Replies

Smith, who has a three-year-old daughter and another baby due soon, works about 20 hours a week at Denny’s — though she has repeatedly requested full-time employment. Because it’s a tipped job, she makes just $2.33 an hour, and currently relies on food stamps to feed her family.

“I’m willing to work. I’m not lazy at all,” she said. “But the jobs we can get are horrible, low pay, and we can’t get the hours we need. As a parent, it just sucks. I want things that are healthy for her, but the fruits and vegetables she needs to grow as young child are expensive.”

Yet, I read nothing 'bout her prior education (dropout??), hubby, nor why baby #2 (which will take her out of the employment pool shortly anyway) was such a 'great idea'....let alone why the presumption everyone else would be required to pay for these bad decisions Leeches, one and all (ok, for the MOST part). And here I thought there was a Constitution to be followed: No property taken, yadda, yadda

So if this woman is drug-free, why should she mind taking a drug test? After all she is receiving several hundred dollars of income a month for an hour or two of her time; wish I could earn that kind of money. But if this is so onerous, then why not just have lab tech at the welfare office who will collect a hair sample at the time she applies for her benefits, and send it off to a lab. Seems to me the only people who would have any reason to object to this are people using drugs. I applaud Gov. Walker for this.

By the I like the idea of drug testing voters as suggested by a previous poster although I don't see it as being practical. I think demonstrating basic literacy in English, proof of ID, citizenship, and residency would screen out a lot of problems. I also favor at least a 30-day residency in the precinct that you vote, and an end to early voting.

I would like to see the polls open for 24 hours on election day, opening at the same time and closing the same time across the country, and more control over absentee ballots.