• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Drug testing for welfare recipients suffers setback

AdamT said:
Well, again, the actual data from Florida suggests that there is *less* drug use -- not more -- in the population seeking assistance than there is in the population as a whole.

Not sure what your position is as you seem to be arguing both sides.
Click to expand...
I have not read the study, but I was under the impression that it suggested drug use was "less than expected", not less than the population as a whole.

Regardless that answer, how did they come to any conclusion without actually testing the general population randomly?
 
danarhea said:
Not true any more. I had to pay for my own drug tests while I was serving probation for DWI. They were 11 bucks each.
Click to expand...

When I was on probation for DUI I never once got tested over the two years.
 
danarhea said:
No you can't. If he is taking marijuana, it's because he has a disability, and you know the disabled can't work. LOL.
Click to expand...

True.

Of course, with the four-hour work days in California, perhaps they can hold out until they get off work at 2:30.
 
jambalaya said:
Data "suggests"? Seriously, how would they actually get reliable data for that? I'll have to call B.S. on that one. And frankly, what people who pay their bills and pay taxes ingest in the form of drugs doesn't concern me as much. I think drug use should be greatly decriminalized. My position is I am not a hack that sees only one side of this issue.
Click to expand...

They have the data for that because Florida already has a law calling for drug testing of welfare recipients, and that's what the results showed. Welfare drug testing in Florida has surprising results : News : ConnectTriStates.com

I should also mention that a federal judge has halted the drug testing program on 4th Amendment grounds ... which is obviously another reason why it's stupid for other states to pass similar laws.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
They have the data for that because Florida already has a law calling for drug testing of welfare recipients, and that's what the results showed. Welfare drug testing in Florida has surprising results : News : ConnectTriStates.com

I should also mention that a federal judge has halted the drug testing program on 4th Amendment grounds ... which is obviously another reason why it's stupid for other states to pass similar laws.
Click to expand...
From the link:
"About 2.5% tested positive, with another 2% percent refusing to take the test. It's estimated that six percent of Americans 12 and older use illegal drugs"

Estimated!!! Not tested, or proven... estimated. If they were wrong with their previous estimates/expectations, why should we put any credence in this estimate?

Emphasis in bold mine.

ETA: Any number below 10% makes the whole issue a non-starter, IMO. Just another emotional wedge issue to curry favor with particular voting blocks.
 
Last edited:
radcen said:
From the link:
"About 2.5% tested positive, with another 2% percent refusing to take the test. It's estimated that six percent of Americans 12 and older use illegal drugs"

Estimated!!! Not tested, or proven... estimated. If they were wrong with their previous estimates/expectations, why should we put any credence in this estimate?

Emphasis in bold mine.

ETA: Any number below 10% makes the whole issue a non-starter, IMO. Just another emotional wedge issue to curry favor with particular voting blocks.
Click to expand...

Err, unless you drug test every single American, any comparison figure has to be an estimate. But yeah, it would be good to know how they came up with the figure.
 
kenvin said:
Also, I am concerned with the cost. Drug tests cost money and between wic social security, Medicare, that is billions of dollars of spending.
Click to expand...
$billions on drug testing???? You're kidding, right?
 
I have a question.
What happens if people fail the drug test. Should they be fined for using illegal drugs or imprisoned?
 
$50 per test is a low price. Usually costs 70 plus. There are around 140 million people getting government assistance from various programs. That is billions and billions of dollars and nothing but a hand out to drug testing companies.

The radical right don't really care about wasting tax payer money.
 
danarhea said:
Not true any more. I had to pay for my own drug tests while I was serving probation for DWI. They were 11 bucks each.
Click to expand...
I have no idea the actual costs, but am just throwing out the idea that maybe an $11 price was subsidized. Or, maybe the test was so limited in scope as to be virtually useless, and more of a scare tactic.

Wouldn't make sense, but stranger things happen.
 
danarhea said:
Not true any more. I had to pay for my own drug tests while I was serving probation for DWI. They were 11 bucks each.
Click to expand...

That was a subsidized cost. SOMEONE paid the other 60 bucks, trust me.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Nope, I don't want to drug test them.
I said home visits.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a really Libertarian kind of thing to do.................. go for it man!


I didn't say that either.
A home visit /= monitoring peoples homes.
It has nothing to do with drug use either.

You still haven't answered the question.
Click to expand...

Does it live in a house,
Is it smaller than a mouse.......?

I'm not interested in your games Harry.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I oppose condoning any behavior that enables an unsuccessful parent to continue to be unsuccessful. . . .drugs are not cheap or free. Not even weed. And if one manages to get some for free in exchange for other activies then perhaps they need to turn that business mind towards actually supporting their family and not their habit.

