Michigan welfare recipients may lose welfare if they test positive for drugs

[Tiger in Spain 0]

..and because I was not a welfare recipient, I did not speak up.

I'd like to see the current welfare system abolished. Add more job training and things like that that actually help people better themselves.

House passes bill to drug test some welfare recipients

LANSING -- Some welfare recipients suspected of illegal drug use could be tested under legislation approved early Thursday in the Michigan House.

It's the latest attempt by House Republicans to change some conditions of the state welfare system. The bill, passed just before lawmakers adjourned until after the November election, will go to the Senate for consideration when lawmakers return to the Capitol.

The bill cleared the House on a 82-25 vote, with some Democrats joining majority Republicans in supporting the bill.

The bill would allow for drug testing of a family assistance recipient if a Department of Human Services employee has a reasonable suspicion the recipient has been using drugs. The bill calls for DHS to set up a pilot program to test the measure.

Welfare recipients testing positive for drug use would be required to enter a treatment program. If they don't conform to the treatment program requirements, they eventually could lose some of their welfare benefits.

Democrats said the legislation wasn't needed because state could give drug tests to welfare recipients now. Republicans said the Democratic administration of Gov. Jennifer Granholm has not done that.

Link

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I'm all for it, and they should start testing anyone who receives government funding of any kind, to include SS and disability benefits. Hell, let's just test everybody and charge it to the credit card. There seems to be no max. these days, so why not? Anyone found positive for illegal narcotics, loses their citizenship and gets shipped to Mexico. Sounds draconian doesn't it? Well, that's freedom for you. Liberty doesn't tolerate such actions by the state.

[otterinbham 0]

Boy, I'm torn on this one.

Under no circumstances do I believe that the state should subsidize somebody sitting at home and doing drugs all day. Period.

At the same time, I believe the War On Drugs has really eroded civil liberties in this country to an intolerable degree.

First of all, I do not do drugs. I think people who do drugs are stupid. At the same time, any person who wants to do a line of coke, smoke a doobie, or whatever else in the privacy of their own home should not have the state telling them no.

If you really prize freedom, then you can't argue otherwise. Because if we outlaw all harmful substances that are consumed voluntarily, then we will see a lot of things whisked away. Alcohol. Cigarettes. Granulated sugar. Pork. And the list goes on and on. All of these, if consumed to excess, will kill you just as surely as heroin.

But the War On Drugs, in its zeal, has passed a boundary over the past few years in its drive to protect us from ourselves. Want to pay cash for a plane ticket? Some guy in Cincinnati tried to several years ago on his way to his annual purchasing visit to Houston for his landscaping visit. He had thousands of dollars confiscated by the DEA on the "suspicion" that he might be a drug dealer. In fact, it's perfectly legal for the state to confiscate property from people even tangentially related to drug use (for example, the unwitting parent of a drug user) without due process. It is a shameful abuse of civil rights.

Worst of all? The War On Drugs, despite its untold billions in expenditures, despite its steady erosion on the rights of all Americans, has not decreased drug use in this country one bit. All it has done is pushed the drug trade underground and created an explosion in crime over the past 40 years.

So how does the State of Michigan propose to enforce this, anyway? Mandatory drug tests? That's against the Bill of Rights the last time I heard. Does this mean that a laid-off, 60-year-old auto worker will have to urinate in a cup just the same as an inner city welfare queen? Are we really wanting to do this?

[CCTAU 3,335]

Freedom is earned. If you are on my dime, then you do as I say. Don't like it, get off my dime.

What the hell is wrong with that. SS, disability, those are diferent. Most SS and diabled folks are ALREADY on some sort of drug.

Are any of you disabled? It is not the life of Riley.

I really feel the government shoudl start building some of the old communes out in the country. Everyone lives to gether and works together. Don't like it? Get a job and get off the dole. Australia has no welfare. Its called the dole. If you are on the dole, you work for the government. But you do not sit around getting paid to have babies. Treatment my ass. Throw them on the street and put their kids in the system. We are already paying for them anyway. Our lack of assigning and accepting responsibility is bringing this county to its knees. We have "professional" poor people who pass this skill from generation to generation with no end in sight. Feed the poor. STARVE the lazy. Drug test them ALL.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

And, that doesn't include the legal and illegal immigrants who exploit the system. The welfare-state is no picnic for those who contribute and those who receive. But, I think anyone who receives government money of any kind, should be tested, or abolish the welfare-state, the Federal Reserve and the government for that matter, and start all over again with the same constitution, just don't violate it.

