• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Drug tests for welfare applicants

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure - CNN

Saying it is "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction," Gov. Rick Scott on Tuesday signed legislation requiring adults applying for welfare assistance to undergo drug screening.
"It's the right thing for taxpayers," Scott said after signing the measure. "It's the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don't want to waste tax dollars. And also, we want to give people an incentive to not use drugs."

This is a good thing I think. Some argue that it's unconstitutional. Then again, the other spectrum argues that taking money in taxes to GIVE to the 'entitled' is unconstitutional. So this is a good middle ground. Give only to those who need, not to those who are abusing it.



As far as I know there are a couple other states that have put in the same legislation.


So what are your thoughts on this?
 

generalblue

Where is my Queen?
I agree that we need to start drug testing people that apply for welfare. I don't have exact numbers but there is a lot of people that are on welfare that do drugs, sell drugs, and are criminals as well. It should be like any job that you apply for, take a drug test, also run a background check, and if you fail the drug test or have a felonoy, you don't get money. I don't want my tax dollars going to those guys. It should be hardworking honest people that fell on hard times recieving these checks. Although this will help, it won't cut this issue down completly. It will also reduce tax spending on welfare as well, and can use that money for other things that are more important than giving a junkie his fix.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I do agree that entitlement spending is unconstitutional as there is no power granted to Congress that allows them to tax me and give it to someone else. However, since we are doing that and have been doing that under some phantom clause of the Constitution, I don't think this is an unreasonable measure at all. Our tax dollars should not be subsidizing those that waste their days getting high. I agree with generalblue, it should go towards hard-working people who fell on hard times, not those who engage in criminal behavior.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
Its stunning that this is just now coming on-line. I guess drug testing technology has gotten much more accessible and cost effective and that is why its just now starting to happen. The only objection I could imagine to this would be from presumably intelligent bureaucrats such as Tom Vilsack and Jay Carney who believe that the more welfare you give out, the less employment you will have??? But besides those num-nuts the drug testing welfare is so incredibly common sense I can't imagine why every State would not follow.
 

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
It's not so much that people disapprove how a beneficiary is using it (it may be drugs now, but then it can be anything really like make up, junk food, cigarettes, alcohol, etc.) It's a monitoring nightmare. It seems to be it's more an issue of whether criminals or people doing criminal behavior be eligible to welfare benefits. It could be drugs, it can be other things.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
It's not so much that people disapprove how a beneficiary is using it (it may be drugs now, but then it can be anything really like make up, junk food, cigarettes, alcohol, etc.) It's a monitoring nightmare. It seems to be it's more an issue of whether criminals or people doing criminal behavior be eligible to welfare benefits. It could be drugs, it can be other things.
Well, it's not just that might be what they are using the money on. What it also is, is the thinking "if they have money to score an 8-ball of cocaine, they can feed themselves and their kids". I don't have a problem with spending more money to monitor, it seems much of that would be saved by finding those that abuse the system and removing any benefits they receive.
 

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
what I meant by monitoring nightmare is IF beneficiaries would be monitored against using the money for anything that people could disprove of. Drugs is easy. But if extends to the principle of people not wanting to finance obesity or smoking or drinking habits would they start checking their diet and food purchase, Would there be smoking and alcohol control?
 

Iris

rainbow 11!
I agree with generalblue, it should go towards hard-working people who fell on hard times, not those who engage in criminal behavior.

Yep. I completely agree with you here. Being a Florida resident, I'm happy and hopefully we will see some changes around here. I live in a really nice neighborhood, but the areas around it are kinda sketchy. I know tons of people who are on government assistance and own coach purses, awesome cars and tons of fancy shit. and I know they aren't gifts from other people, they are purchases they make with all of their extra money.
 

shelgarr

Registered Member
Having any kind of monetary dependency at any time of life usually results in a loss of power and privileges. So in this case when they are using government money to support a habit, sure I think it's reasonable. My only hesitation is what's the point? Ok, they're positive. Then what? Jail (more taxpayer cost). Rehab (more taxpayer cost). Cut benefits (probably won't happen).Improved healthiness? They don't care. Plus then they live longer and .... (more taxpayer money). Get them straight so they apply themselves and get off assistance is the best thing to be gained. I wonder though how often that will really happen.
 
Last edited:

Comet

Registered Member
Due to my philosophy of less government in our lives, I respectfully disagree with this. As much as we want assistance to go to those truly in need, it is a tad over-reaching to commence monitoring how those people spend their money.

Obviously I do not want to see our government supporting the drug habits of individuals but on the flip-side of the coin I do not want to see our government prying into our personal lives.
 
Top