Is it a good idea to test welfare recipients for drugs?

[JOSweetHeart]

I think that it is. To me, when there is nothing to hide, nobody minds and if the person is on drugs while they are trying to get approved for the welfare money, then they shouldn't get any of the money until they are all cleaned up.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[danielpalos]

Why should the Individual Person be penalized on an Institutional basis? Job 34:30 applies.

 

[buddhallah_the_christ]

I am sure that it is a very good idea. I wonder what is the statistics how much of welfare money are spent on drugs?
I would go further: drug addicted persons should show all their checks of the goods they bought.

 

[danielpalos]

Should we start with the public sector first? Prohibition in modern times is just plain silly. We already know it was a historical mistake, last millennium.

 

[paravani]

Time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid, folks.

-- The results are thin: According to USA Today, more than 87,000 welfare recipients went through Arizona's program in the three years after it began. The total number of drug cheats caught was exactly one — a single positive result, which saved the state precisely $560. -- Policy at Mic.com

From the article "Arizona Spent $1.7 Million Drug Testing Welfare Recipients to Catch One Person" -- One company at the forefront of the lobbying push for mandatory drug testing is Hoffman-La Roche, which ironically is the same company that produces Valium and other highly addictive sleeping pills. This company also spends money to keep cannabis illegal—and weed is one of the few “drugs” that these tests can reliably detect. In fact, an entire “trade association” (Drug & Alcohol Testing Industry Association) has been created as a front for Big Pharma’s lobbying efforts to get as many Americans drug tested as possible while ensuring the War on Drugs stays in full-effect. --

(By the way, I think the person who wrote the article title got their figures mixed up. Arizona intended to SAVE $1.7 million. In fact they probably ended up spending about $2.6 million for 87,000 drug tests at $30 each, which is what Florida pays for them. They didn't save any money at all.)

The lesson here is, Always follow the money. Who stands to make money from the policy? Has the policy actually saved other taxpayers money, or has it cost them money? Does the industry who makes money off the policy have a lobbying arm, and are they active in my state?

Answer the above questions for any political issue or candidate, and you are likely to vote much more intelligently in the future.

-- Paravani

 

[danielpalos]

Why does the Right even bother to complain about social spending if even the hard money crowd is not complaining about the "funny money" that is used in our welfare system.

 

[Teddy Pollins]

I have learnt the wisdom of the life in America : do not pay for lazy idlers. As more as we work hard so more they are just doing absolutely nothing.
Welfare was a stupid idea at the very beginning. Welfare is a social payment for the end of the USA.

 

[Eaglewings]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

I was an a addiction counselor before I got sick and it is an easy inexpensive test.
Thing is in a rehab you can stand in a room with the one being tested because there are so many ways to cheat

 

[Ava]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

I think it is a better idea to investigate welfare recipients for fraud.

I also think there should be in expiration date for welfare benefits. One year or two, maybe. Time enough for them to acquire a trade or other forms of education that would lead them to employment of some kind.

 

[danielpalos]

Our elected representatives are delegated the power to regulate Commerce.

We should end the "funny money" scheme via policy public; in regard to legal tender for all debts public and private.

 

[Kondor3]

Given the results obtained in a handful of State -level pilot projects in this area... it's probably a waste of taxpayer money.

 

[bedowin62]

the claims of "wasted money" are by obtuse fools only counting the cost of the testing vs the cost of the money saved not giving it to a drug-using welfare recipient. what they arent counting is the enormous amounts of money it cost the state when a family falls apart because of drug use; in court costs, therapy, counseling, incarceration, foster homes, treatment....etc

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

the claims of "wasted money" are by obtuse fools only counting the cost of the testing vs the cost of the money saved not giving it to a drug-using welfare recipient. what they arent counting is the enormous amounts of money it cost the state when a family falls apart because of drug use; in court costs, therapy, counseling, incarceration, foster homes, treatment....etc

If they are on welfare and using drugs, I'd say that family is already in huge trouble.... court costs, therapy, counseling, incarceration, foster homes, treatment are already in their future.

Just say'n.

