Drug test people on welfare?

[-zeroSKILL-]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Ugggghhhhhh. This debate again.

You and Lito have basically covered all of the problems I have with it when I try to rationalize/justify doing it.

I'm neither for it, nor against it.

I just wish drug testing wasn't such a huge expenditure. If testing for drugs was able to be cheaply done in an easy manner that was also extremely reliable and expedient I would be 100% for this.

But because it is a costly time consuming issue that won't really rectify any problems that are present I'm against it.

The only thing they can really do to prevent the money from being used is by spending the money themselves (the government). They already do this with foodstamps (at least in CA, not sure about other states), you are given a debit card that is only good for the purchase of non taxable food products. If the money they're giving out to needy mothers (cash aid, which is almost ~*never*~ given to males) was regulated like food stamps so that it could only be spent on gas, rent, bills, etc then this whole problem wouldn't exist except for the people fraudulently claiming welfare benefits and spending their earned money on drugs and paying for everything else with govt money.

[Reincarnate]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

psychoangel: I don't see how the drug testing would cost more. Here in NJ on welfare they will give you (This is for a family of 3 it goes up if there are more people and of course down for less) $530 per month in food stamps, $424 in cash per month AND they will pay for an apartment out here for you which a 2br is about 1200 to 1500 a month and they will pay that expense in full plus utilities which are separate from the rent cost. Sorry but I don't think druggies deserve to have all that handed to them when there are families that truly need it that are having problems getting it now because the state is stretched so thin with the amount of people on welfare.

Me: Because a vast majority of welfare recipients *aren't* druggies, and it's an unfortunate myth that's not supported by data and gets skewed by anecdotal confirmation bias. That is how the money is ultimately wasted -- you catch a few druggies but then you waste the money testing everyone else and maintaining the program, which means less taxpayer money is available to help fund not only welfare, but everything else -- during a time when we really need to increase revenues and find places to cut spending.

[Reincarnate]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

I mean, don't get me wrong, I hate the idea that my hard-earned taxpayer money may be going to help a few people who are abusing the system, but it's by no means the majority -- and far from it. Even if you are working, what's to stop your boss (who benefits from your business) from spending his/her money on drugs?

No matter what you're doing, you're supporting everyone else's spending habits in one way or another. The difference is just where costs and benefits are incurred and when. I mean, look at California -- if you're going to take a stance of, say, not raising taxes -- you still need to get that revenue from somewhere. The end result is just siphoning it out of increased tuition costs and the like.

Wasting taxpayer money on testing/maintenance is just a needless expense and misallocation of resources with respect to the taxpayers. You will catch a few, but even then, you're going to incur costs. Why not remove welfare altogether? The answer is that you still don't save money by removing it -- when people are desperate and in need of money, society eats the costs one way or another. So whether it's through assistance or a beefed up justice department or park-cleaning costs or unemployment benefits or welfare, society still pays for the lazy drug-abusers either way.

I'd rather pay that cost through welfare than to kick that person onto the streets and risk incurring much larger costs. And, further, I'd rather not waste money on needless drug tests that will only serve to further squeeze the middle class. I agree that we should try to figure out a better way to keep moral hazard out of the welfare system, and I do think it would be a good idea to reform it in a way that facilitates a less costly allocation of resources, but drug testing is not the answer.

[Nyokou]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Should only be done for people they suspect of abusing the money for drugs/alcohol. Other than that, it's a waste of money.

My boyfriend's uncle gets paid welfare for "mental disabilities". Mental disabilities my ass. He goes off and wastes it on alcohol every time. I'm pretty sure he's ended up in the hospital at least 5 times since I started living with my boyfriend.

My friend from high school, her mom also lives off welfare for "mental disabilities". There's nothing wrong with that woman, I've talked to her for years and she is perfectly fine. My friend used to make fun of her all the time because of it... Telling her that she doesn't have any mental disabilities even though she claims she does. I know her mom has had a history of depression but is that really enough of an issue to stop someone from working? What the hell? I seriously can not understand how working can make someone depressed. It's like these people expect everything to be handed to them. And it is, by our incompetent and broken government.

[psychoangel691]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Your friend is just one person.

