States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

AP ^ | 3/26/2009 | Tom Breen

[mad puppy]

"Nobody's being forced into these assistance programs," said Craig Blair, a Republican in the West Virginia Legislature who has created a Web site — notwithmytaxdollars.com — that bears a bobble-headed likeness of himself advocating this position. "If so many jobs require random drug tests these days, why not these benefits?"

[mad puppy]

Double edge sword...No likes more gov't, but I'd love to get all the druggies off the Gov't dime. Bottom line, I say lets try it.

[btw: many other similar posts, but not this one]

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Craig Blair, a Republican in the West Virginia Legislature who has created a Web site — notwithmytaxdollars.com — that bears a bobble-headed likeness of himself

No bias there, no sir.

[GLDNGUN]

I support this 1000%. If they got serious about it, I think it would cut the welfare rolls by HALF at least.

[NEMDF]

Pros and cons.. One big con is, if the drug testing administration gets backed up, bogged down, loses records, etc., they will still get their benefit. Second is that we will PAY for all of including the screwed up administration of the system. Seems like a good concept, but I would be afraid the only outcome would be more tax dollars spent for no good use.

[JimRed]

Cue the little kid yelling “that’s racist!”.

[rock_lobsta]

I’d like to see drug tests for politicians... ;)

[Leisler]

What?

It is only OK for truck drivers, pilots, fishing boat crews......working scum serf low return tax scum like that.

/sarcasm off.

[RC2]

Washington DC could save a lot of money. They need drug testing every 90 days on politicians. If the people have to go thru it, so should the politicians.

[GeronL]

I think its good but I think it should be anyone who gets a government paycheck of any kind

[HiTech RedNeck]

Michigan tried it (random tests) some time back I hear. Got shot down by its Federal circuit court.

Not optimistic that anything but comprehensive tests would pass legal muster, and oh the bill for doing that.

[Leisler]

(we know your ip address)

[Neoliberalnot]

People have been suggesting this for the last 10 years or more.

[Leisler]

The ones that can hang from the neck from 200lb test for half an hour, are innocent.

[umgud]

Must be part of the stimulus package. Just think of all the lab techs the private labs are gonna have to hire.

[absolootezer0]

we passed it when republicans were still in charge, it didn’t go to 6th until 4 years later. at that point we were rat and rino controlled and they would never consider pressing it on to scotus.

[mad puppy]

From the linked web site, there is yet another link: http://www.register-herald.com/local/local_story_062212021.html

which quotes a letter W.V. Delegate Sally Susman wrote to Blair:

“The notion that a person should be drug-tested — randomly, at first, you note, kindly — because he or she receives public assistance is no more grounded in logic than that a person with a public pension should be tested because he or she receives public funds,” she wrote to Blair.

To which I respond that YES, Sally, there is substantial difference between someone receiving UNEARNED assistance to which they have NO right and someone he has worked for the Government long enough to EARN a pension. The fact that she can't grasp that difference tells me a great deal about Ms. Susman....none of it complimentary.

[b4its2late]

They should drug test congress and the wh too.

[Professor_Leonide]

Hey, let’s have some compassion for welfare recipients. Drug testing? Who came up with that idea?

[microgood]

"If so many jobs require random drug tests these days, why not these benefits?"

Only certain jobs like pilots and other transportation workers can be drug tested because suspicionless searches are a violation of the Fourth Amendment of our Constitution.

Republicans that have absolute contempt for our constitution like this idiot jerk are one of the reasons I quit the Republican party.

[mad puppy]

Test the politicians! I would LOVE that. Just 1/year at a random and UNANNOUCED time would be fine with me. Any positive test causes much more frequent tests and a 2nd positive gets you booted.