States consider drug tests for welfare recipients Mar 26 2009

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Jan 8, 2007
30,528
2,263
1,045
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) - Want government assistance? Just say no to drugs.

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.

A January attempt in the Arizona Senate to establish such a law failed.

In the past, such efforts have been stymied by legal and cost concerns, said Christine Nelson, a program manager with the National Conference of State Legislatures. But states' bigger fiscal crises, and the surging demand for public assistance, could change that.

"It's an example of where you could cut costs at the expense of a segment of society that's least able to defend themselves," said Frank Crabtree, executive director of the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Drug testing is not the only restriction envisioned for people receiving public assistance: a bill in the Tennessee Legislature would cap lottery winnings for recipients at $600.

There seems to be no coordinated move around the country to push these bills, and similar proposals have arisen periodically since federal welfare reform in the 1990s. But the appearance of a cluster of such proposals in the midst of the recession shows lawmakers are newly engaged about who is getting public assistance.

Particularly troubling to some policy analysts is the drive to drug test people collecting unemployment insurance, whose numbers nationwide now exceed 5.4 million, the highest total on records dating back to 1967.

"It doesn't seem like the kind of thing to bring up during a recession," said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "People who are unemployed, who have lost their job, that's a sympathetic group. Americans are tuned into that, because they're worried they'll be next."

Indeed, these proposals are coming at a time when more Americans find themselves in need of public assistance.

Although the number of TANF recipients has stayed relatively stable at 3.8 million in the last year, claims for unemployment benefits and food stamps have soared.

In December, more than 31.7 million Americans were receiving food stamp benefits, compared with 27.5 million the year before.

The link between public assistance and drug testing stems from the Congressional overhaul of welfare in the 1990s, which allowed states to implement drug testing as a condition of receiving help.

But a federal court struck down a Michigan law that would have allowed for "random, suspicionless" testing, saying it violated the 4th Amendment's protections against unreasonable search and seizure, said Liz Schott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

At least six states - Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Virginia - tie eligibility for some public assistance to drug testing for convicted felons or parolees, according to the NCSL.

Nelson said programs that screen welfare applicants by assigning them to case workers for interviews have shown some success without the need for drug tests. These alternative measures offer treatment, but can also threaten future benefits if drug problems persist, she said.

They also cost less than the $400 or so needed for tests that can catch a sufficient range of illegal drugs, and rule out false positive results with a follow-up test, she said.

My Way News - States consider drug tests for welfare recipients


:eusa_whistle:
 
oh PEEEEJAYYYYYy........




I posted this JUST FOR YOU, homey...
 
So, some guy who just lost his job smokes a joint and gets denied his unemployment benefits, even though he's a good solid worker, and he's looking for work everyday. Now he can't feed his kids or make his rent payment. Oh well, guess he'll learn. Of course, the guy sitting in the bar, closing it down everynight, and not even trying to find a job, will continue to collect his bennies and continue to drink them away. Alcohol is legal and all, so no biggie.
 
Yep, its that lousy logic that one thing is legal, so (fill in the blank) should be legal too, wont buy you a cup of air at the local cafe.

Alcohol has destroyed enough lives, so lets back up and see you use that logic now. or will you tell us that pot is a harmless drug, and the only thing thats bad about it is that its illegal?

In that case, tell me why in the early 80s, a well known and published MEDICAL report came out and stated that 1000s of pot smokers had quit, and were documented quitting, for the reason that they were feeling paranoid and unstable, the longer they smoked?

Now...perhaps that explains all the poor mental health today, but its SURELY not a selling point for legalizing pot.
 
This is something that I would support. I really dont want my taxes going to support someone who uses my money to buy drugs. Now, I also agree that pot should be legalized, but I do not think the two are related.

I fully support tobacco companies and cigarette sales. I think tobacco products should be used as a tax cow. Anytime states or the Feds need money, they should hike the taxes on tobacco and alcohol. If and when the legalize pot, they should tax pot sales in exactly the same way.
 
Yep, its that lousy logic that one thing is legal, so (fill in the blank) should be legal too, wont buy you a cup of air at the local cafe.

Alcohol has destroyed enough lives, so lets back up and see you use that logic now. or will you tell us that pot is a harmless drug, and the only thing thats bad about it is that its illegal?

