Drug Testing for Welfare...

[Okierifleman]

Hey, some safety net isn't a bad thing. Bad things happen to good people and it's sometimes beyond their control. That's why I'm OK with the concept of limited benefits.

It would probably not be a bad idea to get the federal government out of the charity business, though. I think it would be more effective if it was run locally.

I firmly agree but we have a safety net, its called unemployment. You get it for 3 or 4 months and then its done. I am not cold hearted at all, I believe that welfare has its place and I will gladly let the govt use some of my tax dollars to give it to people who really need it. That would be people who CANT work, not that WONT work. People have been born and raised on welfare for generations. People need help sometimes and I am all for it but you could cut welfare about 90% and just help the people that needed it, and we wouldnt be having this conversation.

 

[M. Sage]

I am not cold hearted at all...

Trust me, I would never accuse someone of that. If you thought I found you cold-hearted... trust me, some of the views I have are pretty frosty compared to yours on this issue.

 

[Phoebe Ann]

I think the idea of drug testing for an individual to receive a welfare check is ludicrous. Who makes that determination? If welfare recipients are drug tested, we should drug test teachers, senators, police officers, fire fighters, airport security, toll booth operators, anyone working on big daddy's dime. No one, anywhere, should make a determination, that any one group should be tested while leaving everyone else out. As soon as we test them, you're next. This is not about what we think of welfare recipients personally. They have the same rights afforded to them by the law. If the law's not working, change it. Find a way to make the program more successful and get people off welfare.

 

[GM.Chief]

I think the idea of drug testing for an individual to receive a welfare check is ludicrous. Who makes that determination? If welfare recipients are drug tested, we should drug test teachers, senators, police officers, fire fighters, airport security, toll booth operators, anyone working on big daddy's dime. No one, anywhere, should make a determination, that any one group should be tested while leaving everyone else out. As soon as we test them, you're next. This is not about what we think of welfare recipients personally. They have the same rights afforded to them by the law. If the law's not working, change it. Find a way to make the program more successful and get people off welfare.

Many of those jobs you listed are already drug tested. I am in the oilfield and am drug tested regularly/randomly. The USCG also says that I must be drug tested regularly/randomly as a merchant mariner. If I, as a gainfully employed, contributing member of society must be drug tested regularly, I have absolutely no qualms stating that the people using the system get tested too. Why shouldn't they be tested if those of us who foot the bill are tested? Noone is forcing them to get welfare, so it would still be their right to refuse the test, and thereby the check.

Easy solution to their problem...don't do drugs. Don't buy drugs with government (read the peoples) money. As stated before by someone else in this thread: it's supposed to be a hand up, not a hand out.

 

[Phoebe Ann]

GM.Chief, I believe in accountability. My concern with this type of decision (hypothetical as it is) is who is doing the deciding and how far are we going to go? Why don't we just cut out their reproductive organs while we're at it. They're not contributing so don't let them make babies!

What about the people who are getting unemployment now? Many are not even looking for a job. Do we drug test them at 3 months? Who is going to decide what level of toleration is enough? There is too much inclination for subjective judgement on this. However, no amount of objectivity will change a culture or drive it to clean up its act. We must hold people accountable (all people) while never violating their constitutional rights. I'm not taking up for them. I'm just saying, we start the infringment and it will spread to us as well. (Think: Patriot Act)

 

[MAPS1350]

I agree with GM, but will take this one step further.

It's my belief that welfare, an unemployment as well, are broken systems. I believe that they should be disbanded and set up new systems that actualy work. I propose co-ops in the most literal form possible. WE all help each other out...but slightly gov't sponsered.

For example....my SIL has used state run daycare for her DD. In an area of the country where it can cost between 800 and 1600/week per child in daycare, she paid nothing. She's low income and I realize that in order for her to try to work, get on her own, she needs a bit of help. However, this is an incredibly expensive system that does nothing to support itself. It just continues to take and take, absolutely not self sustaining at all.

But, if the gov't woudl've bought a building to house the daycare in, with some start up funds. You could now have a very successful co-op. Each parent gets 5 days a week free, or incredibly cheap ($20/week/child to cover utilities and food), babysitting. On the sixth day, it's your turn to watch other's children. And on the seventh day, you rest. Yeah....it would be hard to work 6 days a week. BUt this system would be self sustaining and would teach those invovled how to help others and get invovled in their community.

This same concept could apply to almost all other areas of charity. People helping people. Low income, single mothers, minorities, all empowering themselves, with a bit of help from their neighbor, while giving a bit of help to their neighbor.

I know.....utopia......and where did this hippie girl come from? lol

But in my experience, throwing money at a problem doesn't help. The POTUS might think so....after all, "the stimulus is doing exactly what it should be doing and the recession is over". But I believe that it makes things worse in the end.....better to teach someone to fish than to buy them a lobster dinner....in my not so humble opinion.

April

 

[Phoebe Ann]

Great post April. I agree with you that we should change behaviors by teaching another way. A culture has to be changed and that will not happen in our generation. One generation didn't create the problem, one generation can't clean it up. Compassion must be a component while setting boundaries.

And of course you agree with GM! You live with him!

Glad you're posting.

Phoebe Ann

 

[GM.Chief]

Actually...she gets me to agree with her. My wife is the one to do most research and has a deeper understanding of the issues. I ususally just get mad, say "they're stupid". And then she explains to me why they are stupid, or why I'm wrong...lol

 

[Big country]

If I have to get drug tested to do private security then I have no problems drug testing the leaches that suck my money out of the hands of folks who need it. I like GM's earlier idea. Here is a trash bag there is the trash pick it up get paid leave the empty or half empty bag laying in the park to go and get a gainful job good for you. I have seen women in the food stamp office drive off in escalates and other assorted cadillac's wearing all name brand designer labels. They had no job. I have no problem with folks that need help getting help but these people have learned to live off the system they say high to their friends in there they see each other in the welfare line and talk about what happened last year in the same office yeah I'm tired of giving them free money.