Drug Testing For Welfare

[Burg_Grad_77]

It seems that 3 states, Florida, Kentucky, and Indiana all have passed bills instituting this, though I just saw where the courts rejected Floridas law. Personally I think they should be tested. If I have to be tested for any job I try to get to work at the so should they to receive money.

What's everyone else think?

There is also a bill being introduced to Congress.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/0 ... 06450.html

[ManitouDan]

yes with a lifetime ban if you test positive for a) something illegal or b) something you dont have a rx for .

[Runner]

I agree. The government could pick up the tab of anyone testing negative and stop the payments immediately for anyone testing positive. The testing would be very cheap compared to what is paid out now and would save this country tons of money in the long run once the scum is dropped from welfare. Not only should they be tested for "drugs", they should also be tested for alcohol. If you can afford alcohol (or cigarettes), you don't need the welfare.

[NYBuckeye96]

From what I have read online, drug testing costs more than the benefits received by welfare recipients who test positive. A lot more.

So if the reasoning is to do drug tests to save tax payer money, that isn't a plan, as it will cost taxpayers much more in the longrun.

If the reasoning is because it is the right thing to do, then the reasoning is fine by me. You just have to realize that this will cost taxpayers, not save money. But morally we would be doing the right thing.

[NYBuckeye96]

Here is an article on costs......

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/20/2 ... -cost.html

Of the 4,086 applicants who scheduled drug tests while the law was enforced, 108 people, or 2.6 percent, failed, most often testing positive for marijuana. About 40 people scheduled tests but canceled them, according to the Department of Children and Families, which oversees Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known as the TANF program.

The numbers, confirming previous estimates, show that taxpayers spent $118,140 to reimburse people for drug test costs, at an average of $35 per screening.

The state’s net loss? $45,780.

[ManitouDan]

^^^ horribly flawed study ... HORRID . the dang test were done by schedule ? Not random ? NON random drug testing ? and FWIW drug screens can be purchased for less than 5 bucks a pop . so the test should cost about 4500.00 NOT 45000.00 so how does the math really add up ... according to NYBUCK the testing cost 118K and 108 people tested positive .... Can you imagine the health care savings alone by taking away the medical cards of 108 people ? and the food stamps . I would love to save 5-10% of the people using illegal drugs to help those that dont .

[courier]

If you draw a dime of taxpayer money you should be subjected to RANDOM testing...This includes politicians, educators, fed/state/local employees, etc...Deterrence is the key here folks, not prevention.

[Runner]

One place the government goes wrong in testing these people...is they ONLY test the applicant. They NEED to test EVERYONE that benefits from the applicant. Both spouses and kids, if they have them. And like I said....alcohol testing should be included and if any percentage is found, they lose their benefits. Those numbers would then grow very large in a short time.

These "scheduled" tests are joke and everyone knows it. Even many employers let their employees off the hook knowing they were out partying over the weekend. The employee "somehow" gets the word very early Monday morning to call off sick so they won't have to go in for testing, but come in the next day and have it done. How convenient.. . I have seen it done many times in both the public and private sector.

[Bear]

So you are for more government?

[C-Bolt]

Am I seeing things? Dem's and Repub's agreeing on something LOL,well I have always said this and think it should be done also, although some think its too costly, but why not let the recipient pay for it? If they want it bad enough they can cough up a few more bucks I would think.

[courier]

I am for a better government that sets priorities and spends our tax dollars wisely. We squander billions of dollars annually. Billions of tax dollars go uncollected annually. Fraud, waste and abuse is the norm in the Fed Gov. Yet, we, the Joe n Susie citizen, act as though it is okay and/or the norm. It isn't okay. Politicians are constantly throwing out RED HERRINGs and the avg citizen swallows the bait. Don't look where they are waving because they are picking your pocket while you are distracted.

[Runner]

Stop paying aid to the darn illegals that don't belong here and foreign countries and the costs could be even lower.

[C-Bolt]

Yep agree there too! It always peeves me to see these other countries get so much of our money including Israel and I might catch flack for that but my god how much more military help do they need over there? Even with the recent screw up with Egypt they still got enough might to wipe every country off the map over there,keep it over here where it belongs, we're broke enough the way it is, but that will be the day with any of our leaders.

[courier]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^DITTO^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[LICKING COUNTY FAN]

Yes they should be tested just like those who work are tested.

[noreply66]

agree

[Tigercannon71]

I agree they should be tested. Only thing I got reservations on is those that fail and get their welfare taken what happens to their kids. I mean if the parent has no income will the state take the kids into custody till the parents clean up?

[Runner]

If the parent is a user in any way, they don't deserve to have kids in the first place.

[LICKING COUNTY FAN]

I agree with no druggie should have their kids.

[Tigercannon71]

True, but if the kid is doing well despite the drug user parent you dont want to pull them out of school and the home sending them to a "group" home. The would do more harm than good plus it just puts another dependent onto the govt system.
It sounds great to say pass a drug test or no welfare, but I think it's a very complex situation that a few other factors have to be considered.