[otterinbham 0]

Freedom is earned. If you are on my dime, then you do as I say. Don't like it, get off my dime.

What the hell is wrong with that. SS, disability, those are diferent. Most SS and diabled folks are ALREADY on some sort of drug.

Are any of you disabled? It is not the life of Riley.

I really feel the government shoudl start building some of the old communes out in the country. Everyone lives to gether and works together. Don't like it? Get a job and get off the dole. Australia has no welfare. Its called the dole. If you are on the dole, you work for the government. But you do not sit around getting paid to have babies. Treatment my ass. Throw them on the street and put their kids in the system. We are already paying for them anyway. Our lack of assigning and accepting responsibility is bringing this county to its knees. We have "professional" poor people who pass this skill from generation to generation with no end in sight. Feed the poor. STARVE the lazy. Drug test them ALL.

You're wrong, my friend. You are so, so ssoooooooo wrong. Terribly wrong. Sadly wrong. I mean, flunked eighth grade civics wrong.

You are free in this country from the moment you emerge from the womb. You only forfeit your freedom when you commit a crime. And anybody who knows anything about the what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" under this countries insane war on drugs knows how quickly this policy will be abused by the well-meaning halfwits in our government.

Aside from your boneheaded idea to reconstitute the re-education camps that Mao and Stalin and Ho Chi Minh and Castro loved so much, have you ever considered that the price this country pays for a more vibrant economy than Europe is the ability of business to lay off employees at will? This is not cruelty. This is providing business with an ability to stay in business. On the other hand that means that a high percentage of hard-working, honest Americans will lose their jobs over their lifetimes for reasons beyond their control. That means they will go on unemployment, which has become a necessity in an economy that prides itself on the principle of creative destruction. That makes unemployment benefits as a legitimate function of government, especially since the old corrupt system was streamlined rather successfully a full ten years ago.

The vast majority of people on welfare stay on it for a matter of months, not years. So basically, what you're suggesting is that a recently out-of-work autoworker in Detroit will be forced to endure the further indignity of pissing in a specimen cup so he can feed his family until he finds another living. Do I understand you correctly?

Now, since you evidently were asleep in civics class, let me whip out an excerpt from the Bill Of Rights, namely Amendment IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

A urine test to collect unemployment (Which, by the way, is ostensibly paid for by the Unemployment Insurance deduction on the payroll check. It is essentially the same as buying life insurance or auto insurance or home insurance, so it is not on your dime, thanks) constitutes a search without evidence of wrongdoing. It is a glorified fishing expedition. Therefore it is absolutely wrong, and an insult to the workng people of this country.

Fortunately, I've never lost a job. I've never spent a nanosecond on welfare. But in the volatile business I'm in, I've known friends who have. They all hated it, but they desperately needed the money from a system which they paid into.

So really, what you're talking about it spitting on Constitution in order to smoke out the very small percentage of welfare recipients who are actually taking advantage of the system. The rest are decent folk like you and me who have met with difficult times--And you want to debase them for it.

You have a very odd definition of what's like to be a Christian and an American, my friend.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Freedom is earned. If you are on my dime, then you do as I say. Don't like it, get off my dime.

What the hell is wrong with that. SS, disability, those are diferent. Most SS and diabled folks are ALREADY on some sort of drug.

Are any of you disabled? It is not the life of Riley.

I really feel the government shoudl start building some of the old communes out in the country. Everyone lives to gether and works together. Don't like it? Get a job and get off the dole. Australia has no welfare. Its called the dole. If you are on the dole, you work for the government. But you do not sit around getting paid to have babies. Treatment my ass. Throw them on the street and put their kids in the system. We are already paying for them anyway. Our lack of assigning and accepting responsibility is bringing this county to its knees. We have "professional" poor people who pass this skill from generation to generation with no end in sight. Feed the poor. STARVE the lazy. Drug test them ALL.

