• 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

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Those who want to drug test welfare recipients in Indiana suffered a setback on Friday.

The bill was withdrawn in the House after it was suggested that the pool of people to be drug tested should expand to include lawmakers themselves.

So here is the question we all want to know - What do the Indiana lawmakers have to hide? If drug testing is good enough for mothers and children who are receiving food stamps, then it is damn well good enough for lawmakers too.

Article is here.

Discussion?
 
Last edited:
So here is the question we all want to know - What do the Indiana lawmakers have to hide? If drug testing is good enough for mothers and children who are receiving food stamps, then it is damn well good enough for lawmakers too.

Article is here.

Discussion?

They are paid with tax dollars, yes?
 
I don't understand. Why would the lawmakers have to be drug tested if they are NOT on welfare or taking foodstamps?
 
I don't understand. Why would the lawmakers have to be drug tested if they are NOT on welfare or taking foodstamps?

Why shouldn't law makers have to take drug tests?
 
Some of them should be drug tested and given lie detectors frequently.. I don't see anything wrong with the idea for the most part.
 
They are paid with tax dollars, yes?

Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I believe they are. They are public servants, and so are paid by the public they are supposed to be serving.

Of course, the employer has the right to insist on drug testing, and should.

As for drug testing of welfare recipients, that has been done, with some interesting results:

Drug testing of welfare applicants in Florida - which has been mandatory since July - finds they're less likely than the public at large to use illegal drugs.

Anyone taking bets on whether drug testing the legislators would have the same result?
 
So here is the question we all want to know - What do the Indiana lawmakers have to hide? If drug testing is good enough for mothers and children who are receiving food stamps, then it is damn well good enough for lawmakers too.

Article is here.

Discussion?

If military personnel,law enforcement,firefighters, teachers, and pretty much any other tax payer funded employee has to be piss tested then surely so can welfare recipients and politicians.
 
Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I believe they are. They are public servants, and so are paid by the public they are supposed to be serving.

Of course, the employer has the right to insist on drug testing, and should.

As for drug testing of welfare recipients, that has been done, with some interesting results:



Anyone taking bets on whether drug testing the legislators would have the same result?

Anyone with advance notice can pass a piss test. It isn't hard.My best fried passes his piss tests all the time.All it takes is enough time to drive to a friend or relatives house and collect urine from a friend or relative who does not do drugs and keeping that urine warm and concealed. If they made these welfare recipients all go down the welfare office to collect their welfare and food stamps on a regular bases and randomly test them on the spot I guarantee the results would be a lot higher.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe another state is going down this road after the humiliation of the Florida governor when it turned out that a much smaller percentage of welfare recipients are on drugs than in the population as a whole. His bigotry turned out to be totally misplaced. Why would more politicians want to throw themselves down that well?
 
Anyone with advance notice can pass a piss test. It isn't hard.My best fried passes his piss tests all the time.All it takes is enough time to drive to a friend or relatives house and collect urine from a friend or relative who does not do drugs and keeping that urine warm and concealed. If they made these welfare recipients all go down the welfare office to collect their welfare and food stamps on a regular bases and randomly test them on the spot I guarantee the results would be a lot higher.

Interesting your best friend is a drug addict. You know what they say birds of a feather and all, and this guarantee. Do you know a lot of welfare recipients who use and sell drugs?
 
Republicans who constantly bitch about class warfare are the first to demonize the poor, the sick, minorities, the needy, etc. If they're not lazy bastards, they're scum who do drugs and don't take of their kids. If they're not trailer trash, they're simply there to leech off the rest of us. This is the supposedly non-class warfare mantra of modern day Conservatism in America.
 
So here is the question we all want to know - What do the Indiana lawmakers have to hide? If drug testing is good enough for mothers and children who are receiving food stamps, then it is damn well good enough for lawmakers too.

Article is here.

Discussion?

And drug testing for those that receive lower tax rates on capital gains...............wouldn't that put a scare into to all those hedge fund managers????
 
Not word one about due process, 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search & seizure, innocent until proven guilty, etc. And by many of the same people who decry the government doing anything that might be used against them without due process. We're all just a nation of big dumb hypocrites, aren't we?

And spare me the comparisons with other jobs. If it's a private employer, the same standards wouldn't necessarily apply in much the same way that freedom of speech as guaranteed in the 1st Amendment applies to government restrictions, not private enterprise restrictions. If the employees are government, that preemptive testing is wrong, too.
 
And drug testing for those that receive lower tax rates on capital gains...............wouldn't that put a scare into to all those hedge fund managers????

Yeah, let's drug test everyone. :roll:
 
I personally don't care if anyone in government does drugs. Their decisions reflect their ability to lead. If they are demonstrating they can't do that, or they are a poor leader, then let their constituents deal with them. What they do in their personal lives is not really relevant, and drug use in of itself does not demonstrate poor leadership. A lot of our Presidents have been older men with health conditions who have taken legal drugs which can accompany various side effects to body and mind - but these are never questioned. People are too hung up on legalities to see reality.

The media sensationalism about the private lives of politicians is at sickly levels, and the myth that no one "reputable" does drugs persists in our society so that people are shocked when a propaganda piece gets sent out.