In that case, tell me why in the early 80s, a well known and published MEDICAL report came out and stated that 1000s of pot smokers had quit, and were documented quitting, for the reason that they were feeling paranoid and unstable, the longer they smoked?

Now...perhaps that explains all the poor mental health today, but its SURELY not a selling point for legalizing pot.

So just to be clear, would you be in favor of denying the benefits to people who drink?
 
:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:

I like this!!! How about we also limit the types of food they can get on food stamps too. I'm sick of people having a cart full of junk and expensive meat and using their Oregon Trail card (FS card) to pay for it. Then when asked to use a club card for discounts, they say nah, not like I'm paying for it. Set it up like WIC.
 
So, some guy who just lost his job smokes a joint and gets denied his unemployment benefits, even though he's a good solid worker, and he's looking for work everyday. Now he can't feed his kids or make his rent payment. Oh well, guess he'll learn. Of course, the guy sitting in the bar, closing it down everynight, and not even trying to find a job, will continue to collect his bennies and continue to drink them away. Alcohol is legal and all, so no biggie.

I think Alcohol should be included in the testing. If you want our money, then you must jump through our hoops.
 
I have an idea. Rather than pay infinitely for drug test, which will cost enough to derail this idea in short order, monitor grocery store cameras and anyone caught smiling with food stamps loses them. I'll be damned if a food stamp recipient will indulge in any form of personal hope, laughter or happiness. If you want food, you had better be one sad SOB. Or be willing to let one of our saddistic agents sodomize you until they are suffciently satisfied that you have met the misery requirements to be fed.

:eusa_whistle:
 
So, some guy who just lost his job smokes a joint and gets denied his unemployment benefits, even though he's a good solid worker, and he's looking for work everyday. Now he can't feed his kids or make his rent payment. Oh well, guess he'll learn. Of course, the guy sitting in the bar, closing it down everynight, and not even trying to find a job, will continue to collect his bennies and continue to drink them away. Alcohol is legal and all, so no biggie.


This is an excellent point.

I think that marijuana should be legal (Disclaimer: I have never smoked pot or cigarette in my life, nor will I ever). I do not buy into the "marijuana use will lead to use of heavy drugs" argument.

I think marijuana is bad for you, just like cigarettes, or excessive alcohol consumption, but it it the person's choice to do it. Clearly, marijuana suppresses one's consciousness, so just like EtOH, one could not operate machinery or vehicles.

On the other hand...if someone is so destitute that they need government assistance...can they really afford pot or cigarettes?
 
Father Time: I would be fine with that. Drunks, potheads, deadbeats, no reason they should be slurping booze on one hand and eating paid for steak and shrimp on another.

Xotoxi: just like an alcoholic, someone that needs a buzz always finds money for that high, no matter how broke they are, their priorities are just that poor. Additionally...there is a large market for swapping welfare food for drugs, booze, cigarettes, among lowlifes.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone actually have any real data on the percentage of people receiving government assistance that are consuming illegal drugs? Why does anyone think this is a real problem?
 
Does anyone actually have any real data on the percentage of people receiving government assistance that are consuming illegal drugs? Why does anyone think this is a real problem?


The data from the Michigan foray into drug testing recipients reflected numbers just a little below the general population. I'll see if I can retrieve them for you. These numbers are genrally regarded, by the people that bother to look at them, as eveidence that this effort is practically useless. About 3%, I beleive, for marijuana use.
 
In the whopping 5 weeks that Michigans drug testing survived before being sued, the results were 8% positive.


In the five weeks Michigan's program operated, 8 percent of recipients tested positive, in line with national drug-use statistics.

Welfare Drug Tests to End - The New York Times



These states currently planning to test, will most likely not begin testing. There will be challenges filed pronto and injunctions until the cases are settled. I would be surprised if any test ever happen. It has been talked about forever and in all these years, Michigan managed to test fewer than 300 people before being stopped.
 
Finally, something I can get on board with.

So someone should get denied benefits just because they smoked a joint? Wow, you republican religous wackos are really amazing. So in short, you are allowed to get drunk as hell, pound a couple 40's and get shitface drunk and get your benefits. But smoke a joint and you are not worthy of getting your money. Fucking amazing how stupid our society is. We can't get anything right.
 

Forum List

Back
Top