 

[bedowin62]

the claims of "wasted money" are by obtuse fools only counting the cost of the testing vs the cost of the money saved not giving it to a drug-using welfare recipient. what they arent counting is the enormous amounts of money it cost the state when a family falls apart because of drug use; in court costs, therapy, counseling, incarceration, foster homes, treatment....etc

If they are on welfare and using drugs, I'd say that family is already in huge trouble.... court costs, therapy, counseling, incarceration, foster homes, treatment are already in their future.

Just say'n.

agreed; but dont problems get more complicated and costly to fix the longer they are allowed to fester?

 

[Billy000]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Drug use among food stamps recipients is statistically low. It would be a waste.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Drug use among food stamps recipients is statistically low. It would be a waste.

 

[Meathead]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Only " IF " we test ALL government employees, including members of Congress, the president, city and state employees, members of law enforcement, government contractors, and anyone that receives their income from taxpayers. Why single out those less fortunate, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, the children, the handicapped, the mentally challenged, and our Vets? Why should we not test every single person getting taxpayer funds? Would that not be fair?

Why do some people think that only our poor and less fortunate receive taxpayer money? Do we pay members of Congress, and pay them even though they don't work? Do we pay social workers that do a poor job of making sure children aren't abused? Do we pay government employees to sit at a desk all day drinking coffee and playing game on the internet?

I wouldn't demand the same amount of sobriety for those not sponsored by the state. On your dime, do whatever the **** you want, but not on mine.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Only " IF " we test ALL government employees, including members of Congress, the president, city and state employees, members of law enforcement, government contractors, and anyone that receives their income from taxpayers. Why single out those less fortunate, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, the children, the handicapped, the mentally challenged, and our Vets? Why should we not test every single person getting taxpayer funds? Would that not be fair?

Why do some people think that only our poor and less fortunate receive taxpayer money? Do we pay members of Congress, and pay them even though they don't work? Do we pay social workers that do a poor job of making sure children aren't abused? Do we pay government employees to sit at a desk all day drinking coffee and playing game on the internet?

I wouldn't demand the same amount of sobriety for those not sponsored by the state. On your dime, do whatever the **** you want, but not on mine.

When you ask somebody else to take care of you, you have pretty much given up your freedoms...

 

[Sonny Clark]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Only " IF " we test ALL government employees, including members of Congress, the president, city and state employees, members of law enforcement, government contractors, and anyone that receives their income from taxpayers. Why single out those less fortunate, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, the children, the handicapped, the mentally challenged, and our Vets? Why should we not test every single person getting taxpayer funds? Would that not be fair?

Why do some people think that only our poor and less fortunate receive taxpayer money? Do we pay members of Congress, and pay them even though they don't work? Do we pay social workers that do a poor job of making sure children aren't abused? Do we pay government employees to sit at a desk all day drinking coffee and playing game on the internet?

I wouldn't demand the same amount of sobriety for those not sponsored by the state. On your dime, do whatever the **** you want, but not on mine.

When you ask somebody else to take care of you, you have pretty much given up your freedoms...

Not necessarily. There's nothing wrong with accepting help when you really need it. A lot of people have been helped and were able to get back on their feet.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I think it is indeed. Why should I pay my taxes and see those lazy bums getting their welfare just to buy crack or pot? I think it's unfair. All welfare recipients have to be tested for drugs every time they get their welfare checks. Maybe it will teach them how to work. Or I have an another idea, everyone should get welfare checks no matter if a person works or not. It will make America even more communist.

Only " IF " we test ALL government employees, including members of Congress, the president, city and state employees, members of law enforcement, government contractors, and anyone that receives their income from taxpayers. Why single out those less fortunate, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, the children, the handicapped, the mentally challenged, and our Vets? Why should we not test every single person getting taxpayer funds? Would that not be fair?

Why do some people think that only our poor and less fortunate receive taxpayer money? Do we pay members of Congress, and pay them even though they don't work? Do we pay social workers that do a poor job of making sure children aren't abused? Do we pay government employees to sit at a desk all day drinking coffee and playing game on the internet?

I wouldn't demand the same amount of sobriety for those not sponsored by the state. On your dime, do whatever the **** you want, but not on mine.

When you ask somebody else to take care of you, you have pretty much given up your freedoms...

Not necessarily. There's nothing wrong with accepting help when you really need it. A lot of people have been helped and were able to get back on their feet.

Oh, I agree..... I'm not anti-welfare at all... but I think it is ridiculous that there are generations in families that have been on welfare. That is sad.