Welfare applicants decline to take drug test, fueling debate over new law

[Inthemiddle]

1,597 + 32 + 1,629 stoners who have been sucking up taxpayers money. Now they ain't.

Citation needed.

 

[jgarden]

Does being poor in America enough to provide the government with "reasonable cause" under the Constitution for mandatory drug testing?

 

[StevenC]

What is a drug test going to prove? and why is it relevant to receiving welfare? If you're on drugs your kids dont have hunger?

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

 

[Inthemiddle]

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

Who said they're spending money on drugs? For all you know they traded the drugs for sexual favors.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Does being poor in America enough to provide the government with "reasonable cause" under the Constitution for mandatory drug testing?

No, being poor is not "reasonable cause" for mandatory drug testing.


Neither is applying for welfare mandatory.


Both are voluntary.



>>>>

 

[Inthemiddle]

Does being poor in America enough to provide the government with "reasonable cause" under the Constitution for mandatory drug testing?

No, being poor is not "reasonable cause" for mandatory drug testing.


Neither is applying for welfare mandatory.


Both are voluntary.

If you are assaulted, there is no mandate that you report the crime to the police. It's a voluntary act. Should the police start mandating drug tests to ensure that you are sober, and thus giving an accurate reporting?

 

[Care4all]

Nearly 1,600 Fla. welfare applicants decline to take drug test, fueling debate over new law




Not sure how I feel about this.

are they doing alcohol testing, too?

either way... are you going to starve people for smoking a joint? pure harassment, imo.

Pure harassment? lol nobody is forcing them to take the hand out... to call this harassment is either not knowing what harassment is or just straight diluted thinking


Anyways this is ultimately futile because most people who take drugs know how to get around the test. Well at least the smart ones and the ones able to play the system.

And I'm not sure of your point about alcohol? Do you want them to test for that or not?

it is an invasion of privacy....and as someone who does not do drugs, I would still not take the test....on principle alone....and hopefully win my case in court. Innocent people should not be forced to do this....under any circumstances in my book.

 

[Jarhead]

Does being poor in America enough to provide the government with "reasonable cause" under the Constitution for mandatory drug testing?

No, being poor is not "reasonable cause" for mandatory drug testing.


Neither is applying for welfare mandatory.


Both are voluntary.

If you are assaulted, there is no mandate that you report the crime to the police. It's a voluntary act. Should the police start mandating drug tests to ensure that you are sober, and thus giving an accurate reporting?

welll...in an effort to compare apples to apples..

If your NOT reporting the crime cost the government (taxpayer) money, then I can certainly see someone making an argument for what you say...yes.

Furthermore, you are ignoring the one thing that makes this law "for the good" of the recipient....

No drug test means that a drug user could use the money to purchase drugs...in essence, the taxpayer is enabling a drug habit.
Stopping the welfare will give the drug user more "impetus" to seek help...

SO I think it is best you look past the ideological views...and look at the pros of such a law.

 

[OODA_Loop]

If you are assaulted, there is no mandate that you report the crime to the police. It's a voluntary act. Should the police start mandating drug tests to ensure that you are sober, and thus giving an accurate reporting?

Report a crime to the police and your sobriety is certainly judged to lawful standards, if there is probable cause to believe your sobriety is in connection to certain crimes than yes they will "mandatory-ily" drug test you.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Does being poor in America enough to provide the government with "reasonable cause" under the Constitution for mandatory drug testing?

No, being poor is not "reasonable cause" for mandatory drug testing.


Neither is applying for welfare mandatory.


Both are voluntary.

If you are assaulted, there is no mandate that you report the crime to the police. It's a voluntary act. Should the police start mandating drug tests to ensure that you are sober, and thus giving an accurate reporting?

I take it you didn't like a truthful answer to your "reasonable clause" question and now want to go down the "silly road". Sorry don't play those games.



>>>>

 

[ClosedCaption]

What is a drug test going to prove? and why is it relevant to receiving welfare? If you're on drugs your kids dont have hunger?

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

I dont get it, drugs arent paid for with WIC checks and food stamps. Money pays for it.

Even if a couple is a drug user and spends all their money on drugs, what does that have to do with their child?

 

[Jarhead]

are they doing alcohol testing, too?

either way... are you going to starve people for smoking a joint? pure harassment, imo.

Pure harassment? lol nobody is forcing them to take the hand out... to call this harassment is either not knowing what harassment is or just straight diluted thinking


Anyways this is ultimately futile because most people who take drugs know how to get around the test. Well at least the smart ones and the ones able to play the system.

And I'm not sure of your point about alcohol? Do you want them to test for that or not?

it is an invasion of privacy....and as someone who does not do drugs, I would still not take the test....on principle alone....and hopefully win my case in court. Innocent people should not be forced to do this....under any circumstances in my book.

it is commonplace in the working world...as it is a necessity for the safety of co-workers.

Do you not see the upside for the user in this case? It may prompt the user to seek help.

And it will eliminate the taxpayer from being the enabler of the habit.

It seems to be a win win for all....except the ones that WANT to use and WANT the taxpayer to pay for it.

 

[WillowTree]

Well if they aren't taking the drug test that must mean they have money to buy drugs. Just a guess.

That would be a pretty stupid test. As said already, the test costs money which many applicants may not have, not to mention accessibility problems. But why should we bother to take all factors into consideration? We're more interested in selectively using only those factors that give easy answers to our simplistic political demands.

