about time

I live in Florida.

This is needed as a large majority of welfare recipients are drug dealers. I have quite a few friends in law enforcement, and it is common practice to find out a dealer is also on welfare. I was riding with a friend of mine about a month ago and the guys she arrested was living in a really horrible shotgun house, he had 9 kids 2 girlfriends and it seemed everyone was on some drug or another. Kids were all over 14, and strung out.

But he had a BRAND NEW CTS-V CADILLAC!!!!!

I am not going to tell you his ethnicity, but I bet you can figure it out. Everyone ended up in jail or juvi. The drugs he was arrested for were cocaine, crack, meth and pot. Later on I found out they found ecstasy and a large amount of prescription drugs. Turns out this guys was involved in a string of pharmacy robberies.

Still say we dont need drug testing for welfare?

 

It's not picking on someone for the government to require a drug test in order to flush criminals out of the system, with as final and proper a result as when one flushes a toilet. The tests should be each month, plus random and unannounced tests. Failed tests should result in a search. Illegal drug users have no business getting welfare money when I have to pay taxes for welfare. Let them be satisfied with alcohol and tobacco like other law abiding citizens. Speaking of which, no illegal should get a dime of government welfare money.

 

Did someone say this was "picking" on people with less?

Interesting, maybe they have less due to enjoying the occasional drug binge? Drugs aren't cheap, and you're also not very productive while using them!

Drug testing should be mandatory for any gov't handouts, eh, uh, I mean "benefits".

 

Let me start by saying I am anti-drugs. Here is the problem with this new law in Florida: To get welfare you have to have kids. So you have all these "families" with strung out parent who fail the drug test. This test is expected to effect 58,000 families here in Florida. At a fail rate even 1 in 20 you are looking at 3,000 families losing the benefits. That is somewhere between 3,000 and 12,000 kids (low income homes tend to have more kids for some reason). So what do you do with the kids? State could take them away as clearly the parents would rather get high then care for them. What state has the resources to handle that many kids?? Is that the best way for the states to spend their money? The cost of the removing, housing, counseling these kids will be more then the amount the families were receiving in welfare. No to mention the lawsuits and family monitoring once kids are returned. I don't have the anwser but these laws clearly will not save the states any money and in many cases not be in the best interest of the children. The law does treat a pot smoking parent the same as a meth-head or crack #####. What is worse for a child...dad/mom the pot head or dad/mom the alcoholic? I do agree with drug testing for unemployment comp, and many of the other non-child benefit funded programs such as scholarships.

 

I would much rather see a state implement a program that to get welfare or assistance, that person must work at doing something productive for the community. All this testing stuff will do is add more cost to the taxpayers and, as we all know from past experience with the government, it will be nothing more than window dressing. I am no bible thumper by a large measure, but there is something to be said of the passage in the bible that says if a man won't work, neither shall he eat. Sorry, no freebies. That does not include those that can't work due to physical handicaps. But if you are able to work, there is a lot of public facilities that need cleaned and maintained, and roadsides and streets that need trashed policed up. And we will be able to tell who are the druggies better than any costly drug test. You don't show up... No benefits. You show up stoned... bye-bye.

 

There are always unintended consequences with .gov regs.
The drug testing is not free.
There will be a few welfare weenies who will find a skanky lawyer to file a frivolous lawsuit.
If you want to save $$ spent in the SNAP (food stamps) program, expend the man-hours to change what can be bought and where the card can be used.
Eliminate all junk-food. No sweets, soda, chips, dips, and prepared foods. No frozen foods except veggies & fruit.
Card to be used only in grocery stores, NOT convienience stores.
Mandate a 2hr class covering smart shopping and healthy nutrition.

 

I suppose you support Michelle O's mandatory nutrition plans. The government has no place in telling someone, under any circumstances you can't buy this or that type of food. You get that started, and the door is wide-open for them to be dictating to everyone!!

I agree that booze and cigarettes should not, and if I recall correctly are not to be purchased with food stamps. But that takes more than just the purchaser to accomplish. The store clerks have to be turning their heads.

 

A small step I wish all states would adopt. I'm sure the ACLU will soon chime in if they haven't already.

 

If you have nothing, then how can you afford to use illegal contraband? Where does that income come from? UC and EUC gives you just enough money to pay bills.

 

I don't think testing is the way to go. I think you'd get better results on getting these people back to work by using the programs that are already in place. Some states have time limits on how long you can draw benefits and I believe that would be better than testing. I agree that no one should be a drug pusher and receive monies from the state but testing is not going to stop that. Take the money that you would need to have to start testing and hire some people to monitor the programs that are not being inforced. Those are the places that need help not making more programs that can not be manned.