I'm much less concerned about the private drug-related conduct of parents who are providing for their children adequately . . . but in those cases it's still fit to intervene when they start to neglect their children.
Click to expand...

I worry more about our policies that have forced millions of kids into poverty in the first place, but that's just me..........................you do what you think you need to do.
 
I am curious where the drive for this is coming from, considering alcohol is legal and abused far more than illegal drugs. If the reason for the testing is to make sure they aren't doing something that enables an unsuccesful parent to continue to be unsuccesful, it makes no sense.

Why the demonization of pot and other drugs all the while ignoring alcohol?
 
TheNextEra said:
I am curious where the drive for this is coming from, considering alcohol is legal and abused far more than illegal drugs. If the reason for the testing is to make sure they aren't doing something that enables an unsuccesful parent to continue to be unsuccesful, it makes no sense.

Why the demonization of pot and other drugs all the while ignoring alcohol?
Click to expand...

It's just race and class warfare. The radical right's new pass time.
 
jamesrage said:
I believe this is yours.
Click to expand...
This could be taken either of two ways. The race card could have been played by the person you were responding to, or it could have been played by you and he was merely pointing it out. And it was in your possession, apparently...

:2razz: ;)
 
TheNextEra said:
I am curious where the drive for this is coming from, considering alcohol is legal and abused far more than illegal drugs. If the reason for the testing is to make sure they aren't doing something that enables an unsuccesful parent to continue to be unsuccesful, it makes no sense.

Why the demonization of pot and other drugs all the while ignoring alcohol?
Click to expand...

Did you forget the legal-line here?

On that note, though - being an alcoholic can get you in the hot seat, too :shrug:
 
jamesrage said:
I believe this is yours.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can answer this then since no other person wants to. What is the reason behind the drug testing? Why just drugs like pot, etc and not alcohol? Alcohol is abused far more than drugs. So really why spend the money on testing for drugs only?

Aren't you concerned just as much about Dan smoking a joint as you are Bill getting drunk all day? What makes Dan worse than Bill?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Did you forget the legal-line here?

On that note, though - being an alcoholic can get you in the hot seat, too :shrug:
Click to expand...

What makes a person using abusing drugs any less productive than someone using alcohol. What is the REAL reason behind the drug testing?

BTW, doing something illegal, doesn't make you unproductive by default. It's illegal to speed and there are millions of people that do it everyday.
 
Last edited:
kenvin said:
Why shouldn't law makers have to take drug tests?
Click to expand...

It isn't a matter of lawmakers taking or not taking drug tests. The intent of the legislation was to ensure that public money was only going to people who do not use illegal drugs. To allow a person to receive welfare money while using illegal drugs is exactly the same thing as providing them with the drugs. Because that is what drug addicts do with money. They buy more drugs. Why should the governement support someone's crack habit.

Again, for the millionth time, this is just another liberal attempt to deflect from the actual problem and change the subject. If the legislature wants to make lawmakers subject to drug tests, that should have been an entirely separate bill- however, obviously the intent of ammending the legislation was merely to prevent the passage of a good bill.

Perhaps you can answer this then since no other person wants to. What is the reason behind the drug testing? Why just drugs like pot, etc and not alcohol? Alcohol is abused far more than drugs. So really why spend the money on testing for drugs only?

Aren't you concerned just as much about Dan smoking a joint as you are Bill getting drunk all day? What makes Dan worse than Bill?
Click to expand...

People should be tested for both. The reason behind the drug testing is a minimal attempt to cut down on welfare abuses.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Sounds like a really Libertarian kind of thing to do.................. go for it man!

Does it live in a house,
Is it smaller than a mouse.......?

I'm not interested in your games Harry.
Click to expand...

There are no games on my end.

I asked a very specific question, that was on topic
You have done everything in your power not to answer.

The only person playing games, is the one dodging the question.
 
kamikaze483 said:
It isn't a matter of lawmakers taking or not taking drug tests. The intent of the legislation was to ensure that public money was only going to people who do not use illegal drugs. To allow a person to receive welfare money while using illegal drugs is exactly the same thing as providing them with the drugs. Because that is what drug addicts do with money. They buy more drugs. Why should the governement support someone's crack habit.

Again, for the millionth time, this is just another liberal attempt to deflect from the actual problem and change the subject. If the legislature wants to make lawmakers subject to drug tests, that should have been an entirely separate bill- however, obviously the intent of ammending the legislation was merely to prevent the passage of a good bill.
Click to expand...


Politicians get public money too. The point of the amendment was to point out hypocrites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom