I think we should make Rick Scott submit to random pee tests. The guy is pretty batshit crazy and I have to wonder if drugs are contributing to that craziness.

At this point I think the whole group of GOP candidates should take one. They are all nuts!!

 

[editec]

Under the Temporary Assistance For Needy Families program, the state gives $180 a month for one person or $364 for a family of four.

A whole $180 a month?

 

[Ravi]

You asswipe libtards cannot come up with a single plausible reason as to why the hard working taxpayer should subsidize someone's drug use.

Says the medicare recipient.

medicare isn't a hand out retard. I was forced to pay into the system.. so try again you big fat fuck of a fail.

I thought you never worked outside the home?

Anyone that has ever worked or paid taxes has also been forced to pay into the system, so your argument fails.

 

[Full-Auto]

Conservatives...where is the fiscal responsibility in this program?

Have some coffee. damn.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Under the Temporary Assistance For Needy Families program, the state gives $180 a month for one person or $364 for a family of four.

A whole $180 a month?

Don't you that thats enough for a big screen TV, computer and car. thats living fat.

 

[Katzndogz]

That's in addition to everything else they get. My step granddaughter has gamed the system into a real income of $3,500 a month.

 

[editec]

Under the Temporary Assistance For Needy Families program, the state gives $180 a month for one person or $364 for a family of four.

A whole $180 a month?

Don't you that thats enough for a big screen TV, computer and car. thats living fat.

Oh yeah, I forgot.

Those Welfare people are living large.

 

[JoeB131]

Judge Blocks New Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law | News One

Supporters say applicants skipped the test because they knew they would have tested positive for drugs. Applicants must pay $25 to $35 for the test and are reimbursed by the state if they pass. It’s unclear if the state has saved money. During his campaign, Scott said the measure would save $77 million, but it’s unclear how he arrived at those figures.

Is it me or is it that GOPtards love throwing out imaginary monetary figures just to sway people into believing something that is falseß

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

 

[Care4all]

Judge Blocks New Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law | News One

Supporters say applicants skipped the test because they knew they would have tested positive for drugs. Applicants must pay $25 to $35 for the test and are reimbursed by the state if they pass. It’s unclear if the state has saved money. During his campaign, Scott said the measure would save $77 million, but it’s unclear how he arrived at those figures.

Is it me or is it that GOPtards love throwing out imaginary monetary figures just to sway people into believing something that is falseß

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

Joe, find your supposed drug addicts in another way that is not unconstitutional.....

I am all for that.....

but that is not the argument here.....the argument is not, wanting or not wanting those who take illegal drugs to receive welfare....

the argument is whether our government can conduct an illegal search and seizure of the citizen's urine....without probable cause.

Where is the probable cause? Do you have proof that ALL recipients of welfare take illegal drugs? Is there anything that you have that should allow our gvt to take all welfare citizen's piss?

Again, where is the probable cause to allow this search and seizure of our gvt.?

Read the constitution.....that's what this is about....

 

[AmericanFirst]

Its a temporary stay.

Will have to see where it goes.

Funny how 7,000 decided not to take the test. Guess the free money wasn't as important as their drugs.

You have flawed reading skills, 7,000 people *PASSED* the test and 1600 refused.

Then those 1600 should get no welfare.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Judge Blocks New Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law | News One



Is it me or is it that GOPtards love throwing out imaginary monetary figures just to sway people into believing something that is falseß

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

Joe, find your supposed drug addicts in another way that is not unconstitutional.....

I am all for that.....

but that is not the argument here.....the argument is not, wanting or not wanting those who take illegal drugs to receive welfare....

the argument is whether our government can conduct an illegal search and seizure of the citizen's urine....without probable cause.

Where is the probable cause? Do you have proof that ALL recipients of welfare take illegal drugs? Is there anything that you have that should allow our gvt to take all welfare citizen's piss?

Again, where is the probable cause to allow this search and seizure of our gvt.?

Read the constitution.....that's what this is about....

I don't think it should be illegal. It is Gov't. money, they should have to follow certain guidlines. Besides, they are not being forced to take urine tests, it is a choice; test and pass or no money. They can choose not to test, but they get no money.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Its a temporary stay.

Will have to see where it goes.

Funny how 7,000 decided not to take the test. Guess the free money wasn't as important as their drugs.

