• 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!

Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure

Eighty Deuce

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
3,747
Reaction score
1,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In some ways, this would have seemed a no-brainer. While it got some political challenges, it seems headed for Constitutional muster as well.

(CNN) -- 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.

"It's the right thing for taxpayers," Scott said after signing the measure. "It's the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don't want to waste tax dollars. And also, we want to give people an incentive to not use drugs."

more: Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure - CNN.com

I would like to think that this shoul dbe common-sense policy nationwide for anyone on any government assistance, to include those getting a government paycheck of any sort.

Constitutional claims or not, I think this one hard to oppose politically. Of course, I am for the legalization of all drugs, with conditions, but would still want drug testing mandated regardless.
 
In some ways, this would have seemed a no-brainer. While it got some political challenges, it seems headed for Constitutional muster as well.



I would like to think that this shoul dbe common-sense policy nationwide for anyone on any government assistance, to include those getting a government paycheck of any sort.

Constitutional claims or not, I think this one hard to oppose politically. Of course, I am for the legalization of all drugs, with conditions, but would still want drug testing mandated regardless.

It's social engineering. Social engineering, isn't that a conservative term? Interesting that you have a conservative governor imposing social engineering on citizens. The logistics would be difficult and costly as hell. The idea is also discriminatory against poor people. If it is applied it should then be applied fairly and therefore all employees of any business that receives state money should also be drug tested including corporate officers, boards of directors, and lobbyists. Make it just.

If the point is that state money may finance drug abuse then any and all state money may finance drug abuse. Test anyone who receives money from the state or test no one that receives money from the state. That also includes state legislature and staff. I don't see that offing happening, do you?

The proposed Florida law is just another attempt to separate the wealthy and powerful from everyone else, class warfare.
 
Last edited:
It's social engineering. Social engineering, isn't that a conservative term? Interesting that you have a conservative governor imposing social engineering on citizens. The logistics would be difficult and costly as hell. The idea is also discriminatory against poor people. If it is applied it should then be applied fairly and therefore all employees of any business that receives state money should also be drug tested including corporate officers, boards of directors, and lobbyists. Make it just.

If the point is that state money may finance drug abuse then any and all state money may finance drug abuse. Test anyone who receives money from the state or test no one that receives money from the state. That also includes state legislature and staff. I don't see that offing happening, do you?

The proposed Florida law is just another attempt to separate the wealthy and powerful from everyone else, class warfare.

I see zero rational support in your argument. No work is performed for this welfare. Its free if you ask for it, and then qualify. Don't do drugs, and you can get free stuff paid for by those who earn their money.

It is that simple.
 
I think the cost of drug testing is going to cost much more than amount we will be saving from those that do use drugs. This has actually already been touched on in another thread specific to Florida. If it would save money, or if the drug testing itself was free then I would probably be all for it, but it is most likely going to waste money and not be effective. I think it is just Rick Scott trying to make money for his business.
 
In some ways, this would have seemed a no-brainer. While it got some political challenges, it seems headed for Constitutional muster as well.



I would like to think that this shoul dbe common-sense policy nationwide for anyone on any government assistance, to include those getting a government paycheck of any sort.

Constitutional claims or not, I think this one hard to oppose politically. Of course, I am for the legalization of all drugs, with conditions, but would still want drug testing mandated regardless.

Florida is going to see a massive increase in crime and imprisonment in the next few years.
 
Florida is going to see a massive increase in crime and imprisonment in the next few years.

Based on what ? Any thing to document this ? Ouija Board ? Magic Eight Ball ?
 
Based on what ? Any thing to document this ? Ouija Board ? Magic Eight Ball ?

It's simple logic. You take the poorest group of people who at the same time are addicted to drugs and you take the money away that they have been using to support their habit. Do you think they are magically going to be cured of their drug habits? Do you think that they are just going to be able to up and quit? These are not people who can afford treatment. These are people who will likely steal, prostitute, gamble, or whatever it takes to get their fix. They are going to end up in prison where the tax payers will end up paying a lot more.

I'm not saying that this was a good or bad move, simply pointing out the reality of where this is going. Every action in the war on drugs ends with more people in prison and more tax dollar money going to pay for it.

Also, Scott is going to profit off this immensely. Drug tests are not free. My employer paid $30 for my last one. They are also dehumanizing. Can you imagine having someone watch you take piss just so you could get money for food?
 
It's simple logic. You take the poorest group of people who at the same time are addicted to drugs and you take the money away that they have been using to support their habit. Do you think they are magically going to be cured of their drug habits? Do you think that they are just going to be able to up and quit? These are not people who can afford treatment. These are people who will likely steal, prostitute, gamble, or whatever it takes to get their fix. They are going to end up in prison where the tax payers will end up paying a lot more.

