Florida Drug Tests Welfare Recipients

**Wingfoot** · August 27th, 2011, 08:36 AM

(CBS/AP) TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - 1 June 2011 - Welfare applicants in Florida will have to undergo drug testing under a bill signed by Gov. Rick Scott.

Governor Rick Scott (R-Florida)

The drug testing bill was a priority for Scott. It will require anyone applying for temporary government assistance to pass the test before receiving benefits.

Applicants will have to pay for the tests themselves and will be reimbursed if they pass.

The Governor took the plan a step further. Scott's order expands drug testing to all employees, not just those who drive, carry weapons or deal with children. (Wingfoot is confident the measure excludes the elected state representatives in the Capitol Building at Tallahassee...... Just sayin')

Scott's office defends the measure as a way to make sure the state is paying for a healthy and productive workforce. The Governor's spokeswoman, Amy Graham, says the Florida legislators are confident the measure will be upheld by the courts.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida says the measure is an overreach of the Republican governor's powers and intrudes into employees' private lives.

Wingfoot sez, "Bullshit to the ACLU! Hooray for Florida! 49 States to go!"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

**TheCableVine** · August 27th, 2011, 11:09 AM

I'm very curious to see how many people are denied public assistance because of their drug habits. Or, how many people think it is more important to take drugs than provide for their family.

**yahoo** · August 30th, 2011, 07:38 PM

I'm with Wing.....49 states to go!!!!! That is so awesome!!!!

**sprayandpray** · August 30th, 2011, 10:32 PM

Or is this just more Gov't intrusion into our lives? Unauthorized wiretaps, intrusive airport searches, what else is on the agenda? Just asking, is this more of the "Nanny State" mindset?

**Dave72** · August 30th, 2011, 11:46 PM

Ya, watch what you wish for.

Drug tests for welfare ? Nah.. who's biz is it if their neighbor shares his puff of a joint on the weekend. No proof that they're funneling their welfare cheque into drugs.
I always said, dont hand out cash. Have a welfare card (like a bank card) that can be used for x-amount of this and that.

Drug tests for workers ? Sure, if they're getting buzzed on the job. Should be all employees including admin/officials. No biz on what ppl do on their own time though (once you throw that seal away, it can go a long long ways into your personal life)

You guys in the US will be ahead of us for getting video cameras on every corner (witness England). They say , hey as long as you're not doing anything wrong, then why worry.
This feels right for any of the current laws that you agree with. What happens when 'current laws' stretch out to something you dont agree with (maybe political affiliations, what you look like (profiling), failure to pray at noon on Sunday... etc etc)

Yes there's alot of bullsht going on with skirting the laws and stuff. Dont ask big brother to watch over us all, I dont think its something your kids are gonna appreciate.

**RD_Wrangler** · August 31st, 2011, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by Dave72

Ya, watch what you wish for.

Drug tests for welfare ? Nah.. who's biz is it if their neighbor shares his puff of a joint on the weekend. No proof that they're funneling their welfare cheque into drugs.
I always said, dont hand out cash. Have a welfare card (like a bank card) that can be used for x-amount of this and that.

Drug tests for workers ? Sure, if they're getting buzzed on the job. Should be all employees including admin/officials. No biz on what ppl do on their own time though (once you throw that seal away, it can go a long long ways into your personal life)

You guys in the US will be ahead of us for getting video cameras on every corner (witness England). They say , hey as long as you're not doing anything wrong, then why worry.
This feels right for any of the current laws that you agree with. What happens when 'current laws' stretch out to something you dont agree with (maybe political affiliations, what you look like (profiling), failure to pray at noon on Sunday... etc etc)

Yes there's alot of bullsht going on with skirting the laws and stuff. Dont ask big brother to watch over us all, I dont think its something your kids are gonna appreciate.

Respectfully Dave, if they are asking Big Brother to give them cash garnered from my paycheck, I'm of the opinion they have forfeited any claim to their civil liberties. Freedom comes with an automatic price of personal responsibility. I despise the Nanny State, but if they're going to live OFF of it, they should have to live UNDER it. You either want Liberty and strive for self-reliance or you don't. They shouldn't get it both ways. This may actually slap some of the hands that are always reaching out for what other people earn.

I'm all for removing the State's involvement in our lives (more so than most desire), but if they are going to act like dependent children, they should be treated as such.

**sprayandpray** · August 31st, 2011, 06:46 AM

The problem is how wide of a brush to use when you are painting these people. For instance, unemployment recipients, disabled people, single parents, elderly people on Soc Sec. When do they get added to the 'monitored'? Any gov't program has a tendency to grow.

