PDA

View Full Version : Drug Tests for Welfare Checks


Dino 6 Rings
03-26-2009, 09:29 AM
Pretty sure some of us here have been fans of this idea....well here it comes, at least, its being looked at as an option.

States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

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.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090326/D975MFE80.html

xfl2001fan
03-26-2009, 10:20 AM
AMEN! When I lived in WV, I was asking for this for a long time from the few people I knew connected to politics. You should absolutely be clean to receive your check. The only people discouraged by asking for financial aid are those who are breaking the law in the first place.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 10:57 AM
This should have been enacted when the welfare system was first put in place.

rbryan
03-26-2009, 11:12 AM
Sounds good at first glance, only problem is it will cost more to test everyone than the money saved for throwing all the crackheads off the welfare wagon.

2nd problem....what do you think all the crackheads are going to do once the welfare checks stop........go get a job??

Unless you're willing to put them all out to sea on an ice flow its pointless.

PisnNapalm
03-26-2009, 11:19 AM
I dunno.... Seems to me that the cost of testing everyone would outweigh any savings by booting some off welfare.

I just don't know...

xfl2001fan
03-26-2009, 11:23 AM
I dunno.... Seems to me that the cost of testing everyone would outweigh any savings by booting some off welfare.

I just don't know...

You could test everyone intially (to clear the system) and then do random tests from there. Like a 10% every quarter. You would only get 40% done throughout the year...but once you pop hot, you're out. If you pop hot, you go to court for taking illegal substances and get fined. The fine, plus court costs, plus testing costs should help add a surplus.

If you have popped hot in the past, you need to pay for your own drug test in order to get back in, show up clean (on your own dime) for 6 consecutive months and then you are subject to the same 10% random tests from then on. A second hot charge (if it's unjustifiable) means you are disqualified for life.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 11:24 AM
Sounds good at first glance, only problem is it will cost more to test everyone than the money saved for throwing all the crackheads off the welfare wagon.

2nd problem....what do you think all the crackheads are going to do once the welfare checks stop........go get a job??

Unless you're willing to put them all out to sea on an ice flow its pointless.

Maybe, but I haven't seen any numbers proving as much. Let's say a drug test is under $500. That would be one average check, right?

Plus, the principle of someone taking welfare money and supporting a drug habit and buying lottery tickets irks me. Maybe they will be forced to think about changing their lives. I am sickened at the thought of my hard earned money supporting a slob.

rbryan
03-26-2009, 11:27 AM
You're assuming a crackhead on welfare is going to have the cash on hand to pay the fines..........

Whats the next step?? Put em in jail when they don't pay. Back to square one on saving any $

The eskimos had it right from the get go.

rbryan
03-26-2009, 11:28 AM
You're right, something needs to be done. Maybe having the $ for the testing be paid out of the first check they recv. I guess its a start.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 11:29 AM
You're assuming a crackhead on welfare is going to have the cash on hand to pay the fines..........

Whats the next step?? Put em in jail when they don't pay. Back to square one on saving any $

The eskimos had it right from the get go.

They obviously have the money to buy the crack... :noidea:

It's not about just saving money, it's holding people accountable for their own lives and giving incentive to better themselves.

hindes204
03-26-2009, 11:35 AM
They obviously have the money to buy the crack... :noidea:

It's not about just saving money, it's holding people accountable for their own lives and giving incentive to better themselves.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!! :iagree::iagree::iagree:

rbryan
03-26-2009, 11:36 AM
To truly hold people accountable the whole welfare system needs to be revamped.

Unless someone is physically unable to work, they shouldn't be there to begin with.....but thats a whole different story.

I can't say I like the idea of signing off on career welfare recipients just because they don't do drugs.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 11:47 AM
To truly hold people accountable the whole welfare system needs to be revamped.

Unless someone is physically unable to work, they shouldn't be there to begin with.....but thats a whole different story.

I can't say I like the idea of signing off on career welfare recipients just because they don't do drugs.