I'm not saying that this was a good or bad move, simply pointing out the reality of where this is going. Every action in the war on drugs ends with more people in prison and more tax dollar money going to pay for it.

Also, Scott is going to profit off this immensely. Drug tests are not free. My employer paid $30 for my last one. They are also dehumanizing. Can you imagine having someone watch you take piss just so you could get money for food?

...This is also supported by the results of harm reduction programs. They give addicts the resources they need to 1. not die of their habits and 2. receive help. They reduce crime and increase the rates of addicts going to rehab.

But people don't like it because they have some sort of sadistic desire to punish addicts. They don't care if that hurts the society they have to live in.

If they insist on drug testing, they should simply use it as a criteria of what help to offer, not a disqualifier for recieving help at all. Society at large loses when we try to punish addicts. Crime will indeed go up, and people will not recover from their addictions at the rate they could be if they were recieving help and if we had harm reduction programs.

I'm sorry if it goes against people's desires to punish addicts. But it simply works better.

There's also the question of how much these tests will cost, how much potential they have to bankrupt the system completely, and the ethics of a government official being a beneficiary of the drug testing company they happen to be employing. Oh my.
 
In some ways, this would have seemed a no-brainer. While it got some political challenges, it seems headed for Constitutional muster as well.



I would like to think that this shoul dbe common-sense policy nationwide for anyone on any government assistance, to include those getting a government paycheck of any sort.

Constitutional claims or not, I think this one hard to oppose politically. Of course, I am for the legalization of all drugs, with conditions, but would still want drug testing mandated regardless.

I"ve always said that if we're going to drug test welfare recipients we should also drug test our politicians as well as the employees, managers, and executives of any business that receives a government contract.
 
From the OP:

Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.

So, this is aid directed at children, not adults, and the adult has to prove to be drug free in order to qualify.

It does make some sense, as giving money to drug addicts in order for them to take care of children is tantamount to pissing it away.

I wonder if the designated individual has to be drug tested as well?
 
I see zero rational support in your argument. No work is performed for this welfare. Its free if you ask for it, and then qualify. Don't do drugs, and you can get free stuff paid for by those who earn their money.

It is that simple.

No it is isn't that simple and it isn't free. Your erroneous assumption is that poor people are somehow less than equal to you because you work. Most people who need welfare worked before your idols on Wall Street took every dream they had. Most of these people PAID taxes and PAID into the system. It isn't free. Many of those people are veterans. Tell me they didn't pay it forward. Don't give us that holier than thou malarkey. And don't tell me the people who need welfare assistance don't want to work. Most would love having a good job. The entire idea of forcing these Americans to take drug tests because they need assistance is outrageous and shameful and wrong.
 
If you take the King's Coin...you are subject to the King's Laws.

And his Law says you have to be sober to acquire (for free) the tax money of working citizens.

I don't see the problem.
 
If you take the King's Coin...you are subject to the King's Laws.

And his Law says you have to be sober to acquire (for free) the tax money of working citizens.

I don't see the problem.

You obviously have no idea that the United States is not a monarchy. We don't have a king. The U.S. government doesn't earn money. It receives money from taxes which come from the People. The money which the government doles out comes from the people, not from a king.

God, where do these people come from?
 
It's social engineering. Social engineering, isn't that a conservative term? Interesting that you have a conservative governor imposing social engineering on citizens. The logistics would be difficult and costly as hell. The idea is also discriminatory against poor people. If it is applied it should then be applied fairly and therefore all employees of any business that receives state money should also be drug tested including corporate officers, boards of directors, and lobbyists. Make it just.

If the point is that state money may finance drug abuse then any and all state money may finance drug abuse. Test anyone who receives money from the state or test no one that receives money from the state. That also includes state legislature and staff. I don't see that offing happening, do you?

The proposed Florida law is just another attempt to separate the wealthy and powerful from everyone else, class warfare.

I wouldn't call it class warfare, but it is doing something that punishes the children.
 
I don't know what is worse, the fact that this law will increase the needless suffering of many Floridians, or that I am in a position to profit off it immensely given the career I have chosen. This must be what it feels like to be a Republican politician.
 
As far as I am concerned. Good. I don't mind pissing in front of someone, do it all the time in a public restroom. It really is simple. Do drugs, don't eat. Don't do drugs and eat. Personally I'd rather eat. But hey...thats just me.
 
I don't know what is worse, the fact that this law will increase the needless suffering of many Floridians, or that I am in a position to profit off it immensely given the career I have chosen. This must be what it feels like to be a Republican politician.

Having to prove you are not drug involved to receive welfare benefits will increase needless suffering? Are you serious? Many employers in Florida require a drug screen as a condition of employment. So welfare recipients should have no conditions regarding moral turpitude?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1059532864 said:
Having to prove you are not drug involved to receive welfare benefits will increase needless suffering? Are you serious? Many employers in Florida require a drug screen as a condition of employment. So welfare recipients should have no conditions regarding moral turpitude?

It's simple logic. You take the poorest group of people who at the same time are addicted to drugs and you take the money away that they have been using to support their habit. Do you think they are magically going to be cured of their drug habits? Do you think that they are just going to be able to up and quit? These are not people who can afford treatment. These are people who will likely steal, prostitute, gamble, or whatever it takes to get their fix. They are going to end up in prison where the tax payers will end up paying a lot more. Heck, the drug tests aren't free either. That will cost tax payers quite substantially as well.

You really think you are morally superior to these people? A lot of these people live very crappy lives and drugs are about the only escape they have. Most started well before they were even adults and have been addicted for years. All these kinds of laws do is take them off the streets and put them in prison on the tax payer's dime. If you were born in their circumstances, you would likely have turned out the same way.
 
Last edited:
No it is isn't that simple and it isn't free. Your erroneous assumption is that poor people are somehow less than equal to you because you work. Most people who need welfare worked before your idols on Wall Street took every dream they had. Most of these people PAID taxes and PAID into the system. It isn't free. Many of those people are veterans. Tell me they didn't pay it forward. Don't give us that holier than thou malarkey. And don't tell me the people who need welfare assistance don't want to work. Most would love having a good job. The entire idea of forcing these Americans to take drug tests because they need assistance is outrageous and shameful and wrong.

What have you been smoking?
big%20doobie%20joint.jpg
 
You obviously have no idea that the United States is not a monarchy. We don't have a king. The U.S. government doesn't earn money. It receives money from taxes which come from the People. The money which the government doles out comes from the people, not from a king.

God, where do these people come from?

It's just a saying, Rusty Trombone...good grief.

It's also a book by Thomas James Bass.

Do you understand the meaning?

The U.S. Government doesn't "recieve" money...it confiscates it.

And it does not do so from "The People", it does so from some people. In fact, less than half of the citizens.
 
As far as I am concerned. Good. I don't mind pissing in front of someone, do it all the time in a public restroom. It really is simple. Do drugs, don't eat. Don't do drugs and eat. Personally I'd rather eat. But hey...thats just me.

If it was just the drug users, I would agree with you, but I don't believe in making their children starve to prove a point. I am just not that cold hearted.
 
If it was just the drug users, I would agree with you, but I don't believe in making their children starve to prove a point. I am just not that cold hearted.

Knew someone would bring this up. IMO anyone that does drugs should have thier children taken away. Do this and the children won't suffer not only from not having food but also from not having drug addicts as parents.
 
If it was just the drug users, I would agree with you, but I don't believe in making their children starve to prove a point. I am just not that cold hearted.

I personally know ****heads on foodstamps, unemployment, medicaid and SSI that have no children.
 
It's simple logic. You take the poorest group of people who at the same time are addicted to drugs and you take the money away that they have been using to support their habit. Do you think they are magically going to be cured of their drug habits? Do you think that they are just going to be able to up and quit? These are not people who can afford treatment. These are people who will likely steal, prostitute, gamble, or whatever it takes to get their fix. They are going to end up in prison where the tax payers will end up paying a lot more. Heck, the drug tests aren't free either. That will cost tax payers quite substantially as well.

You really think you are morally superior to these people? A lot of these people live very crappy lives and drugs are about the only escape they have. Most started well before they were even adults and have been addicted for years. All these kinds of laws do is take them off the streets and put them in prison on the tax payer's dime. If you were born in their circumstances, you would likely have turned out the same way.

So allowing someone with a crappy life to remain addicted and on welfare is a good idea to you? I guess your logic suggests that Florida should even provide their drugs for them. Maybe they can get a good deal from the Mexican drug cartels. Then maybe fewer people will get killed in the war on drugs.
:bs
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1059532997 said:
So allowing someone with a crappy life to remain addicted and on welfare is a good idea to you?

Oh goodness no. I think we should have treatment available. If you are going to give them a drug test, then also give them treatment.

I guess your logic suggests that Florida should even provide their drugs for them. Maybe they can get a good deal from the Mexican drug cartels. Then maybe fewer people will get killed in the war on drugs.
:bs

Typical conservative mentality. Either I'm for anti drug laws or I'm for drug cartels. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom