It's only FAIR to drug test all welfare recipients

[CoffeeCat]

Florida just voted to drug-test all welfare recipients.

Does this mean the bank CEOs will now be drug tested? Just look at the billions in
corporate welfare they received. And they promised to use this welfare to unfreeze
the credit markets, but that never happened. My God...they MUST be on drugs! They don't even
remember their promises or what they say from one minute to the next. My guess...they're
all under the influence of...ROOFIES!! Test them all!

What about the farmers who receive government subsidies...I suppose they'll line
up to pee in a cup now? These guys get paid government welfare for merely doing their
jobs. How do we know they're not spending that money on crack cocaine and hash?
What if Farmer Earl gets high at a 4-H meeting and crashes his combine on a rural road?
It's an outrage! Drug test these welfare recipients...hell yes!

Let's not overlook the biggest welfare queen of all--GE. They made billions and didn't
pay ONE DIME of taxes. Talk about welfare! I'm assuming that all GE executives lined
their pockets with those billions. Speaking of pockets...what's in those pockets? A
dime bag? Oh the shame! Test these welfare recipients now!

And what about the oil-company executives who made billions in profits during their
last fiscal quarter. They went to Congress last month, demanding a continuance of their corporate
welfare! We need to keep tabs on their weekend dalliances. If they get stoned out their minds they
could destroy an entire body of water, like the Gulf of Mex...ohmygod!! TEST EM NOW!

If you want to drug test poor families that get food stamps, you also must test
the millionaires, billionaires and corporations that receive billions in corporate
welfare. It's only fair.

Seriously. The taxpayers do NOT need to be supporting the drug habits of the
cocktail-party circuit. And if these elites, CEOs and billionaires have nothing
to hide--then they will be PROUD to pee in a cup--in exchange for their welfare.

[Snoutport]

1. CONGRESSMEN and GOVERNORS!

I want to know what these guys are taking...it sure must be good to warp their view of the world so badly.

[individual rights]

4. Everyone who works for the government should be tested.

[liberation]

48. Nope, only those in legislative and executive positions

maybe the judicial ones too.

[Philippine expat]

72. Yes,, every govt employee just like the military

if you test positive you are gone

[RKP5637]

11. I seriously bet some interesting results would turn up if this were done. n/t

[suffragette]

2. K&R

[spanone]

3. next republicans will want to drug test social security recipients...

[individual rights]

6. There is one big difference...

SS recipients earned theirs.

[krispos42]

19. Doesn't matter

The funds come from current payroll taxes on current income earned by people currently working. SS is not a retirement fund like a 401(k) or IRA. The amount a retiree receives has only a passing relationship to what the retiree made.

Also, Social Security covers disabled people... accidents, birth defects, mental handicaps, etc. People that may not have earned a dime in their lives before they started receiving monthly payments.



And let's not forget Medicare/Medicaid. It also comes from current payroll taxes.



So let's get testing! By the time we're done, between food stamps, WIC, LIHOP, bank bailouts, the F-22 program, Medicare, public-school students, Medicaid, church attendees, and Social Security, just about two-thirds of the country will be pissing in a cup monthly!

[HubertHeaver]

23. That was quick.

[richmwill]

8. Don't care if they do...

... I have nothing to hide.

[Le Taz Hot]

28. So . . . no concept of the Right to Privacy?

Fourth Amendment? Anything? And if you do get tested and come up with a positive even though you didn't ingest any illegal substances but took one of the 65 OTC LEGAL drugs that produce a false positive (http://www.ipassedmydrugtest.com/false_positives.asp), then what?

[Zenlitened]

5. K and freakin' R! - n/t

[KamaAina]

7. Don't forget people who live (or have lived) in government housing.

(cough)Noelle Bush(cough)

[fascisthunter]

9. What are Government Officials Taking?

because if any position should be tested for drug use, it's our fucking government, where the most harm to a massive amount of people is possible.

[Obamanaut]

10. I peed in a cup during my Navy career. I think if the military and welfare

recipients can pee on demand, EVERYONE who is receiving tax funded pay checks should likewise line up at the urinal, cup in hand - local and state employees/elected officials, federal ones, congress people and their staff members, even the President.

[badtoworse]

12. I just peed in the cup for a job I'll be starting in two weeks...

and I've had to do it for my last four jobs. Sorry, no sympathy from me - if I have to piss clean to get a job, then welfare recipients should have to do the same to get benefits.

[notadmblnd]

15. yeah, but do you pay for it our of your pocket?

because welfare applicants will have to cough up the cash and pay for the drug test before they can get any assistance. Now, if they could afford a freakin drug test, why would they be needing to apply for assistance?

And how about the kids who are denied because their parent can't pass? They should be denied food and health care? Are you sure you don't want to rethink your very right leaning position?