You have flawed reading skills, 7,000 people *PASSED* the test and 1600 refused.

Then those 1600 should get no welfare.

For what reason, not willingly giving up their piss for a test they have to pay forß

 

[Ravi]

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

Joe, find your supposed drug addicts in another way that is not unconstitutional.....

I am all for that.....

but that is not the argument here.....the argument is not, wanting or not wanting those who take illegal drugs to receive welfare....

the argument is whether our government can conduct an illegal search and seizure of the citizen's urine....without probable cause.

Where is the probable cause? Do you have proof that ALL recipients of welfare take illegal drugs? Is there anything that you have that should allow our gvt to take all welfare citizen's piss?

Again, where is the probable cause to allow this search and seizure of our gvt.?

Read the constitution.....that's what this is about....

I don't think it should be illegal. It is Gov't. money, they should have to follow certain guidlines. Besides, they are not being forced to take urine tests, it is a choice; test and pass or no money. They can choose not to test, but they get no money.

Government money? No, it's our money.

 

[Care4all]

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

Joe, find your supposed drug addicts in another way that is not unconstitutional.....

I am all for that.....

but that is not the argument here.....the argument is not, wanting or not wanting those who take illegal drugs to receive welfare....

the argument is whether our government can conduct an illegal search and seizure of the citizen's urine....without probable cause.

Where is the probable cause? Do you have proof that ALL recipients of welfare take illegal drugs? Is there anything that you have that should allow our gvt to take all welfare citizen's piss?

Again, where is the probable cause to allow this search and seizure of our gvt.?

Read the constitution.....that's what this is about....

I don't think it should be illegal. It is Gov't. money, they should have to follow certain guidlines. Besides, they are not being forced to take urine tests, it is a choice; test and pass or no money. They can choose not to test, but they get no money.

It is unconstitutional, that is all that matters......AF.

I believe when it makes it through the courts, this WILL BE the results....unconstitutional to boot!

If you put America First, as your name implies, then you would join me in protecting our constitution. You can't let the "i don't want this and I don't want that" get in the way.....of standing by the constitution imo.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I think it's funny how stupid libturds can't do simple math. The percentage of applicants who didn't pass the test is (1600 + 32) /(7000 + 1600 + 32) = 19%

Actually, it's 32/7000 who tested positive, which is 0.05%. The 1600 didn't even take the test. You can't group them together with people who tested positive.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Then those 1600 should get no welfare.

Why should they be penalized for not having sufficient transportation to get to the testing facility, or not having the money to pay for the test?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Besides, they are not being forced to take urine tests, it is a choice; test and pass or no money. They can choose not to test, but they get no money.

In other words it's a quid pro quo. We've already discussed how quid pro quo does not create a de facto consent.

 

[JoeB131]

So you think the government should be subsidizing people's drug habits?

I'm really having a hard time understanding the liberal position here. You would think that you'd want to get the druggies off the welfare rolls and force them to straighten out their lives.

Joe, find your supposed drug addicts in another way that is not unconstitutional.....

I am all for that.....

but that is not the argument here.....the argument is not, wanting or not wanting those who take illegal drugs to receive welfare....

the argument is whether our government can conduct an illegal search and seizure of the citizen's urine....without probable cause.

Where is the probable cause? Do you have proof that ALL recipients of welfare take illegal drugs? Is there anything that you have that should allow our gvt to take all welfare citizen's piss?

Again, where is the probable cause to allow this search and seizure of our gvt.?

Read the constitution.....that's what this is about....

It's not like the government is busting into their homes and taking their wee-wee.

I should point out that most of the jobs I've held have required me to take a drug test as a condition of being hired, and a couple have conducted drug tests while I was employed. So it's not really a constitutional issue. You are asking the government to give you something, they are assuring you aren't abusing the privilage.

 

[JoeB131]

[I don't think it should be illegal. It is Gov't. money, they should have to follow certain guidlines. Besides, they are not being forced to take urine tests, it is a choice; test and pass or no money. They can choose not to test, but they get no money.

Government money? No, it's our money.

Quite right, Mad Hatter. It is out money. We earned it and the government takes us from us. Which means we have every right to insist that they aren't wasting it by subsidizing people's bad lifestyles...

My God, she might actually be starting to get it!

Naaaaaah.