Not my friend.

Terrible idea, and a huge waste of money for what? To make someone lose their support of welfare because of an addiction? C'mon that's ****ing stupid. Plain and simple.

Of course you would chime in your two cents of nothing. Come back when you can make a valid argument other than you just being against it because you do drugs yourself.

The only thing they can really do to prevent the money from being used is by spending the money themselves (the government). They already do this with foodstamps (at least in CA, not sure about other states), you are given a debit card that is only good for the purchase of non taxable food products. If the money they're giving out to needy mothers (cash aid, which is almost ~*never*~ given to males) was regulated like food stamps so that it could only be spent on gas, rent, bills, etc then this whole problem wouldn't exist except for the people fraudulently claiming welfare benefits and spending their earned money on drugs and paying for everything else with govt money.

I'm pretty sure the debit card for food stamps is just about all states now. But how would they regulate cash? You just can't do it. The money goes on the same card and can be taken out via ATM or cash back at the grocery store or walmart. Then from there the cash can be used for whatever the person wants. It would cost more to try to monitor cash then it would to just drug test people.


I agree that there are all types of people that abuse the system, but urine dip tests cost next to nothing, I don't see where this huge cost is coming in. For someone to administer the tests? They could just do them right in the office.

Here in NJ if someone is getting Rental, Cash and food assistance for a family of 3 and they are on it for a year that's in the 30,000 range for 1 year for that family. What would you say the ratio of drug users to non users is? 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10000? I mean you say there isn't the statistical proof, but chances are most haven't been caught. Drug users are usually pretty good at hiding the addiction. Here in NJ at least (I don't know about other states) I think it would be worth having the drug test. At the very least drug tests for those going for housing and everything. I guess I don't see a reason to do it for food stamps since they technically can't take that and buy drugs with it. (Altho they could convince someone to trade money for use of their food stamps)

Pretty much all down the stretch of my street is drug users. I can't wait to get out of here because I don't want Saphira growing up here. It used to be a nice area, but it's just not anymore.

I also saw something about how if they aren't getting welfare then we're paying for them in jail. Well in all technicality if they're using illegal drugs they should be in jail anyway. I'm fairly certain the cost is less to have people in jail then to give them a cushy apartment paid in full with food stamps and cash assistance. OH! I forgot to mention, NJ will also give you the money to furnish that apartment. There's another couple grand right there. They'll also pay for a bunch of other stuff too, like schooling at community college, job training, transportation, the amount of things this state gives away is insane. And of course people will milk the system for every penny they can while on the assistance.

When it comes to it violating people's privacy, so jobs shouldn't drug test either? You're choosing to apply for the welfare and it will be known that a drug test will be administered. They are choosing to give up that right if they apply for the assistance. There's nothing stating anyone has the "right" to state benefits. One of the biggest things they ask you at assistance offices here is what's preventing you from getting a job? Of course no drug user is going to be like, oh yea it's because I do drugs so I can't pass a drug test to get a job. The majority of jobs out here drug test before hiring. Unless you find a private place of employment which is hard to find out here.

I can't say for every state that this is the right path, but I'm fairly certain in certain states this would be beneficial rather than hurtful.

[Reincarnate]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

I agree that there are all types of people that abuse the system, but urine dip tests cost next to nothing, I don't see where this huge cost is coming in. For someone to administer the tests? They could just do them right in the office.

[...]

I can't say for every state that this is the right path, but I'm fairly certain in certain states this would be beneficial rather than hurtful.

Applicants have to pay for the test themselves, and they'll only be reimbursed if they pass. Time value of money alone means this is not exactly a free transaction -- the applicants still incur a cost and it's not clear how long the reimbursement period would be. When you're applying for welfare, you're not exactly rolling in dough.

A similar law in Michigan back in 1999 (random drug-testing of welfare recipients) was tried and it failed after a four-year battle on grounds of being unconstitutional. This law is not much different. It's simply changing "random searches" to "mandatory searches for all."

Back during the Michigan debate, 10% of the randomly-selected recipients tested positive for illicit drugs (mostly pot, and 3% tested positive for hard drugs like cocaine), and this wasn't much different than the general population rates overall.

