Welfare drug tests

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Salty, Sep 18, 2011.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,085
    Likes Received:
    218
  2. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    It's a great thing to do....one of the few good things our new governor has brought us.
     
  3. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,085
    Likes Received:
    218

    What is the talk around town about it, both from taxpayers and from recipients point of view?
     
  4. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction,"

    But it's perfectly fine to put Florida tax payers on the hook to subsidize drug screens. How much is this gonna cost?

    Is it constitutional? Probably not but who cares? Only politicians and their corporate sponsors enjoy fourth and fifth amendment protection these days anyway. Everyone else is guilty until proven innocent. I noticed in the article that only democrats are against this so I guess that means that in order to be a good republican "conservative" you have to be all for it?

    How's that Salty? I actually answered the question. :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #4 poncho, Sep 18, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 18, 2011
  5. KobrinFamily

    KobrinFamily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    I may sound mean but I am in Canada and live in low income houseing my Husbund is disables but there are alot people on welfare on this street and they are doing drugs all the time and not useing the money were it is intended too be, They eather smoke/Snort/Drink it away and there kids suffer the effects, Im sorry but I think there is nothing wrong with drug testing!!!
     
  6. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    You don't sound mean at all, to me. Evidently you care a great deal for children. There's nothing wrong with that.

    But how is mandatory drug testing going to help them? What happens when their parents are denied welfare because they fail a drug screen?

    They'll be just as hungry either way and may even become homeless. Should we then take these children away from the parents and make them wards of the state? I don't know how it works in Canada but in the United States children in the care of the state (CPS) get treated much worse than if they were to stay with their parents.

    See this HERE

    Instead of government prying into people's private lives every chance it gets government should be doing it's job to create an even playing field so business can grow and flourish in the United States. More jobs and opportunities means less dependence on the state. Which means less people on welfare and less children going hungry. The fault lies with government more so than with parents that are being denied the ability to find a decent job with a decent wage and decent benefits. Now I understand that not all parents would rather work than collect welfare but is that really all their fault? I mean the government has helped to create the very conditions that has made the welfare state such a huge problem by not doing the job it was intended to do in the first place.

    Rather than doing it's job as it was intended to do the government instead cracks down on those it has made so dependent on government services. Shouldn't we be asking why the government refuses to do it's job instead of criminalizing those it has helped to put in the position of needing government handouts instead?
     
    #6 poncho, Sep 18, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 18, 2011
  7. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,085
    Likes Received:
    218
    Why would it be unconstitutional? They would only be tested if applying for welfare. Since no one is requiring them to accept welfare - they have the choice not to take it - thus no test.


    FYI, I am NOT a Republican

    Salty

    PS, Hmm are you implying that you have no problem with people getting welfare? :confused:
     
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Last time I heard there were two common drug tests. One is expensive and accurate. The other is cheap and produces many false positives. Wonder which Fla will use and the appeal process?
     
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Because the government by not performing it's constitutional duties has set up the situtation whereby you must either sign away your God given rights or go hungry, cold and homeless bow bow bow.

    Doesn't matter. If all you can see is people taking advantage of the situation instead of how the situation came to be in the first place. The government (along with a monetary system of debt) created the situation for the most part so why should we blame only those who may take advantage of it?

    No sir. We shouldn't have a welfare state at all. That's what I've been saying. The church used to take care of people who needed help. Now the church is more than happy to let the government do it's job while it sits backs and enjoys the benefits of being in bed with Caesar. (501c3)

    Of course the so called "conservative" church goers of today all seem to love to mouth off about and condemn those we've turned our back on in favor of government intervention. I suppose though if we want to make ourselves and others believe we are good Christian "conservatives" (by today's Orwellian standards) then we need to vilify those we've thrown under the bus for the sake of increasing Caesar's power over us all every chance we get.

    You want less welfare Salty? Then demand the church and the government do their jobs instead of making it a habit of tossing people under the bus and then blaming them for getting the bus all bloody.

