0
flashvortx

Welfare drug-screen goes into effect

Recommended Posts

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/07/02/florida.drug.tests.welfare/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

"A controversial law requiring adults applying for welfare assistance to undergo drug screening has gone into effect in Florida. Saying it is "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction," Gov. Rick Scott signed the legislation in June."

As much as I dislike the government getting all up in our business, I'm cool with this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As much as I dislike the government getting all up in our business, I'm cool with this



I don't like it for a few of reasons, but the one of biggest one is ultimately, if successful, will cost more money than it saves.

Think about it.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm all for it. If people have to take drug tests to get and keep a job, the welfare recipients those taxpayers support should have to pass the same tests.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

As much as I dislike the government getting all up in our business, I'm cool with this



I don't like it for a few of reasons, but the one of biggest one is ultimately, if successful, will cost more money than it saves.

Think about it.

It was stupid political showboating.



Cost more than it saves? Prove it.
You are probably not considering the health care provided to welfare recipients and how much more it is for drug addicts than for non-addicts. Or for the increased cost of caring for the children of those who use drugs and their kids end up in foster homes. Hell, we could go on all day listing costs you didn't consider.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) The vast majority of people that take drugs know the ins and outs of getting around them. Ask anyone that works in a drug rehab clinic. It's not like random drug testing where any day of the week you can be pulled to do it. It happens every month like clockwork, so it can be scheduled around.

2) If the goal is 100% compliance, then 100% of the people need to be tested AND reimbursed every month by the state for NO reason. Think about it. That's the big one. If successful, it wastes money.

3) I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.



Nope, the shares were sold off. Link
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

1) The vast majority of people that take drugs know the ins and outs of getting around them. Ask anyone that works in a drug rehab clinic. It's not like random drug testing where any day of the week you can be pulled to do it. It happens every month like clockwork, so it can be scheduled around.

2) If the goal is 100% compliance, then 100% of the people need to be tested AND reimbursed every month by the state for NO reason. Think about it. That's the big one. If successful, it wastes money.

3) I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.



1) Then make the testing random. Pretty simple, huh?

2) For no reason? You stated the reason in the previous sentence.Duh!

3) Moot point since stocks were sold off.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.



Nope, the shares were sold off. Link



That's not entirely correct. As I previously noted, he transfered a $62 million dollar stake in the company to his wife.

Link.

It's still money that flows from the tax payers into his household.

That's pretty f'in' corrupt.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

2. Disagree. I doubt 100% compliance is a realistic goal. Many are so addicted to drugs that they are going to use them anyway.Therefore, random testing would be very effective and the threat of being tested will act as a deterent.



Even if 100% compliance is the goal (doubt it), the program can still be considered a success if the costs to run it are less than the savings of the people kicked off welfare or denied it.

I'm pro legalization of all drugs but still support this as the drug testing isn't mandatory, just for those that want government assistance.
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

2. Disagree. I doubt 100% compliance is a realistic goal. Many are so addicted to drugs that they are going to use them anyway.Therefore, random testing would be very effective and the threat of being tested will act as a deterent.



Even if 100% compliance is the goal (doubt it), the program can still be considered a success if the costs to run it are less than the savings of the people kicked off welfare or denied it.

I'm pro legalization of all drugs but still support this as the drug testing isn't mandatory, just for those that want government assistance.



Anybody want to take bets on whether or not this will be found as unconstitutional? I can't for the life of me see that standing for very long.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.



Nope, the shares were sold off. Link



That's not entirely correct. As I previously noted, he transfered a $62 million dollar stake in the company to his wife.

Link.

It's still money that flows from the tax payers into his household.

That's pretty f'in' corrupt.



His connections to the clinic are being checked out. If there is a conflict of interest then he can be ordered by the courts to remove those interests.
But I have a feeling that still won't be enough for you.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But I have a feeling that still won't be enough for you.



Because it's a bullshit law on a LOT of levels.

It was shady to begin with, it's not going to save a dime and it's almost certainly unconstitutional.

It "feels good" to some self-righteous folks, but it's pure bullshit.