I agree 100%. I also think they have to show that a certain percentage of it should be going to career or education development. And, it should have a set end date so they know the timeframe to work towards.

If you give and give and provide no incentive to provide on your own, you promote laziness. I see this first hand with a friend who owns a couple HUD duplexes.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 11:49 AM
You're right, something needs to be done. Maybe having the $ for the testing be paid out of the first check they recv. I guess its a start.

That's an idea.

HometownGal
03-26-2009, 11:50 AM
It's not about just saving money, it's holding people accountable for their own lives and giving incentive to better themselves.

Agreed. I'm all for it. :thumbsup:

If you aren't doing drugs and have nothing to hide, you should have no problem submitting to a drug test.

I'll bet the Demos put the kibosh on this one. Heaven forbid we Americans should be held accountable for anything. :banging:

rbryan
03-26-2009, 11:52 AM
I don't know...if anything theres probably a democrat somewhere licking his chops at the thought of how much $ he can skim off the top of a new govt program to test welfare recipients.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 12:02 PM
actually, laws like this have been proposed in state legislatures over the past 2 decades...usually they get shot down...no idea why. Guess some of those elected officials get votes from the people who get the handouts...and they think taking them away will lose their vote.

Dino 6 Rings
03-26-2009, 12:12 PM
Next up, drug test ALL politicians.

that's the dream.

SCSTILLER
03-26-2009, 12:24 PM
Does anyone see the ACLU jumping on this should it start gaining momentum?

HometownGal
03-26-2009, 12:52 PM
Does anyone see the ACLU jumping on this should it start gaining momentum?

Yep. That's pretty much a guarantee. Those rattlesnakes will be licking their skins at this one.

revefsreleets
03-26-2009, 01:15 PM
There is exactly zero chance this ever gets passed. ZERO.

I like the idea behind it though. Personal accountability is always a good thing. But this would also reverse the horrible direction Obama is heading in concerning welfare, so it's just not gonna happen.

Welfare will continue to be an entrenched program of generational entitlement for the worst and the dullest.

Hammer67
03-26-2009, 01:59 PM
Does anyone see the ACLU jumping on this should it start gaining momentum?

They already have in WV...ACLU chapter president basically said these types of rules only "hurt people who already can't help themselves"

:doh:

trauben
03-26-2009, 02:37 PM
If those serving in active duty military have to do it, then so should those sucking on the teet (not to be confused with those who temporarily use it as it's intended during hard times)!!!!

Anyone see that new commercial? The one that shows a woman on a back road with her car broken down looking scared and worried with her voice sounded over saying, "My car broke down one day on my way to pick up my children from daycare. I was stranded with no way to call for help."
http://www.new-cell-phones.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/samsung-b220-cell-phone.gif
It was for cell phones for those on Welfare! They call it "safelink". :pissed:
https://www.safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/home.aspx

You and I will now start paying for the luxury of cell phones for those using the system erroneously! I have a MASSIVE problem with that!

A drug test is the least they should do to prove their not just junkies out living off of yours and my hard earned money we have to pay into taxes to support them! :twocents:

hindes204
03-26-2009, 03:14 PM
god forbid people live without cell phones :doh:

SCSTILLER
03-26-2009, 03:16 PM
They already have in WV...ACLU chapter president basically said these types of rules only "hurt people who already can't help themselves"

:doh:


You have got to be flipping kidding me. The people that pay the taxes (or the majority of people that pay the taxes) have to take drug tests, work in drug free work places where if you get busted you are done, etc. etc. and the people collecting from the hardworking taxpayers are going to have themselves disadvantaged in some way. How about this, what if you, the welfare recipient who loves the bowl, finally finds a job and they drug test you. Guess what, no job, back to welfare. How is drug testing them "hurting" them, if anything keeping them (some of them) clean will actually help them IMO!