    How is mandatory drug screens going save taxpayers money anyway? Am I suppose to believe that if the state of Florida turns away people who test positive that's going to keep them from turning to crime? Are they supposed to just crawl under a rock and die or what? Hungry and desperate people will do unspeakable things to satisfy their hunger for food and lust for drugs will they not? How much will a future of higher crimes rates cost the taxpayer? More or less than what they'd be paying out in welfare benefits? How much will it cost to increase the size and scope of government (even more) and the police force and prison system to handle the added strain?

    And what happens when this proves to be another failure by government? What always happens, the government will demand more money, more power and more control to solve a situation it helped to create by not performing it's constitutional duites in the first place.
     
    #9 poncho, Sep 18, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 18, 2011
  10. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,085
    Likes Received:
    218
    Are you trying to tell me that getting welfare is a God given right?
     
  11. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Nope . . . sorry Salty my mistake I should have wrote this in a third grade format instead of a sixth grade format so y'all could grasp it easier. Let me give it another try, okay?

    Because the government by not performing it's constitutional duties has set up the situtation whereby you must either sign away your God given (fourth and fifth amendment) rights (against warrantless searches and self incrimination) or go hungry, cold and homeless bow bow bow.

    In other words if you want to eat again, or remain employed, or simply wish to be considered a "good citizen" in this day and Orwellian age then you have to sign this contract that voids and nullifies any and all rights (that the company, corporation or government specifies) you were granted by your creator on the condition of being born a human being on planet earth.

    There is no right God given or otherwise to collect welfare.

    There now is that easier to understand? :BangHead:
     
    #11 poncho, Sep 18, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 18, 2011
  12. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Oh, this from the guy on another thread complaining about personal attacks and childish remarks. Hello pot...meet kettle.
     
  13. Sapper Woody

    Sapper Woody
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    104
    The government has forced no one into welfare. I will stand by that statement until my dying breath. Welfare happens because of one of two things: either bad decisions, or unforeseen events (such as fire, earthquake, etc.).
    What is wrong with having to show that you are a responsible, law abiding citizen in order to get help? Or in order to get/keep a job? It is not the government's fault that many people choose to disobey the law, and that you cannot tell who is and who is not obeying it simply by looking. If you want to throw some blame at someone, then throw the blame at pot/crack/opium heads, and not the government. It's definitely not perfect, but it's not at fault here.
     
  14. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is against Article I, Section 12 of the Constitution of the State of Florida. It's unfortunate that Rick Scott continues to trample on the rights of Florida's citizens.
     
  15. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps you could quote the relevant portion of Article I, Section 12 for the benefit of those of us who are unfamiliar with it.
     
  16. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    "SECTION 12. Searches and seizures.—The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and against the unreasonable interception of private communications by any means, shall not be violated. No warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, particularly describing the place or places to be searched, the person or persons, thing or things to be seized, the communication to be intercepted, and the nature of evidence to be obtained. This right shall be construed in conformity with the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. Articles or information obtained in violation of this right shall not be admissible in evidence if such articles or information would be inadmissible under decisions of the United States Supreme Court construing the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution."
     
  17. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    If a drug test is a condition of receiving the welfare aren't the welfare recipients waiving this right when they sign up?
     
  18. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    No. See Marchwinski v. Howard. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a lower court's ruling that a similar Michigan program is unconstitutional based on U.S. Supreme Court precedents. Because that section of the Florida constitution is construed in conformity with the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court, this serves as persuasive precedent that the Florida drug testing law is unconstitutional.
     
  19. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd be more interested in their work history. I would rather them prove they can't survive without my money. There is no reason to have 6 generations of the same family on welfare. Dope, or no dope.

    Once again, it's the wrong question.
     
  20. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about telling us in your own words what Marchwinski v Howard was about and what the court decided.

    Nonlegalese please.
     

Share This Page

Loading...