Should recipients of welfare be required to take a drug test?

by Rocket2112 Posted 2012/08/21 15:49:19

Related Topics: Welfare, Drug Test, Drug, Test

Read More

13 votes
Read all 15 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	10 votes	77%
	No	3 votes	23%

Add a comment above

DH 2012/08/21 17:09:22

No

They tried that. It cost more than it saved.

reply
bob 2012/08/21 17:03:28

Yes

Along the the wealthy tax right offs and political offices

reply
Friday - Just the Facts 2012/08/21 16:25:44 (edited)

No

The moron govenor of Florida already implemented this rediculous effort. He had stated that a high percentage of welfare recipients were using drugs but when the actual dumb ass law was enacted the results showed that welfare recipients had a lower percentage of drug use that the general public. Link to facts- http://www2.tbo.com/news/poli...
Why does the republican party waste so much time and taxpayer money trying to be the moral authority?
MORON...
Of course he also has a financial interest in a drug testing facility! Typical Republican!

reply
666_Maggots~PassionForGlory... 2012/08/21 16:15:28

Yes

Seems completely appropriate, in my opinion.

reply
Soapstone 2012/08/21 16:03:14

Yes

And it should have started decades ago. Now it's probably to little to late, but it's a start.

reply
Russian 2012/08/21 15:57:40

Yes

+2
As long as taxpayers won't have to pay for them.

reply
LibertyCaroline 2012/08/21 15:53:36

Yes

+2
And make them pay for it. Most tax payers are required to take drug test to earn that income that provides welfare.

reply
JMCC 2012/08/21 15:51:40

No

How much would it cost to implement and run, and how much would it save?

reply
Rocket2112 to JMCC 2012/08/21 15:54:30

+3
Imposed fines could generate money.

reply
JMCC to Rocket2112 2012/08/21 16:01:04

+1
Fining people on welfare has never been that successful in the UK...

It ends up costing a fortune in police and court time, eventually seeing a write off in costs, ultimately prison is the only option - and that it almost always very expensive.

reply
Friday ... to JMCC 2012/08/21 19:26:47 (edited)

+1
Our right wing nut jobs would gladly spend 10 times more than what they would save just to be able to put a group of people, they feel are unworthy of help, under their thumbs.

reply
JMCC to Friday ... 2012/08/21 19:29:06 (edited)

Prison Officers in the UK have long held the opinion that prisons are "fridges" to store surplus population...

reply
Friday ... to JMCC 2012/08/21 21:50:50

+1
...and with the current, very disturbing trend in this country to "privatize" the prison system and the growing number of poor/unemployed we are heading into a very dark period. If a corporation owns a prison do you think they want any empty cells? Do you think they will be pushing for harsher sentences to keep their profit margin higher?

reply
Friday ... to JMCC 2012/08/21 19:20:14

+1
This link may help answer your question.. They tried it in Florida
http://www2.tbo.com/news/poli...

reply
JMCC to Friday ... 2012/08/21 19:23:49

"The as-yet uncalculated cost of staff hours and other resources that DCF has had to spend on implementing the program may wipe out most or all of the apparent savings, said Derek Newton, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. The program will grow costlier yet, he said, if it draws a legal challenge.

The ACLU has been threatening for months that it may challenge the constitutionality of the program; Tuesday, Newton said his group is still weighing a lawsuit."

Added to the fact that those without welfare are likely to commit a crime, you have to wonder if it is worth it...

reply