This facebook group caught my eye as friends on both sides of the aisle were joining it, so I joined it as well to see some point of views on the topic. EDIT: The linked page has since been taken down, and this one is in it’s place: Click Here
It sounds like a good idea doesn’t it? On the surface, yeah, it could sound like a good idea. But when I thought about it more, it doesn’t seem like that good of an idea after all. Think of all of the checks and balances that would need to be put into place to try and save a little money.
One of the biggest arguments in the group is, “I needed to pass a drug test to get my job, why can’t they get tested for getting on welfare?” Cost would be the simple reason. When an employer hires someone and puts them through a drug test, they pay for that cost of the hospital doing that service for them. If a system would be put in place for drug testing welfare recipients, the government would have to pick up the tab on millions of tests to be done, which would in turn increase the costs of the welfare system as a whole.
You are probably thinking, why wouldn’t it decrease the costs? This could be debated, but my belief is that there are more non-drug using people that need the welfare system when they fall on bad times than there are people on drugs that fall onto the system. In the end, we would be paying more for testing, than the people that are denied would save in spending.
Now, what would happen to those denied welfare due to them using drugs? How would they make a living? They would most likely go to a life of crime, drug dealing, prostitution, etc. to try and make ends meet. This would also cost our tax payers more money to cover the costs of these citizens. We are not just covering their welfare now, but we are covering the costs of them being processed through the courts and then put into the prison system.
What about legal drug abuse? There are some people that use the system and abuse the money that they get on legal drugs such as nicotine and alcohol instead of feeding their kids. How would this idea govern that?
What about corporate welfare? How would this idea be extended to that area?
All in all, this will never be more than just an idea the more you think about it, and will never make it through any congress or senate.
Unfortunately, the group on Facebook supporting this has devolved from what sounded to be a good idea on the surface to something that is bringing out the hate and racism in droves.
The current system is being abused, yes… but that is the nature of the beast. If there is a system, someone out there will abuse it. This system just happens to carry a stereotype with it where people are looked down on as a result of their misfortune. It all comes down to how you enforce regulations on how to make sure that the people that need it, receive it.
There are ways to deal with people who are abusing the system, turn them in. http://www.ucowf.org/
Of course there are alternative groups out there we well, such as this one.
Stand for what you believe in, look into the issues and don’t blindly follow them.
SaumZ
Great thoughts on the subject. It’s not as cut and dry of an issue as people think. And just because almost 1 million people have joined a fan page and want to do this does not make it a good idea.
Stephanie Mewhirter
26 Jan 10 at 3:25 pm
i don’t necessarily think this is a good idea, but your argument that testing would cost more than the system would save by disqualifying habitual drug users is ridiculous.
i have lived in low-income neighborhoods and done volunteer work with low and moderate income people, and without question the majority of adults receiving welfare are habitual drug users of one sort or another. maybe it’s not 90%, but it’s easily 60%.
to me, the difficult question comes in how the children of such a person would be treated. many welfare recipients have 3 or more children, and these children have a rough life as it is. should they go without food because their mother habitually smokes pot, or crack, or whatever. not so much.
if there were an easy answer here, the government would have stumbled across it by now. it’s truly a shame that millions and millions abuse the welfare system and reproduce simply to increase their eligibility for benefits. this sort of reverse darwinism harms our culture and society, and those that make responsible choices about reproduction may be forced to defer starting a family in part because of the taxes withheld to pay for these programs.
what can you do?
david
26 Jan 10 at 4:35 pm
I think a lot of the folks there know the err of their thoughts but don’t want to admit it when faced with it. Bunch of classist racist blowhards.
Bellesouth
27 Jan 10 at 12:41 am
thank you for this informative blog.
Patricia Smith
27 Jan 10 at 7:32 am
This is my counter group to this nonsense. Join if you’re on facebook.
Kristina Moody
27 Jan 10 at 12:14 pm
@David
I would like to hear your perspective on the testing methods. Would it be tested once upon entering the program? Would it be a test every time someone gets a check? Would it be a hair test or urine test?
You know a lot of drugs out there do not last in your body more than a week with a urine test.* The only one that lasts up to a month is Marijuana, due to it staying in the fatty cells in your body.