Testing would cost many millions. There are 4.7 million people on welfare right now, 3.5 million of them children. In 2011 (as of 5/26/2011), there were about 147,000 applications approved out of 330,000 total applications.

Meanwhile, the average cost of the test is something like $40, plus the costs of creating the program, hiring the personnel, maintaining the system, and filtering out false positives (codeine, poppyseed, etc). Urine tests are almost exclusively pot-testers because the chemicals stay in the body longer. It's much harder to find evidence of alcohol abuse and hard drug use, as the substances leave the body quickly.

In other words, taxpayers would pay millions of additional dollars for the sake of targeting a very small group of people who abuse drugs. This doesn't actually solve the problem of optimal welfare resource allocation because you're not even targeting the real juggernaut of abuse (alcoholism), nor are you providing incentives for people to find work or seek help for their addictions. Job training programs have been shown to be far more effective in keeping people off welfare.

The war on drugs, to date, has been pretty clear that naive laws don't actually fix the problems. They haven't worked in the past, so what makes anyone think they're going to work here, either?

[agonist]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

How is that malicious in any way? I know of a woman who is getting welfare right now. She get's food stamps, cash assistance, and rental assistance (they pay for an entire apartment for her) what does she do with the cash, she blows it on pot. Yea because that's what people on welfare need right? I'm sorry but if you have money to piss away on drugs, alcohol or tobacco then you don't need money from welfare. None of those 3 things is a necessity.

There's plenty of ways to "piss" away money aside from drugs and alcohol. You could blow all your money on prostitutes or whatever **** else for all the government knows. It's unfair for them to single out drug users from everyone else. Also, it's no ones ****ing business what you decide to put into your own body. Seriously, no ones business at all whatsoever. Sometimes people just wanna go home and smoke a joint after a long nights work. It's relaxing. It's rewarding. If you're a working man/woman, be it that you're on welfare or not, what's wrong with kicking back on the couch and lighting up a joint or having a beer after work? It's as if you categorize all tobacco, alcohol, and pot users as pathetic pieces of shit that don't deserve anything. YOU HAD ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY BEER AND CIGARETTES SO YOU DON'T NEED HELP. What kind of nazi shit is that? People enjoy beer and cigarettes. What do you enjoy spending your money on? Clothes, video games, DVDs? It's no different than me or whoever else spending money on what we LIKE. Wait, I know a good solution; they should just keep tabs on every ****ing dollar you spend! That way they can decide rather you're spending it on things you "need". pfft... Here's my point : it's no ones business what you decide to put into your body, nor is it any of yours to know what that woman does with her money. I agree that its ****ed up that our tax dollars provide for this kind of shit but still, if you meet the financial qualifications for welfare then by no means should you be denied. fuc bro i smokd a joint 2 weeks ago and it showed up positive on the am i good enough to qualify for welfare test so i got denied fuc

"Well in all technicality if they're using illegal drugs they should be in jail anyway."

"When it comes to it violating people's privacy, so jobs shouldn't drug test either?"

So basically all drug users and pot smokers are undeserving piles of shit. We oughtta just cast them out of society completely, deny them food and water. Hell, just lock them all up. They deserve to be in jail anyways. THEY'RE WORTHLESS. Right?

You don't do drugs. You're doing something with your life. You're far greater than anyone that would ever stoop to the level of drug/alcohol use. We get it. Kill yourself now

[Mans0n]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Yeah okay like im the only one who chimed in their two cents.. C;mon now you really gonna try and say that?

And i don't need to waste my time making a valid ''argument'' against something that's completely retarded and a waste of time. Plus the majority of people who've posted in this thread are against it for many reasons. Why? because they also know its a big waste of money and time. Why help big corporations who make drug tests? because that's who would be benefiting most out of this if it were the law in all 50 states.

Besides if this were such a great idea like you think, why isn't already law? why hasn't it been implemented already years ago? simple answer is because its not a good idea plain and simple. Why you can't get that through that thick skull of yours is beyond me.

But hey everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Which is why i never made any rude comments towards your point of view, like you seemed fit to do to me. But its no biggie.

