drug testing welfare recipients violates 4th Amendment???

[Whitsettd8]

Why would somebody turn away a person because they had an EBT card?

If I owned a store and some junkie came in with an EBT card buying a case of soda and a few bags of doritos I would be annoyed to the point on declining it and I'm sure there are others on here that feel the same way.

 

[Stickfight]

Just deduct it from the benefits.

How does that affect the cost of the testing?

People receiving more than minimum subsistence benefits is a different problem. Using drug testing as the vehicle to address that is underhanded and doomed to fail.

 

[CindyE]

I think it was brought up and ignored earlier, but are those of you in favor of drug testing recipients of state funds also in favor of footing the bill for it?

I'm not sure how one can be simultaneously unhappy with being taxed to pay for welfare yet in favor of increasing its cost significantly, but I've seen bigger logical disconnects here before.

Or require the welfare recipients capable of working to help with the drug testing.

 

[Stickfight]

Why would somebody turn away a person because they had an EBT card?

On INGO capitalists are expected to play by a certain set of rules. They are tucked away when arguing over health care, dragged out for drugs, gun and ammo panics, illegal immigration, bacon shortages.

 

[Stickfight]

Or require the welfare recipients capable of working to help with the drug testing.

So take them off the government dole and put them right back on it doing busy work that costs taxpayers more and accomplishes nothing?

 

[CindyE]

So if people on welfare don't pass the drug screen we cut all govnment assistance and then what?
I know there's alot of negative feelings about those of Welfare, but the poor children of these people suffer - significantly.
Poor nutrition, poor upbringing, go to school smelling bad - it's horrible for these little ones.

The mentality of kicking all "low lifes" off welfare, bombing our enmies "off the map" etc sounds rough and tough but just doesn't work in the real world.

I'm kinda on the fence about this. I know there are lots of people taking advantage of welfare, I've seen it, but as always, the innocents suffer along with them. Just like if mom or dad gets arrested, is in jail or gets their license suspended, ends up losing their job if they have one, etc. The whole family suffers, not just the individual.

 

[Leadeye]

I really don't see drug testing the recipients of government money as ever going forward simply because there are too many people making good money off the system as it is.

 

[CindyE]

So take them off the government dole and put them right back on it doing busy work that costs taxpayers more and accomplishes nothing?

No, leave them on the dole, but get free labor out of them. Just an idea, I'm as sick of this mess as anyone, seems there's no good solution. As long as people don't do what they should, and be responsible, we'll have this crap. So that probably means always.

 

[g00n24]

How does that affect the cost of the testing?

People receiving more than minimum subsistence benefits is a different problem. Using drug testing as the vehicle to address that is underhanded and doomed to fail.

I have no idea of the real numbers but I'm betting the expenses of the drug testing would be covered by the amount of people losing their benefits...of course if the tax payers just break even it still accomplishes nothing.

 

[spirit390]

My grandfather a yellow dog democrate turn 18 the year before the great depression hit and one of the most profound thing he ever instilled in me was how FDR's CC camps helped you not feel worthless when asking for economic assistance. That comes from a man that also told me that they never knew that there was a depression "hell we was poor anyways so it was always a struggle to get by". Also joined the navy with two kids in diapers and one in the oven on December 8,1941. Maybe that is the answer if you don't want to pull your weight you can't be in the wagon. And yes I am a male shovanest pig so mama's without baby daddy's to do the work for the family can work in the day care or the kitchen.

 

[Whitsettd8]

I have no idea of the real numbers but I'm betting the expenses of the drug testing would be covered by the amount of people losing their benefits...of course if the tax payers just break even it still accomplishes nothing.

A quick google showed states only catching about 3-5% of applicants failing the test. Arizona was quoted to only catch 1 person out of 87000 screened. I assume these test are well advertised and not random screenings. Giving people time to clean up before applying for assistance.
Looking at some statistics online on drug use. Studies show about 7-9% of the US population use illicit drugs. You can guestimate that figure would roughly carry over to those on welfare. Probably not worth it at the end of the day.

disclaimer: not quoting 1 specific source just a brief overview from a few google sites
It's a slow day at work.