I'm quite certain the state of Fla. has the capacity to decide if their laws work for the state of Fla. We don't need you doofus to decide. Like I said. spend your drug money on food, test clean and if you still need help.. well then we'll take your applications.

 

[Jarhead]

What is a drug test going to prove? and why is it relevant to receiving welfare? If you're on drugs your kids dont have hunger?

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

I dont get it, drugs arent paid for with WIC checks and food stamps. Money pays for it.

Even if a couple is a drug user and spends all their money on drugs, what does that have to do with their child?

Food stamps are sold for a small percentqge of face value just as anything else.

 

[WillowTree]

Pure harassment? lol nobody is forcing them to take the hand out... to call this harassment is either not knowing what harassment is or just straight diluted thinking


Anyways this is ultimately futile because most people who take drugs know how to get around the test. Well at least the smart ones and the ones able to play the system.

And I'm not sure of your point about alcohol? Do you want them to test for that or not?

it is an invasion of privacy....and as someone who does not do drugs, I would still not take the test....on principle alone....and hopefully win my case in court. Innocent people should not be forced to do this....under any circumstances in my book.

it is commonplace in the working world...as it is a necessity for the safety of co-workers.

Do you not see the upside for the user in this case? It may prompt the user to seek help.

And it will eliminate the taxpayer from being the enabler of the habit.

It seems to be a win win for all....except the ones that WANT to use and WANT the taxpayer to pay for it.

Exactly. I did it often when I worked and randomly too. I always came up clean. But "a drug free workplace" is the law of the land.

 

[WillowTree]

What is a drug test going to prove? and why is it relevant to receiving welfare? If you're on drugs your kids dont have hunger?

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

I dont get it, drugs arent paid for with WIC checks and food stamps. Money pays for it.

Even if a couple is a drug user and spends all their money on drugs, what does that have to do with their child?

Why is it liberals always think it's the job of the taxpayer to raise their children? If you want to take drugs and not be responsible for feeding your children then don't fucking have children.

 

[WorldWatcher]

What is a drug test going to prove? and why is it relevant to receiving welfare? If you're on drugs your kids dont have hunger?

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

I dont get it, drugs arent paid for with WIC checks and food stamps. Money pays for it.

Checks can be cased for money. Food Stamps can be sold, usually they are sold as some reduced value (say $20 in food stamps sells for $10 in cash, the purchaser can then buy $20 of Food Stamp eligible food, or, sell the stamps for $15 and make a 50% profit on investment - not a bad return as long as you don't get caught).

Even if a couple is a drug user and spends all their money on drugs, what does that have to do with their child?

If the money is being paid to support the child, then it should be used to support the child not buy drugs.


>>>>

 

[Sallow]

Nearly 1,600 Fla. welfare applicants decline to take drug test, fueling debate over new law

MIAMI — State figures show that hundreds of welfare applicants in Florida have declined to take drug tests that have been required for the assistance since mid-July.
Thirty-two applicants failed the test, 7,028 passed and 1,597 didn’t take it, according figures released Tuesday the Department of Children and Families. People who decline to take the test aren’t required to explain.

Proponents of the law have suggested applicants would be deterred because they knew they would test positive. Critics say applicants may not have taken the test because they couldn’t afford the fee that can be as much as $35 or didn’t have easy access to a testing facility.

Not sure how I feel about this.

1,597 + 32 + 1,629 stoners who have been sucking up taxpayers money. Now they ain't.


This is good.

Okay.

What if they die without assistance.

Still good in your book?

 

[Inthemiddle]

welll...in an effort to compare apples to apples..

If your NOT reporting the crime cost the government (taxpayer) money, then I can certainly see someone making an argument for what you say...yes.

Furthermore, you are ignoring the one thing that makes this law "for the good" of the recipient....

No drug test means that a drug user could use the money to purchase drugs...in essence, the taxpayer is enabling a drug habit.
Stopping the welfare will give the drug user more "impetus" to seek help...

SO I think it is best you look past the ideological views...and look at the pros of such a law.

Reporting crime to the police DOES cost taxpayer money. Investigating the crime, time spent filling out paperwork, time in court if the perp is found, detention costs if convicted, etc. All because you reported someone taking your wallet, and all of its $5, at gun point.

There is a vested interest in the government, and for the taxpayer, to minimize false or inaccurate reports to police. So why can't that be sufficient to require people to take drug tests before reporting crimes to police?

The problem with "looking past ideology" is that the "ideology" we're talking about is constitutional rights. If we are ready to agree that our constitutional rights are drastically reduced from what they have previously been understood to be, then what good was the constitution in the first place?

 

[Sallow]

How about if you are spending money on drugs that should be spent on food and clothes.
And if you have kids what does it say about you. I remember one couple that would rather by coke than spend money for diapers for their baby. Are you ok with that?
If you want to do drugs go ahead. Just pay for them with your own money.

I dont get it, drugs arent paid for with WIC checks and food stamps. Money pays for it.

Even if a couple is a drug user and spends all their money on drugs, what does that have to do with their child?

Why is it liberals always think it's the job of the taxpayer to raise their children? If you want to take drugs and not be responsible for feeding your children then don't fucking have children.

Liberals generally care about children. Rich or poor.

Gosh darn it.