I'm just going to be the better more mature person and forgive for your previous mistake, Good day.

[psychoangel691]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Applicants have to pay for the test themselves, and they'll only be reimbursed if they pass.

You're saying people need to pay for a test when they apply for welfare? Or are you talking about job drug testing? Because I've never paid for drug testing for a job before.

Back during the Michigan debate, 10% of the randomly-selected recipients tested positive for illicit drugs.

If it's only randomly selected then we don't really have an accurate number and 1999 was a different time. We're talking about 12 years later. The towns I grew up in used to be clean, now they have to do random drug tests in the high schools because the kids are on crack and shit.

Meanwhile, the average cost of the test is something like $40.

The urine dipstick tests for drugs are a few dollars and a monkey could do it. They do drug testing right in the courts here, no special staff. Like I said it may not be worth it in every state but if the benefits are like what they offer here in NJ and they're giving out a lot of benefits then they need to do this. Also, it's not something they should test for immediately, the person should have to qualify for receiving benefits first, that knocks out a bunch of people right there.

Job training programs have been shown to be far more effective in keeping people off welfare.

NJ requires that if you are receiving cash benefits you have to participate in a program called work first NJ. This program requires you to do 35 hours a week of some sort of job training, school, or volunteer work. But the problem is, all someone needs to do is go to a psychologist and say I'm not mentally okay for work and they get out of it. Nothing will ever be 100 percent effective of course, but I don't believe those who abuse illegal substances should be permitted to sit on welfare and take away from other families. NJ is beyond their budget in welfare right now and if people like the woman I mentioned earlier wasn't having a 1400 a month apartment being paid for her (and she has been on welfare for a year) plus her cash benefits and everything else she's been getting, it would have been more for a family in need. She pisses the money away on pot then complains that she doesn't have enough to get shit she needs. That pisses me off to no end.

There's plenty of ways to "piss" away money aside from drugs and alcohol. You could blow all your money on prostitutes or whatever **** else for all the government knows. It's unfair for them to single out drug users from everyone else.

I never said there wasn't plenty of ways to piss away money. But the fact is that drugs and alcohol are a big issue. In technicality alcohol is not illegal where as drugs are. So no, it's not unfair to single them out. It's something that can be easily proven as well with a simple test. I doubt most women that are applying for benefits are getting prostitutes, but regardless, something like that is way less in numbers than drugs are.

Also, it's no ones ****ing business what you decide to put into your own body. Seriously, no ones business at all whatsoever. Sometimes people just wanna go home and smoke a joint after a long nights work. It's relaxing. It's rewarding. If you're a working man/woman, be it that you're on welfare or not, what's wrong with kicking back on the couch and lighting up a joint or having a beer after work?

If people are on welfare they aren't working now are they? And as far as I'm concerned if you want to get something like welfare it becomes their business. It's simple if you're drugs are more important then don't apply and then nobody's in your "business"

It's as if you categorize all tobacco, alcohol, and pot users as pathetic pieces of shit that don't deserve anything. YOU HAD ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY BEER AND CIGARETTES SO YOU DON'T NEED HELP. What kind of nazi shit is that? People enjoy beer and cigarettes. What do you enjoy spending your money on? Clothes, video games, DVDs? It's no different than me or whoever else spending money on what we LIKE. Wait, I know a good solution; they should just keep tabs on every ****ing dollar you spend! That way they can decide rather you're spending it on things you "need".

I said if they have the money to piss away on that stuff they don't need welfare money. That's not calling anyone a pathetic piece of shit. Welfare money isn't for spending on what you enjoy, it's about spending it on shit you need. Like diapers for your kids. Working for your money and spending it on what you want is completely different from taking tax payers dollars for doing nothing and spending it on what you want. I don't know how you can categorize it as the same thing. If you want your "privacy" to spend money on drugs or whatever else then get a job.

So basically all drug users and pot smokers are undeserving piles of shit. We oughtta just cast them out of society completely, deny them food and water. Hell, just lock them all up. They deserve to be in jail anyways. THEY'RE WORTHLESS. Right?