Lemme ask you this, how far do you think a bill would get that did similar testing of CEOs of companies that receive corporate welfare? Should people that take out SBA loans be required to test?
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

I'd like to say it was simply stupid political showboating, but as it turns out, Gov. Rick Scott also has ties to clinics that will profit from this. His wife holds a large portion of a company called Solantic that charges $35 for people to take drug tests. So, no matter what happens as far as passing the tests, money goes from the tax payers and into the Scott household.

Tell me that's not political corruption.



Nope, the shares were sold off. Link



That's not entirely correct. As I previously noted, he transfered a $62 million dollar stake in the company to his wife.

Link.

It's still money that flows from the tax payers into his household.

That's pretty f'in' corrupt.



Looks like your source missed mention of the sale of the stock, as well.

Transferred to the wife last year, sold this year.

Still not corrupt, sorry.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

But I have a feeling that still won't be enough for you.



Because it's a bullshit law on a LOT of levels.

It was shady to begin with, it's not going to save a dime and it's almost certainly unconstitutional.

It "feels good" to some self-righteous folks, but it's pure bullshit.

Lemme ask you this, how far do you think a bill would get that did similar testing of CEOs of companies that receive corporate welfare? Should people that take out SBA loans be required to test?



Why do you think it's unconstitutional?

Why do you think it won't save money?

For your corporate welfare, I think if there was concern that drug use was an issue, it'd be more likely to pass.

The same goes with SBA loans.
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anybody want to take bets on whether or not this will be found as unconstitutional? I can't for the life of me see that standing for very long.



On what grounds?

Also, I remember you supporting wage controls for company officers who took money from the gov during the bail out. How it this different?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

But I have a feeling that still won't be enough for you.



Because it's a bullshit law on a LOT of levels.

It was shady to begin with, it's not going to save a dime and it's almost certainly unconstitutional.

It "feels good" to some self-righteous folks, but it's pure bullshit.

Lemme ask you this, how far do you think a bill would get that did similar testing of CEOs of companies that receive corporate welfare? Should people that take out SBA loans be required to test?



Last I checked there wasn't a big problem with corporate CEO's being drug addicts and spending all their, ahem, "welfare money" on crack.
Pretty much the same with SBA loans.
100% compliance is an unrealistic goal because it will never happen. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do something about the problem. You see, I tend to be pro-active. Sitting back and giving up is not an option in my book.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

it's almost certainly unconstitutional.



Hm. Thinking it through (and long story short), I can see arguments both pro (e.g., "rational basis") and con ("violation of privacy") the constitutionality of this law. On balance, I think it's a fairly close call. Given that the SCOTUS is currently 5-4 in favor of the conservative wing, and the Florida Supreme Court is currently 4-3 in favor of the conservatives, I'd give the law's constitutionality a roughly 4 to 3 chance of being upheld if litigated in Florida state courts, and a roughly 5 to 4 chance of being upheld if litigated in federal court (the latter assuming the SCOTUS agrees to hear the case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Studies have shown that in the long run testing does very little as illicit drug use is not an overall problem. Alcohol abuse and mental health is a far more serious problem than the person who smokes the occasional joint. Marijuana is the more prevalent illicit drug of choice. Alcohol is the more common drug amongst welfare recipients. Mental health is the more common barrier to work.

http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/research/pdf/drugtest.pdf

http://www.npc.umich.edu/publications/policy_briefs/brief02/

The cost to implement, more likely, will exceed the benefit. Greater focus on mental health, alcohol abuse, education, and transportation would greatly reduce welfare recipients than screening solely for illicit drugs.
"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I could be wrong but isn't an sba loan supposed to be paid back with interest?



All the more reason to not give them to drug addicts!

Let's test everybody!

BTW, a rather large number of SBA loans are never repaid because they default.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What about Smokers and drinkers and fat people and .................................



Smoking and drinking and eating are legal. Doing something about the welfare problem is better than sitting and watching it happen. This probably isn't the best way of dealing with it, but it's a start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I could be wrong but isn't an sba loan supposed to be paid back with interest?



All the more reason to not give them to drug addicts!

Let's test everybody!

BTW, a rather large number of SBA loans are never repaid because they default.



Ok, so I see the difference
It is OK to tell people in companies what they have to do to get gov money. But it is not OK to tell unemployed people who get gov money what they have to do to get that same money

Double standard much?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0