You're wrong, my friend. You are so, so ssoooooooo wrong. Terribly wrong. Sadly wrong. I mean, flunked eighth grade civics wrong.

You are free in this country from the moment you emerge from the womb. You only forfeit your freedom when you commit a crime. And anybody who knows anything about the what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" under this countries insane war on drugs knows how quickly this policy will be abused by the well-meaning halfwits in our government.

Aside from your boneheaded idea to reconstitute the re-education camps that Mao and Stalin and Ho Chi Minh and Castro loved so much, have you ever considered that the price this country pays for a more vibrant economy than Europe is the ability of business to lay off employees at will? This is not cruelty. This is providing business with an ability to stay in business. On the other hand that means that a high percentage of hard-working, honest Americans will lose their jobs over their lifetimes for reasons beyond their control. That means they will go on unemployment, which has become a necessity in an economy that prides itself on the principle of creative destruction. That makes unemployment benefits as a legitimate function of government, especially since the old corrupt system was streamlined rather successfully a full ten years ago.

The vast majority of people on welfare stay on it for a matter of months, not years. So basically, what you're suggesting is that a recently out-of-work autoworker in Detroit will be forced to endure the further indignity of pissing in a specimen cup so he can feed his family until he finds another living. Do I understand you correctly?

Now, since you evidently were asleep in civics class, let me whip out an excerpt from the Bill Of Rights, namely Amendment IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

A urine test to collect unemployment (Which, by the way, is ostensibly paid for by the Unemployment Insurance deduction on the payroll check. It is essentially the same as buying life insurance or auto insurance or home insurance, so it is not on your dime, thanks) constitutes a search without evidence of wrongdoing. It is a glorified fishing expedition. Therefore it is absolutely wrong, and an insult to the workng people of this country.

Fortunately, I've never lost a job. I've never spent a nanosecond on welfare. But in the volatile business I'm in, I've known friends who have. They all hated it, but they desperately needed the money from a system which they paid into.

So really, what you're talking about it spitting on Constitution in order to smoke out the very small percentage of welfare recipients who are actually taking advantage of the system. The rest are decent folk like you and me who have met with difficult times--And you want to debase them for it.

You have a very odd definition of what's like to be a Christian and an American, my friend.

Don't pay any attention to CCTAU, he's just one of those few selfish individuals who was born in a barn. You know, the hillbilly type that shoots cats in the backyard and claims to be a Christian while spitting on the creation. Here is a letter to the Bush written by one of his types who saw the light and err of their ways.

Open Letter To War Criminal George Bush

[CCTAU 3,335]

The vast majority of people on welfare stay on it for a matter of months, not years. So basically, what you're suggesting is that a recently out-of-work autoworker in Detroit will be forced to endure the further indignity of pissing in a specimen cup so he can feed his family until he finds another living. Do I understand you correctly?

Now, since you evidently were asleep in civics class, let me whip out an excerpt from the Bill Of Rights, namely Amendment IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

A urine test to collect unemployment (Which, by the way, is ostensibly paid for by the Unemployment Insurance deduction on the payroll check. It is essentially the same as buying life insurance or auto insurance or home insurance, so it is not on your dime, thanks) constitutes a search without evidence of wrongdoing. It is a glorified fishing expedition. Therefore it is absolutely wrong, and an insult to the workng people of this country.

Nice job of renaming the issue so that it works on your favor. True librul tactics. Welfare has nothing to do with unemployment in this atricle. Love th e way you get all self-righteous. There are enough repeat/permanent offenders of the welfare sstem that it would make a huge difference if they were not in the system any longer. Freedom in the sense that I speak of is the freedom that comes from paying your own way. That is earned. Libruls took that part out of civics. If you are not earning your own money, then you are not free to do whatever you want with that which is not yours. Using my tax money to fund your habits and housing criminals is not acceptable. Administering a test to make sure of this is the right of the people providing that money. Don't like it, don't take the money. If your company told you to take a drug test, you would have no choice. (other than quit) What's the difference in this case? None. Except libruls want to give away the house to just anyone. Basic responsibilty states that you do not allow this. But we see that libruls would always rather protect the criminals and thieves than the hard-working man.