You don't do drugs. You're doing something with your life. You're far greater than anyone that would ever stoop to the level of drug/alcohol use. We get it. Kill yourself now

Apparently you didn't read where I said don't drug test for food stamps which wouldn't be denying them food and water. I never used anything along the lines of drug users being piles of shit, but if they have the money for drugs then they don't need the measly amount of money they get from welfare. Plus the welfare program is only supposed to be for those seeking work and chances are these drug users can't get work because of the drugs. Since most companies drug test. Why aren't you yelling and pissing and moaning about jobs drug testing or how about the schools that are drug testing? Why is it only an issue when it comes to welfare?

It comes down to me not thinking we should be enabling people to not work and sit around doing drugs. And I love how you can get pissy with me because I brought up the fact that it's illegal. It is what it is bro, don't like it take it up with the government.

Yeah okay like im the only one who chimed in their two cents.. C;mon now you really gonna try and say that?

And i don't need to waste my time making a valid ''argument'' against something that's completely retarded and a waste of time.

You aren't the only one who chimed in but you're the one that does this in like every thread. You make a post that contributes nothing to the conversation. If you're going to advocate a side of something at least provide some argument as to why.

Besides if this were such a great idea like you think, why isn't already law? why hasn't it been implemented already years ago? simple answer is because its not a good idea plain and simple. Why you can't get that through that thick skull of yours is beyond me.

You do realize that this thread was made because two states have already started to do this right?




I think some things were missed or misunderstood in my last post. I don't think every single person should be tested and it may not be something that is good for all states. But some states with what they offer and the amount of people on welfare, like NJ, I feel it would be beneficial.

When I say not everyone should be tested I mean ween out those who apply but don't qualify to receive benefits. Then only drug test those going for cash/rental assistance since that's the most costly and also most likely to be abused. Food stamps can be abused but it's way harder to do so, so don't test for those.

[Mans0n]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

2/50 is nowhere close to majority so i find that irrelevant

[fido123]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

Take the philosophy of "If it already hasn't been done before it's probably not a good idea" to the 60's with civil rights. Also anything but majorities matter? Wasn't aware of that one =/

[Mans0n]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

What im saying is if there's a law passed in say 26/50 states its probably more likely than not going to be made law in the remaining states.

[Reincarnate]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

psychoangel: Yes, people who apply for welfare would pay for the test, and no, it's not just the cost of a dipstick. It requires an entirely new system. The costs have already been outlined publicly. I agree that the person should qualify for the other benefits first before being tested and I'm pretty sure (or at least hopeful) that they'll do it that way.

But why target the poor? There are plenty of people who receive much larger sums of government aid and plenty who generate more cost to society in terms of their drug/alcohol abuse. Why waste resources on something that is but a tiny dent in the grand scheme of the problem?

Like I said, this is a typical hardcore right-wing viewpoint. It's the same impetus that drove the GOP to push for things like shutting down Planned Parenthood during a time when there was an imminent risk of government shutdown -- even though it was not an economically sensible agenda. It's just a means to perpetuate a myth that isn't backed up by data and has everything to do with trying to paint those in poverty as lazy criminals.

If you want to get people out of welfare, simply blocking people from getting into welfare is *not* the answer -- the answer is finding a way so people don't need to even apply for welfare to begin with. Point the resources *there* instead.

[psychoangel691]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

I'm not saying target only the poor welfare just happens to be the topic at hand. I think anyone that's going to receive something essentially for nothing should have to meet certain guidelines including being drug free. Why do I take a stance on drugs so harshly? Because it makes my head spin how many do them now. It was such a taboo thing before and no one spoke of it really. Now just sitting here on ffr all you ever see is something about someone being high. I lost friends and a family member to drugs, so yea I'm sorry I have a little bit of a personal bias against drugs. I don't run around telling people what they should or shouldn't do when it comes to them. But if you have the money to **** your body up then you don't need the taxpayers money in your pocket. That's just how I feel.

[Thatskier]

Re: Drug test people on welfare?

It's a good thing. How many abusive fathers would spend the money on alcohol and cigarettes? It doesn't even have to be illegal substances, just body/mental changing. It could be ****ing mudkipz for all i care. TEST THEM.