That would mean for effective results, a hair test would have to be done. Hair tests do cost far more than urine tests as well.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_test
SaumZ
28 Jan 10 at 12:17 pm
I am a 100% supporter of drug testing for welfare. Not to gear toward one race, sex, age, or financial history. But to eliminate or help control the amount of funding that is going towards habitual drug users. If they were denied benfits for not passing their random drug test then that money will cover the cost of the testing. And as for their children. In a drug filled home they are more than likely not getting the care they need so it may be beneficial to end up in a foster home.
Hilary
28 Jan 10 at 12:20 pm
Guys, welfare is not parole. Parole is not welfare. You cannot take a person’s 14th amendment rights away just because they are impoverished. You may not like it, but that’s fact.
This gets down to the matter of conservatives wanting to control the behavior of those they deem “beneath them”, and nothing else.
You want to expose welfare abuse, why dig into corporate welfare recipients? There are far more injustices there than you’ll find in low-income neighborhoods.
This is ignorance, and people shouldn’t stand for it.
Kelli
28 Jan 10 at 4:17 pm
Ammendment rights? Hrmm.. that may hold some wait if we as a country were a sovereign nation. But that just simply isn’t the case anymore. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94331
Obama has pissed on our constitution.
Jack Levitt
29 Jan 10 at 9:44 am
Jack Levitt, I’m not even going to bother responding to such an imbecilic statement if you can’t even be bothered to learn to spell “amendment” or “WEIGHT”. Or learn the definition of “sovereign”. Or read anything that isn’t completely funded by right-wing interest. Show me the same article written by an actual journalist and then maybe we can talk. Or better yet, take a political science course and learn to think for yourself about these topics.
Your response is ridiculous and untrue. And quoting “news sources” that are simply internet blogs written by conspiracy theorists is what holds no “WEIGHT”.
Go back to English class, please.
Kelli
29 Jan 10 at 12:00 pm
Food for thought , Ms. Arrogant. This is the internet. Nobody cares about you grammar Nazi types. Heil Spell-check! 3rd Webster! and all that non-sense. Oh, and you responded to that statement, so you just contradicted yourself. Stop pretending you’re better than everyone else , because guess what, you’re not.
Jack Levitt
29 Jan 10 at 3:03 pm
Well now.. look what we have here….
1) Not caring about education? check
2) Bashing Obama for no real reason? check
3) Linking to the doldrums of the right wing blogosphere? check
Looks like we have ourselves a grade A teabagger. Let me guess… you’re from the bible belt?
Jack Black
29 Jan 10 at 5:57 pm
Ok people….
You can argue with a little more civility than this.
Mr. Levitt, I do have to agree with Kelli that proper grammar only makes you seem more credible, intelligent, and it makes people give your argument that much more respect.
I know I am not the best at spelling and grammar, but at least I make an effort.
SaumZ
29 Jan 10 at 6:20 pm
The point I was trying to make, Mr. Levitt, is that arguing with a brick wall (or somebody with the debate skills of one) is futile.
And your use of the term “nazi” when attacking me for pointing out your inability to follow simple writing rules only goes to point out just how blind to the nuances of the human condition you must be. Any work I do to argue my point will likely be lost on you. So I’m not bothering further.
Kelli
3 Feb 10 at 10:47 am
Number One, there are more white people on wellfare than blacks and hispanics combined, so lets not make this a racial debate.
With atleast 50% of wellfare recipients on drugs, we would knock atleast 30% of those off of wellfare with the first test. That in itself would cover the expense of testing. Over the next couple of weeks, you would see about 10-15% knocked off of wellfare.
Now we have reduced nearly 45% of our wellfare cost just over a few weeks, that is HUGE!
As for those who tested positive, Get help, clean up, grow up and play your part in a productive society.
Chris
25 Mar 10 at 10:51 pm
@Chris – Any proof to support your claims? You are obviously pulling your stats from somewhere.
Herbie Hancock
26 Mar 10 at 7:51 am
I’ve no problem with social systems or social help programs funded by taxpayer money, except that you eventually run out of everybody’s money. People need help at one point or another in their lives, and sometimes people can’t make it on their own steam due to various circumstances. If you needed help wouldn’t you want help also?
Adrian
26 Mar 10 at 9:32 am
Everybody in the country is soooo uptight and angry
these days I think everybody should just go out
and get stoned and forget about shit for awhile.
If that doesn’t work beat the shit out of everyone around you who doesn’t “share” in your opinions
One way or another you’ll feel soooo much better about things ahhhh!!!
Kneckbone
18 Apr 11 at 9:06 pm
your article is very good
reynaldokarl
24 Jun 12 at 10:21 am