 

[public servant]

I'm kinda on the fence about this. I know there are lots of people taking advantage of welfare, I've seen it, but as always, the innocents suffer along with them. Just like if mom or dad gets arrested, is in jail or gets their license suspended, ends up losing their job if they have one, etc. The whole family suffers, not just the individual.

 

[avboiler11]

My grandfather a yellow dog democrate turn 18 the year before the great depression hit and one of the most profound thing he ever instilled in me was how FDR's CC camps helped you not feel worthless when asking for economic assistance.

Conservatives love to bash FDR's New Deal for its massive expansion of social welfare programs...but the Works Progress Administration (and as mentioned, the Civilian Conservations Corps) was extremely worthwhile IMO because it put people to work. It let a man keep his pride and dignity while giving him the help needed to provide for his family, allowing him to give something (work) in exchange for getting something.

To be honest though, I'm not sure very many people would be willing to do manual labor in 2014 in exchange for their assistance...in much the same way that I don't think an emergency wartime draft would work today as our nation as a whole (all races, sexes, and regions) has become fat, lazy and entitled.

 

[public servant]

Why would somebody turn away a person because they had an EBT card?

I was just curious if it was a mandatory thing. I do wish there were tighter limits on what they could purchase.

I understand there are people who truly need a helping hand and I have no problem giving it to them. However I didn't take them to raise.

Unfortunately I think those folks are in the minority now. Most won't help themselves because allowing taxpayers to foot the bill is much easier.

 

[public servant]

I take it you've been to the Mars Hill Kroger on the first of the month.... you can get a contact high in the checkout line.

I loves Mars Hill. /insert toothless smiley

 

[steveh_131]

This debate always gets confusing. There are several separate points that are being intermixed.

1. Is it constitutional?

In my opinion, it is constitutionally acceptable. The drug screening is part of a voluntary contract, which the welfare recipient must agree to in order to receive money from the government. Many government employees enter into similar contracts that include drug testing as a requirement.

2. Is it financially beneficial?

No. It was a net financial loss in Florida and in other states that tried it. The testing is expensive and the recipients are either rarely using drugs or are easily fooling the tests.

3. Is it politically beneficial?

In my opinion, no. We are essentially expanding the size of the government bureaucracies that run the welfare system. Government does not shrink. It only grows. At this point, all government expansion is detrimental to our nation.

This is a passive-aggressive political move that Republicans are pushing as a way to punish welfare recipients. It may make you feel better, but objectively it is a net loss both in dollars and in liberty.

We should spend our political resources trying to cut these entitlement programs, not on backwards legislation like this.

 

[spirit390]

Conservatives love to bash FDR's New Deal for its massive expansion of social welfare programs...but the Works Progress Administration (and as mentioned, the Civilian Conservations Corps) was extremely worthwhile IMO because it put people to work. It let a man keep his pride and dignity while giving him the help needed to provide for his family, allowing him to give something (work) in exchange for getting something.

To be honest though, I'm not sure very many people would be willing to do manual labor in 2014 in exchange for their assistance...in much the same way that I don't think an emergency wartime draft would work today as our nation as a whole (all races, sexes, and regions) has become fat, lazy and entitled.

Unrepentant hardcore rightwing tea party conservative here and of all of FDR's new deal the cc camps was the only thing that ever made sense. As far as fdr even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then.

 

[ATOMonkey]

This whole argument misses the forest for the trees. Who cares in people on the dole are taking drugs? No one should be on the dole in the first place.

90k jobs advertised in indiana 60k people gettting unemployment benefits. You do the math.

 

[pearlman1966]

There is a Marathon station on US 31 near Tipton that has a sign on the door that says
We do not accept EBT "Food stamps"

The last time I was in Claus' in Indianapolis they had a sign saying they didn't accept EBT, Debit or Credit Cards.

I don't know why they won't accept them, they just don't.

 

[Tnichols00]

It says "Probable Cause"...

What is more of a probable cause?

A: Me having a job so they invade my privacy and require me to tell how much I make?

Or

B: Someone who doesnt have a job asking for assistance with the money that I earned and was taken from me?