[badtoworse]

16. Do you honestly believe that parents who are on welfare and can't pass a drug test are fit parents?

Why do you believe that parents who are doing drugs are spending the welfare money on the kids? Sorry, but pointing to the kids of drug abusing parents as a reason not to drug test is ridiculous. In my book, if you're a parent and you're doing drugs, you are endangering your children's welfare. If you're in that boat AND you're on welfare, then for obvious reasons, you really shouldn't have kids and the state should take action to protect the children.

Personally, I think a drug test is cheap enough that a welfare applicant shouldn't have to pay. If they asked me to pay for the test as a condition to get a job, I'd pay, but they haven't and that is their choice. If you don't have the money for the test, then you should be able to pay it back from you first benefit check (assuming you pass).

[Oasis_]

21. I disagree

It's simply yet another vehicle employed to decrease support and acceptance of marijuana legalization/ decriminalization, as I assume that will generate the vast majority of "positive" results.

The state has created yet another front to wage its failed "War on drugs".

As has been stated, there's other beneficiaries of government largesse and assistance that will never have to submit to any type of screening. It's looked at as politically acceptable to pick on the poor, because, ya know, they can't fight back and lack a voice in the process--which is precisely the reason they're targeted.

What a bunch of horseshit.

Talk about f'd up priorities.

Oasis

[badtoworse]

27. I'm not in favor of legalizing marijuana

If you want to smoke it, go right ahead, but don't expect the state to subsidize it with welfare money - buy the weed with your own money.

[EOTE]

34. Who the hell said anything about subsidizing marijuana?

Why the hell would you even bring up that idiotic meme? Do you really think ANYONE advocating the legalization of marijuana is suggesting that welfare money be used to provide it? Rather, one of the biggest reason FOR the legalization of marijuana is the huge amounts of revenue it would bring IN to the government. Rather than costing many billions per year preventing its distribution and locking up non-violent offenders (who then act as a further drain on society by not being able to provide for their families), we could be earning many billions in tax revenue every year. It's truly a no-brainer issue. Of course, when we have to fight the militant ignorance spewed forth by people like you, it becomes far more of an uphill battle.

[notadmblnd]

55. ou tell me what they're testing for and how a drug test guarentees that a person doesn't/hasn't

Done drugs. And yes, there are many substance abusers out there that are allowed to be parents. Lots of alcoholics, lots of cigarette smokers and lots of prescription drug abusers. Or do you think that it's only the illegal drugs that endanger the welfare of children?


Alcohol - 3-5 days in urine (eTg), up to 90 in hair and around 10 - 12 hours in blood.

Amphetamines - 1 to 3 days in urine, up to 90 in hair and around 12 hours in blood.

MDMA (Ecstasy) 3-4 days in urine, up to 90 in hair and 1 - 2 days in blood.

Barbiturates - 2 to 4 days in urine, up to 90 in hair and 1 to 2 days in blood.

Phenobarbital - 2 to 3 weeks in urine, up to 90 in hair and up to a week in blood.

Benzodiazapines - 3 to 6 weeks in urine, up to 90 in hair and 2 - 3 days in blood.

Marijuana - 7 to 30 days in urine, up to 90 days in hair, two weeks in blood.
Methamphetamine (crystal) - 3 to 6 days in urine, up 90 in hair, 24 - 72 hours in blood.

Cocaine - 3 to 4 days in urine, up to 90 days in hair, 1 - 2 days in blood.

Codeine - 1 day in urine, up to 90 days in hair, 12 hours in blood.

Fentanyl - 1 day in urine, up to 90 days in hair, 4 hours in blood.

Morphine - 2 -3 days in urine, up to 90 in hair, 6 - 8 hours in blood.

Heroin - 3 to 4 days in urine, up to 90 in hair, up to 12 hours in blood.

LSD - 1 to 3 days in urine, up to 3 days in hair, 2 - 3 hours in blood.
Methadone - 3 - 4 days in urine, up to 90 in hair, 24 - 36 hours in blood.

PCP - up to 30 days in urine, up to 90 days in hair, 2 - 4 days in blood.

Dilaudid - 2 to 3 days in urine, up to 90 days in hair, up to 22 hours in blood.

Suboxone - 2 - 5 days in urine, up to 90 days in hair, up to 3 days in blood.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_long_do_drugs_stay_in_your_system#ixzz1O3v0dxyC

[JonLP24]

73. Yes

You're more likely to catch THC users with drug testing than any other method and I find THC users to be good parents. I'm sure there are bad parents that use THC as well as bad parents who use alcohol but I don't think they look for alcohol in these kind of drug tests.