Gotta love the ACLU (American Communist Left Union), they are worthless headline grabbers, that is all!

stlrtruck
03-26-2009, 03:29 PM
AMEN! When I lived in WV, I was asking for this for a long time from the few people I knew connected to politics. You should absolutely be clean to receive your check. The only people discouraged by asking for financial aid are those who are breaking the law in the first place.

Now I know what the freak is wrong with you!!! :flap:

I also think this should have been in place a long time ago. It's about time people put some good policies in place that protect the American people being taxed to death.

KeiselPower99
03-28-2009, 01:11 AM
Pretty sure some of us here have been fans of this idea....well here it comes, at least, its being looked at as an option.

States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

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.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090326/D975MFE80.html

I have no problem with this. If they want our money they should be clean and spend it on stuff they need(food,clothes gas) not drugs. Really suprises me that West Virginia is the leader on this. My home state actually doing something right. :tt02: When I was taking my mining test the instructor was telling us that down in the Southern part of the state where it is real bad that coal cmpanys have began looking over pot as a drug offense cause 7 out of 10 people that apply are addicted to meth or pills.

steelwall
03-28-2009, 03:00 AM
I don't know...if anything theres probably a democrat somewhere licking his chops at the thought of how much $ he can skim off the top of a new govt program to test welfare recipients.

Actually drug tests don't cost that much, and who says the government has to do it? It can be done just like any private business does at a clinic:noidea:

Love the idea...

xfl2001fan
03-29-2009, 04:56 PM
Now I know what the freak is wrong with you!!! :flap:

I also think this should have been in place a long time ago. It's about time people put some good policies in place that protect the American people being taxed to death.

Should I have put, When I was Stationed in WV? :flap: I was there working for Uncle Sam...and moved on to Columbus shortly after.

MasterOfPuppets
03-29-2009, 07:17 PM
Lawmakers in at least eight states want recipients of food stamps, unemployment benefits or welfare to submit to random drug testing. i can understand the welfare recipients getting tested but people collecting unemployment? give me a freakin break..... first off unemployment isn't a gift from the state....employers PAY unemployment insurance, and its not like the person collecting never pays taxes....they even TAX your unemployment check. being a union construction worker, i usually open, and reopen a claim 3,4,5 times a year !!! hell i've worked for as many as 6 different companies a year...and usually get piss tested everytime i go to a different job. i myself AS A TAXPAYER, would be quite aggravated with this.
i personally think making the welfare collectors WORK for the check would be an even bigger detourent than a piss test. there's plenty of garbage on the highways and state parks that could be picked up. and plenty of unkept state property and programs that could use some attention...put these bastards to work, and there would be no need for volunteers. they make people collecting unemployment prove that they've been actively seeking jobs...why are welfare recipients immune to this?

stlrtruck
03-30-2009, 07:21 AM
Should I have put, When I was Stationed in WV? :flap: I was there working for Uncle Sam...and moved on to Columbus shortly after.

I guess it all depends on how long you were there and how long you've been gone. BUt if you were there too long, it's permanent!!! :flap:

xfl2001fan
03-30-2009, 08:30 AM
I guess it all depends on how long you were there and how long you've been gone. BUt if you were there too long, it's permanent!!! :flap:

Over the course of my entire life, I've spent a total of 5 years there. The problem with WV is that my oldest son lives there with his Mom. So when I get a chance to get stationed there, I take it. Makes it easier to see him more often. As it is, living in Columbus ain't too shabby, as he's only about 3 hours away now.

stlrtruck
03-30-2009, 08:49 AM
Over the course of my entire life, I've spent a total of 5 years there. The problem with WV is that my oldest son lives there with his Mom. So when I get a chance to get stationed there, I take it. Makes it easier to see him more often. As it is, living in Columbus ain't too shabby, as he's only about 3 hours away now.

I could say so many things right now but I'll save the joke list for our friend TIMMAH! I grew up close enough (literally 15 minutes from Harper's Ferry) that it's all one big joke. My brother lives in WV now (yeah I rag on him ever once in awhile too).

Well, I don't blame you for taking the opportunity to be around your son. That's outstanding!