**locatethis** · August 31st, 2011, 08:17 AM

Just sayin', While it's a good intent. Guess who owns the testing company contracted by the state of Florida? Why it's our own spaced out looking Governor himself, Rick (he's not really a crook, wink wink) Scott!!!!!

**Wingfoot** · August 31st, 2011, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by sprayandpray

The problem is how wide of a brush to use when you are painting these people.

Judge Judy: "You live with Miss Reed and you signed an agreement to pay her rent with the money you get from the government each month to pay your rent."

Gigolo Student: "My conversation was like, ya know what I'm sayin', just her being around me is like me payin' the rent, ya know what I'm sayin'? I don't have to give her no cash, ya know what I'm sayin'? That's what she was there for! I'm 21! Quit messing around! She's 30, ya know what I'm sayin'? That's what she's there for!"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

**Mke** · August 31st, 2011, 09:58 AM

Spray... I understand where you going with that. Thats the catch 22 of the whole situation. If you open that door, the government wants to open it wider.

I personally think that something needs to be done to prevent the outright abuse of our welfare system. When it comes down to it, Illegal drugs are.... wait for it.....Illegal. When you partake of such liberties you accept the chance of getting caught with contraband and the insuing legal issues. This will go for anyone on the governements payroll.

I'm a government worker, and i'm subject to random screenings. Why shouldn't everyone else who recieves money from the government?

Unemployment - Yes, you are supposed to be finding work and most employers require screening.

Welfare - Yes, If you are down and out, you shouldn't be spending money on recreational intoxicants. They would still be able to buy their beer and smokes.

WIC - Yes, if you are a new mother you shouldn't be on intoxicants for the sake of the baby anyways.

S.S.I. - Yes, if your on disability for physical ailments you are probably legaly perscribed medication, so illegal intoxicants would still be a " No No".
If you are handicapped mentally and not able to coherently make proper descisions, your money will probably be held in trust and dolled out by a guardian, If you fail a screening you should be put into a rehab facility or a program where there is direct contact and guidence for the individual.

Soc.Sec. - Yes, Again see reasons above.

When it comes down to it, Its Illegal and its a concious choice to go agains the local and federal Laws that we all live under. To scare everyone by stating that its another freedom that we will loose under a tyranical governement that is slowly going to keep us in a cage under 24hr survailence is false.

The only true downfall of this practice is that a good portion of the population on the dole will get booted off for infractions and will turn to a life of crime instead of improving their situation. This is the part that we will see. When crime rises, then we will start to employ more cameras to over see the criminality of the people. Not to Spy on good citizens, but to catch the over whelming numbers that never really wanted to work in the first place.

Hence, the catch 22. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Mke

**daman1** · August 31st, 2011, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by RD_Wrangler

..... I'm of the opinion they have forfeited any claim to their civil liberties.......

Really !??! Wow. Maybe we can waterboard them if they get caught.

**TheCableVine** · August 31st, 2011, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by daman1

Really !??! Wow. Maybe we can waterboard them if they get caught.

I'm sure he meant within the context of the discussion. Not ALL civil liberties.

I'm also of the opinion that when you go to the taxpayers and ask them to support you then you should, at the very least, prove that you are not using the money on drugs.

Hmmmm. Waterboarding. I think you have something there.

**sprayandpray** · August 31st, 2011, 08:21 PM

Listen, I am fairly conservative but I have a good portion of Libertarian leanings also. I personally think an adult should be able to smoke pot but I draw the line at cocaine. Why? It's just a personal belief / feeling. However, since smoking pot is illegal, then whoever does smoke, smokes at their own peril. It wasn't that long ago that Marijuana was legal in the U.S. and we only recently banned Drinking and Driving in Texas.
I guess the whole point I want to make is be careful of extending any new powers to the government - they are addicted to power as much as anyone is to anything.

**RD_Wrangler** · August 31st, 2011, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by daman1

Really !??! Wow. Maybe we can waterboard them if they get caught.

Why stop there?

**Bad Robot** · September 1st, 2011, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by sprayandpray

Listen, I am fairly conservative but I have a good portion of Libertarian leanings also. I personally think an adult should be able to smoke pot but I draw the line at cocaine. Why? It's just a personal belief / feeling. However, since smoking pot is illegal, then whoever does smoke, smokes at their own peril. It wasn't that long ago that Marijuana was legal in the U.S. and we only recently banned Drinking and Driving in Texas.
I guess the whole point I want to make is be careful of extending any new powers to the government - they are addicted to power as much as anyone is to anything.

And these days they can't seem to get anything right! Maybe after they straighten out their own mess, they can drug test everyone. Starting with themselves!