[Le Taz Hot]

29. Oh, fer crissakes.

Here, educate your damned self:

The 65 OTC drugs that can cause a false positive:

http://www.ipassedmydrugtest.com/false_positives.asp

[badtoworse]

32. I've never personally heard of anyone being turned down for a job because of a false positive.

I'm not saying it can't happen, but I expect it is rare. Any stats on how often it happens?

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Oh boy.

The drug test only offers a binary result: Yes/No. If it comes back "yes," and without identifying the cause of the positive result, you're automatically removed from consideration. It's the assumption of guilt until proven innocent and if you can't see the inherent problem in that then there really isn't anything else I can say to you.

[Vinee]

58. hair follicle test with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry eliminates the risk of false positives

anyone claiming a false positive on a urine test can then submit to the hair follicle GC/MS. If they pass it, the government pays for it. If they fail it, they pay for it. They can also pay back the benefits they defrauded the tax payers out of at that point as far as I'm concerned.

[Le Taz Hot]

64. I'm taking it

that you're not too keen on the Fourth Amendment then. Very well.

[zalinda]

47. My son was fired for a false positive, and

hasn't been able to find another job. He had Hep C and took all kinds of drugs for a year. He was hired and then 3 months later he had to take a test, the entire floor of employees. He didn't pass, and he couldn't even go back to clean out his desk. There was absolutely nothing he could do about it. Oh, and no unemployment benefits.

zalinda

[Alameda]

40. Pretty amazing information there. A kidney infection can cause

a false positive? The whole thing seems very inefficient. I would think a basic functionality test would be better. Like, can you or can you not function?

I do not do drugs or do I drink alcohol, but I am very much against the invasion of privacy in this drug testing issue.

[Forkboy]

30. Why don't you fight for your rights instead of hoping others share your fate?

[badtoworse]

31. Most here would be happy to "share my fate"

The jobs in question are/were responsible, good paying jobs in the electric power business. I've worked most of my career (28 years) in the power business and would highly recommend it as a career choice.

Power plants can be dangerous places and safety is a high priority in the power business. We work around high voltage equipment every day and mistakes can jeopardize people's lives. A drug user in that environment is a potential risk to himself and to those around him, so I fully support the policy of drug testing job applicants.

[Taitertots]

77. Why do you think using drugs outside of work would effect people at work?

Why do you think using drugs before even starting a job would negatively effect at work performance?

[Shandris]

54. Faulty thinking.

The problem is not that they aren't doing it, it's that you have to.

Fight the real enemy, don't fight an illusory war based on a false premise. We've already done that once this past decade.

[Taitertots]

76. I didn't have to, if I didn't have to piss clean why should they? n/t

[REP]

13. Churches. Test the higher ups of churches.

There's been some notable druggies getting huge tax breaks whilst crying, "Lord, lord" who turned out to be wolves ravening for meth and hookers.

[obxhead]

14. Blood tests.

They can fake their urine.

All the groups you mentioned need to be tested daily as well. Many of the designer drugs they use will leave the system in 48 to 72 hours.

[Vinee]

24. hair follicle tests are even better from what I hear.

a base line should be established for anyone receiving benefits and then it should be mandatory that they be retested at some point.

[Le Taz Hot]

36. And if you live in a medical marijuana state

and have a MM recommendation from your health provider . . . ?

[Vinee]

56. A.) Hippie stoners are gaming the system and ruining it for the people with legit causes.

and B.) it remains illegal at the federal level despite the state laws so I don't see why federal tax dollars should be used to subsidize what is an obvious lifestyle choice. And B.) Enabling drug addicts is the worst thing you can do for them. I have dealt with many drug addicts and alcoholics. I know their games inside and out. I know them better than they know themselves frequently. They have a disease. The disease does the talking for them. Everything coming out of their mouth is just a ruse to feed their disease process. Enabling them by subsidizing their lifestyle just makes the disease that much stronger and leaves them with even less control over their destiny. It sounds harsh and drug addicts will certainly go out of their way to make it seem that way but it really is the best thing for them especially when it has affected their ability to work and provide for themselves and their families.

[Le Taz Hot]

63. Lemme guess --

you took "Reefer Madness" as fact, didn't you? Nice scattershot though.

LTH<-----Hippie Stoner Extrordinaire

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MindPilot]

79. And how do I know you are bullshitting?

You claim to have all this experience with drug addicts, yet seem completely oblivious to the idea that a true addict would not let something like the withdrawal of government benefits stop them from using.

If you were really someone who works with addicts you would be advocating for more funds for better and more accessible treatment programs, not some right-wing feel-good bullshit.

Additionally if you were really involved in drug treatment you would not be implying that marijuana is addictive because you would know that it is not.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

52. At their own expense?

You do realize they're essentially confiscating welfare recipients' money to give to the lab owners, right?