And BF. Cats are not even the other white meat anymore.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

The vast majority of people on welfare stay on it for a matter of months, not years. So basically, what you're suggesting is that a recently out-of-work autoworker in Detroit will be forced to endure the further indignity of pissing in a specimen cup so he can feed his family until he finds another living. Do I understand you correctly?

Now, since you evidently were asleep in civics class, let me whip out an excerpt from the Bill Of Rights, namely Amendment IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

A urine test to collect unemployment (Which, by the way, is ostensibly paid for by the Unemployment Insurance deduction on the payroll check. It is essentially the same as buying life insurance or auto insurance or home insurance, so it is not on your dime, thanks) constitutes a search without evidence of wrongdoing. It is a glorified fishing expedition. Therefore it is absolutely wrong, and an insult to the workng people of this country.

Nice job of renaming the issue so that it works on your favor. True librul tactics. Welfare has nothing to do with unemployment in this atricle. Love th e way you get all self-righteous. There are enough repeat/permanent offenders of the welfare sstem that it would make a huge difference if they were not in the system any longer. Freedom in the sense that I speak of is the freedom that comes from paying your own way. That is earned. Libruls took that part out of civics. If you are not earning your own money, then you are not free to do whatever you want with that which is not yours. Using my tax money to fund your habits and housing criminals is not acceptable. Administering a test to make sure of this is the right of the people providing that money. Don't like it, don't take the money. If your company told you to take a drug test, you would have no choice. (other than quit) What's the difference in this case? None. Except libruls want to give away the house to just anyone. Basic responsibilty states that you do not allow this. But we see that libruls would always rather protect the criminals and thieves than the hard-working man.

And BF. Cats are not even the other white meat anymore.

What, CCTAU. You still think we live in a Republic? Not since the New Deal and Democracy. Then came the big tax hungry government. Paying income taxes just goes to pay the interest on the nation debt. I'm hard working, on my Ford right now. I work too you know.

[LegalEagle 22]

Well, there's always two sides to every story.

People than can work ought to work. People taking taxpayer money should not be buying dope with it.

People on the down and out might deserve and appreciate temporary support to get them over the hump. However, I see no reason not to dole out the money as an interest free loan to be repayed in the future.

True Story:

I went into a Kroger's one day. (Probably to by a gross of condoms in case I ever decided to cheat on my wife.) Two big burly fellows in biker type leather were in front of me. They had about 4 cases of beer, a carton of cigarettes and assorted chips, dips, peanuts, etc. You guessed it - They paid for the food with food stamps then pulled out a wad of 20's to pay for the beer and cigs. Only in America!

Drug Testing - If any law is passed or case holds that drug testing of any American is legal without consent, (these have already been passed and held, btw) then there should be mandatory drug testing of all elected officials and judges - unannounced but at least 1 time every 30 days. If this were true there would be no drug testing of the "little people." Everyone is equal; some are more equal than others.

[channonc 466]

I agree that the welfare system needs to be looked at and changed.

However, I think there are 2 problems with the issue of drug testing welfare receipants:

1. the freedom issue which Otter already mentioned

2. Who is going to pay for the additional testing? taxpayers? who would administer the tests? What would the penalties be for failing to appear for your test? a court appearance would most likely be neccessary in order to not violate your right to due process. What about states that allow for medical marijiana? the Federal government right now does not recognize such a thing, but what if that's the reason I test positive?

I see this plan as being one more thing to throw money and manpower at, that will have loopholes, and just inconveinence those who are not abusing the system. The ones that don't show up for their tests will just clog the court system with more misdemenor cases that do nothing but waste everyone's time.

I would however, consider this in conjunction with a new comprehensive drug plan, one that would cut our much of the money we waste on the "War on Drugs."

[Bottomfeeder 244]

The tests are for metabolized toxins. The hair test for judges and governments officials and employees (to include military) would be sufficient if given every one or two years and into retirement. If positive results occuer after retirement, discontinue federal pension benefits. Mental evaluations for government employees and officals should be conducted bi-monthy.

[CCTAU 3,335]

Test them all. Let the offenders starve. Compassion was giving them a hand to begin with. Stupidity is to continue to do it so they can buy drugs just for their vote.........