People who say that government works for the public, and therefore the public wants them drug tested, are only representing themselves. I am also a member of the public and I say no drug testing for ANYONE, whether they are corporate employees or government workers. If people are doing their jobs and have their personal lives contained, it's nobody's business.

The war on drugs and its cultural effect must end. If people would be more practical instead of so reactionary, we'd have more freedoms.
 
I fail to see the reason for the outrage over drug testing prior or during receiving welfare.

You aren't mandated to take welfare, so if you don't like the rules associated with it, don't accept it.
 
And drug testing for those that receive lower tax rates on capital gains...............wouldn't that put a scare into to all those hedge fund managers????

I am on the fence about drug testing welfare recipients but if you asked me to vote yes or no right now I would say no. But comparing welfare recipients no matter if they are worthy enough to receive benefits to those who are taxed and who contribute to the tax base and to the economic welfare of the country is beyond all sense. Let's not demean those people who are unfortunate and need a hand up but let's put it perspective that they contribute nothing while on the government payroll. Let the government decide the tax on capital gains. Criticize them, not the people who are making a legitimate living. I recieve capital gains on my meager investments. It not just the CEO's and the super rich but milions of people in this country.
 
Also, I am concerned with the cost. Drug tests cost money and between wic social security, Medicare, that is billions of dollars of spending.
 
If the amendment passed - why did he withdraw it? After a vote that shouldn't be allowed and a bill should be tied into the system once it's been addressed as such.

If my Husband and all others in the military must pass drug tests all the time - so should lawmakers and I'm a smidge bit surprised that they don't

Anyone with advance notice can pass a piss test. It isn't hard.My best fried passes his piss tests all the time.All it takes is enough time to drive to a friend or relatives house and collect urine from a friend or relative who does not do drugs and keeping that urine warm and concealed. If they made these welfare recipients all go down the welfare office to collect their welfare and food stamps on a regular bases and randomly test them on the spot I guarantee the results would be a lot higher.

My husband administers military tests often - he knows the tricks and is present in the restroom for those in suspicion.
 
I fail to see the reason for the outrage over drug testing prior or during receiving welfare.

You aren't mandated to take welfare, so if you don't like the rules associated with it, don't accept it.

You aren't mandated to run for office either, so what's the problem with also drug testing politicians?
 
no one should be drug tested without a warrant, whether for work or welfare.

Indiana's legislative priorities have been embarrassing in recent years. cutting education, anti-labor, and anti-lower socioeconomic class policies; the list goes on. it's not difficult to guess which side is running the show. i'm still an independent, but i will admit that Republicans represent my own views less and less. currently, they are getting ready to ram through right to work legislation with no amendments and little debate. if they do that, i might stop considering the Republican party for a vote at any level until it changes.
 
You aren't mandated to run for office either, so what's the problem with also drug testing politicians?

I have no problem with it.

I just like getting a license to drive. There are rules, regulations, and statues that come with the territory. Again, driving is optional.
 
no one should be drug tested without a warrant, whether for work or welfare.

Indiana's legislative priorities have been embarrassing in recent years. cutting education, anti-labor, and anti-lower socioeconomic class policies; the list goes on. it's not difficult to guess which side is running the show. i'm still an independent, but i will admit that Republicans represent my own views less and less. currently, they are getting ready to ram through right to work legislation with no amendments and little debate. if they do that, i might stop considering the Republican party for a vote at any level until it changes.

If employers weren't responsible for healthcare coverage then I'd see your point.
 
Not word one about due process, 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search & seizure, innocent until proven guilty, etc. And by many of the same people who decry the government doing anything that might be used against them without due process. We're all just a nation of big dumb hypocrites, aren't we?

And spare me the comparisons with other jobs. If it's a private employer, the same standards wouldn't necessarily apply in much the same way that freedom of speech as guaranteed in the 1st Amendment applies to government restrictions, not private enterprise restrictions. If the employees are government, that preemptive testing is wrong, too.

Please, dude. Due process and "innocent until proven guilty"...those have NOTHING to do with drug testing anybody. Even the 4th amendment is a stretch. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a governing body deciding that those who receive benefits (typically mothers of young children) should be and remain drug free as a stipulation of receiving and staying on government assistance....if done properly, randomly, and without advanced warning. If somebody had thought to piss test my idiot mother before we qualified for food stamps and welfare perhaps I would have ended up in an environment where that money actually went towards clothing, feeding, and providing medical care to me, the minor child. Instead, everything we received was used for drugs or traded for drugs for my mother...and I, the minor child, suffered for it.

I'm not the only kid that happened to. My mother met her dealer and many of her drug-using buddies at the government office where she applied for and picked up her benefits...and all of 'em had children living much the same way I did. Sure, the majority of welfare parents aren't drug users. But if the justification for providing benefits is a societal obligation to the children of the poverty-stricken we're missing a significant chunk of children by not providing investigative social services to monitor the environment in which the children live. That should include checking for the existence of drug use, abuse, living conditions, etc. It is far too easy in this system for children to continue living in neglect because the system isn't really built to do much beyond cut checks.

Government welfare benefits are not guaranteed to you (maybe for seniors, but that's a different story entirely). You have to qualify for them based on family size, income, and/or ability. Why is it such a huge stretch to demand that you also be law abiding and drug-free to qualify?
 
Back
Top Bottom