[Vinee]

57. Not really. The money saved in the long run by eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse

makes it more than worthwhile for the taxpayers and for the people who have legitimate needs for welfare. Face it, drug addicts are gaming the system and ruining things for the decent people who have temporarily fallen on hard times.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

60. If the State is so certain it'll save money why make people who live with a few hundred $/mo pay it?

[alarimer]

78. Yes because it is Governor's Scotts company that will do the tests.

Or one that he put in his wife's name. Nice cozy kickbacks for that sleazy republican piece of shit.

Anyone who advocates drug testing for anyone without cause (and there are several on this thread), I hope you all lose your jobs from a false positive. Fucking assholes.

[classysassy]

17. Legalize drugs

let all Americans get high,we will all forget about war and the other bad things like hate,greed,and keep busy loving each other,"What a wonderful world that would be" Pot for the peaceful.

[RKP5637]

20. This country needs something. It's uptight about every F'en thing. n/t

[Codeine]

22. I've known plenty of dickhead rightwing stoners.

Libertarians, for example, are just far-righties who like to smoke weed.

[devilgrrl]

18. Glad to hear that the tax payers are for funding the drug tests!

I'm sure the companies profiting from them love it too!

[liberation]

50. Funny you said that... Fla Governor apparently has financial connections with drug testing clinics

but I am sure that is just a "minor" detail, we know GOPers take conflict of interests very seriously...

[999998th word]

25. Government small enough to drown in a bathtub?

full of the results of everyones piss tests.

Hope Perry..et al choke on it ,assholes

This should not even be up for discussion.

[Vinee]

26. Nobody would be forcing you take such a piss test. You cna always just say no. lol

[bluedigger]

33. Nobody would ever force me to buy a product - health insurance - that I don't want, either.

I can always just say no, right?

[liberation]

51. US Constitution, how does it work?

Right to privacy.... You can't explain that!

[Vinee]

59. OK, where does the constitution state that you have a right to a welfare check?

Oh dude, wasn't that a buzz kill?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

61. The Constitution doesn't state you have a right to an iPod either.

So let's test everybody who has an iPod! :crazy:

[EstimatedProphet]

71. Get lost, freeper

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

62. What an interesting sig line you have.

"All actions have consequences." Why, yes, indeed they do.

Posting in a web forum is an action. Isn't it?

[Vinee]

65. so is choosing a life of drug abuse and alcoholism.

and it's not up to the tax payers to subsidize that choice. Your iPod argument was bogus btw.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

67. Because you say so. Yawn.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

69. Wow. Please do go on.

By the way, I never took an illegal drug, never was addicted to anything, never had trouble with the law, and never was unemployed or even underemployed. Oh, and I don't even live in the US.

But go on. In what other ways I am a failure, in your opinion?

[LanternWaste]

70. There is a relevant difference between force and coercion.

There is a relevant difference between force and coercion.

[Recursion]

37. Ending AFDC didn't shut the bastards up

It made sense at the time: transform AFDC into TANF and all the bitching about "welfare" (how did that come to be a bad word?) would stop. But, no.

[raccoon]

38. Betcha a lot of those elites snort coke. And water is wet. nt

[BetsysGhost]

39. DUH

http://www.passadrugtest.com/

[BlueIris]

41. I envision a day when anyone who wants federal dollars has to prove s/he will not be stoned

while spending them. That includes doctors looking for federal research grants, by the way.

[Hannah Bell]

42. kr. funny when some of the folks pushing this crap are laundering drug money

& protecting drug dealers/smugglers -- or maybe even taking a cut.

[DirkGently]

43. Florida did NOT vote for this. Fl would like to test Rick Scott's blood to see if it's pure bile.

[defendandprotect]

44. First, let's drug test all of our elected officials --

[Better Believe It]

45. And next up Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Unemployment Compensation recipients.

And maybe people who receive tax refunds that have earnings of less than $250,000 a year.

[DreamSmoker]

46. Cannabis Patients????

And who do you think they will kick off welfare first????
It will be the Cannabis Patient who get screwed first..
I will bet that no provisions were made for these people at all either..
So its slice, dices , separate , and prosecute starting with the most needy in America as usual....

This is America Inc.. today...
No longer is the Government of the People..

[lonestarnot]

49. K and fucking R!

[lpbk2713]

53. Fair enough.

Just as long as elected officials and candidates for elected office
will submit to polygraph examination whenever it might be requested.

If this were so Rick Scott would do a 180 faster than you could blink. :rofl:

[moondust]

74. Yep, everybody that receives taxpayer money INCLUDING RICK SCOTT.

Glad to see the ACLU is on top of this.

[Taitertots]

75. Somehow I doubt this will actually be used to help them....

Seems like it is being used to destroy their lives so the morality police can point at how drugs destroyed their lives.