this kind of thing has been talked about for years. It’s about time somebody finally did it.
“Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.”
So, in essence, this legislation means nothing!
[Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.]
That’s dumb. They’ll just get the money and give it to the crackhead anyway.
What if they don't know anyone who CAN pass the test?
That law will be voided with the first lawsuit. If not State, then the Federal court will most likely strike it down.
States cannot even require welfare recipients to apply for work, so how can they insist on running recipients’ personal lives?
Nanny statism.
The law looked good on paper, but no matter how well meaning, it infringes on a person’s personal life.
If we did that it NY, it would cost us MORE bucks because we would insist they join a program as a condition of receiving freebees.
Better to just end “welfare” and let charities do this type of work.
This is clearly racist </sarcasm>
I did’nt see that it required those currently getting welfare to be tested, only those applying for it.
All welfare recipiants should be drug tested the 3rd day of every month.
This is silly, unless the state will also require the person receiving the benefits to care for the children (without the drug addicted parents around).
Racism, pure and simple! < /sarc >
Will the "designated individual" have to pass the drug test?
“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.”
Let’s see how far this gets before it’s struck down by the courts.
The courts (up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court) have endorsed drug testing in the past in employer/worker situations, as a matter of “public safety”.
But it’s going to be hard to apply the “public safety” precedent to a situation where someone is being “given benefits” in return for, well, nothing else.
I’m hoping the law can be made to “stick”, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s defeated through the courts.
Just sayin’....
ACORN/democrats/ACLU will claim this singles out addicts and that addictions are covered under ADA.
bet on it.
I wrote and article on helium about this very topic.
http://www.helium.com/items/2170406-welfare-recipents-drug-testing