Posted on 08/29/2013 7:40:00 AM PDT by Deadeye Division
A central Ohio lawmaker is renewing efforts to require adults seeking welfare to pass a drug test.
Sen. Tim Schaffer plans to introduce legislation today that would establish a drug-testing pilot program for Ohio Works First applicants.
“It is time that we recognize that many families are trying to survive in drug-induced poverty, and we have an obligation to make sure taxpayer money is not being used to support drug dealers,” Schaffer said. “We can no longer turn a blind eye to this problem.”
Crawford County has volunteered to participate in the proposed three-county pilot program, and two others will be chosen.
The proposal comes as Ohio’s public welfare rolls are at their lowest levels in decades. As of June, slightly fewer than 25,000 adults received cash assistance. Children, who make up the bulk of recipients, about 107,000, would be exempt from drug testing under Schaffer’s proposal.
Since 2011, eight states have passed laws requiring drug testing or screening for public-assistance applicants, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Ohio would be the 30th state this year to introduce drug testing or screening for welfare clients.
The increased interest in such laws follows legal challenges to drug-testing requirements in Michigan and Florida.
Schaffer, R-Lancaster, said he hopes to avoid similar lawsuits by requiring applicants to be tested only if they indicate on a questionnaire that they have used drugs in the past six months. Michigan’s drug-testing law, he said, was found unconstitutional because it required all applicants to undergo screenings regardless of whether there was reason to believe they were using illegal drugs.
“That screening is an integral component needed to avoid a legal challenge. It gets around the Fourth Amendment (protection against) unreasonable search. A state can’t compel all applicants as a group to take a drug test; you have to establish cause,” Schaffer said.
Critics say drug testing unfairly stigmatizes poor people and wastes tax dollars as incident rates in other states have been relatively low. The Associated Press recently reported that Utah spent $25,000 to screen applicants and only 12 tested positive. In Florida, 108 tested positive of more than 4,000 who submitted to drug testing.
Schaffer said the number of welfare applicants using drugs is likely higher because many don’t return to be tested.
Under his proposal, applicants for Ohio’s welfare program who say they have used drugs in the past six months would have to undergo a drug test. If the test is positive for drug use, the applicant would be banned from receiving welfare benefits for at least six months and referred to drug treatment. The bill sets aside $100,000 for residential treatment for the most-serious abusers. Schaffer said most applicants would qualify for Medicaid, which covers community-based services.
Applicants who indicate they have not used drugs would not be tested.
Schaffer stressed that the children or other dependents of those disqualified for assistance would not lose their benefits. “The goals of this bill are threefold: get help to the kids as the Ohio taxpayer intended, get treatment to the drug abuser and protect the taxpayer.”
ccandisky@dispatch.com
@cccandisky
This is a ridiculous plan that is just like Florida when the Governor’s wife made a killing off the drug tests and it was cost more than it saved. Which if is the case of conservatives is to save money, that isn’t the case. Which means that it’s only about ‘owning’ someone who happens to need food stamps (because not all on snap or welfare are just lazy bums) or whatever.
This is a ridiculous plan that is just like Florida when the Governor’s wife made a killing off the drug tests and it was cost more than it saved. Which if is the case of conservatives is to save money, that isn’t the case. Which means that it’s only about ‘owning’ someone who happens to need food stamps (because not all on snap or welfare are just lazy bums) or whatever.
********************************
P.S. Follow the money and see who will be making a profit. The Republicans are just as good as the Democrats when they do their ‘green initiatives’ that makes their pals lots of money.
Obamaphones for instance. The billionaire that is getting $100 for a phone that in the stores costs $10... yeah wonder what that’s all about.
You want minors to be forced to pee in a cup because their mom is on food stamps?
That’s extreme even for FR.
Thanks.
I still don’t have a problem drug testing those receiving government benefits.
The cost/benefit ratio, however may not directly make it worthwhile.
Even assuming everything is kosher with the Utah stats, the money spent testing is just over 2k per positive tester. We don’t know what the monthly amount they were getting is, but at $400 a month, in just 5 months the testing money has been recouped and after that it’s all benefit to the taxpayer. Seems like a good investment to me.
So people who test positive for pot, who otherwise would not be under treatment, are sent for rehab at taxpayer expense and still get their benefits. Sounds like a scam to me, but then so is the War on Drugs.
YES!!!! FINALLY.
How many didn't apply for welfare, because they knew they'd get tested?
That is my point. Even thought they are legally a minor, they can be charged as an adult in certain cases. In NYC Housing Authority, if a family member is caught dealing drugs the family is thrown out, if the person does not move. I am not talking about 10 year olds, I am talking about teenagers that make their living selling/using drugs. If they are not going to school, making their grades, what is wrong with drug testing them also. If they are not in school or working, than what are they doing???? I am only posting on this issue because of what I know and see on a daily basis in NY.
The Utah info was cited as data supporting the contention that the cost of testing was greater than money saved. I examined the data on that basis. I was not defending the particulars of the Utah program. Indeed, if the the point of the testing is not to cull deadbeats from the welfare rolls, then it is money wasted.
In addition, the dependents are not cut off (I’m not saying they should be), which along with the substantial outlay for treatment costs and the limited six-month suspension from benefits, makes it pretty hard to justify the testing program on strictly cost-benefit grounds. In fact, it would be cheaper just to provide the drugs than test for them lol.
Is there evidence that applications and continuing clients decreased by thousands during this period? Surprised I didn’t hear about that.
>In fact, it would be cheaper just to
>provide the drugs than test for them lol.
Don’t give the party of moral hazard any ideas. It’s all too possible they would take it and run with it.
Good idea.
Regular drug tests should be required for everyone in the federal government too.
Start with the Bg Choomer in the White House, his staff, Congress, the Senate, and their staffs.
Then move on to all the bureaucrats, the Justice Dept., federal courts and the millions of parasitic government employees spread all over the country sucking the life from the nation.
My son recently job hunted and the job he landed, currently has, drug tested him in the interview process; whipped out a kit right there during the interview.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.