This is a point-counterpoint article presented by Brian K. White of GlossyNews.com and Dean Chambers of UnSkewedPolls.com. Should we make welfare drug-free? How do we do it? What are the costs on both sides of the equation? These are just some of the issues we will debate.
Brian K. White — GlossyNews.com
That does sound good, doesn’t it? It’s easy to say that everyone on public assistance should be looking for work, honest, ethical, and drug-free… but we run into some problems. There is no drug-test I know of that excludes for Medical Marijuana. That’s a real thing. There is no drug test that differentiates between heroine and a poppy seed muffin. So we’re going to get some false positives.
In Florida, after the welfare drug test requirement was issued, there was a second bill proposed that would drug test all members of the state house assembly, and it was resoundingly rejected. If we’re going to test one group of people getting government money, I say we have to test all groups of people getting government money, all the way up to the president. The whole testing regime is a joke, and it’s not meant to actually weed out anything serious. In Florida alone, it cost more to test than it saved in unpaid benefits.
Dean Chambers — UnSkewedPolls.com
To cite the few problems presented by drug testing or the hypocrisy of politicians unwilling to subject themselves to the testing doesn’t in any way prove that welfare recipients shouldn’t be tested. No one can honestly argue that children on welfare should be allowed to be brought up in a household where alcohol and illegal drug consumption takes place regularly. Clearly politicians who are also paid by the public should be tested as well.
Heroine is not the drug most likely to be abused but clearly a healthy person who tested positive falsely from being poppyseed in muffins can clearly be distinguished (needle marks upon inspection by a doctor) from a regular heroine user. The so-called medical marijuana issue is a ruse to legalize marijuana and will soon have created a whole new general of pot addicts. Marijuana is not medicine and this scam shouldn’t be used as an excuse to let welfare recipients get high at public expense.
Brian K. White — GlossyNews.com
So we agree that legislators should be held to the same high standards as those they govern over. Once we can test them (the cost would be low, there aren’t that many of them,) you’ll have my blessing to test the public aid recipients. The law in question, however, is not designed to look out of the best interest of the children, but rather to punish the parents and trim the government budget.
If we really care about the children, we need to have mandatory drug testing followed by mandatory drug treatment. Perhaps even think about a three-strikes rule, but even that would still punish the children more than the parents. If we really care about society we have to think of drug addiction not as a criminal problem, but as a public health problem, and address it accordingly.
Dean Chambers — UnSkewedPolls.com
I”m glad to see that my argument has won here. Of course the drug testing should be followed by a requirement, that those on public assistance who fail the drug test, should be given a choice between losing public assistance, or continuing to receive the benefits funded by taxpayers while enrolling in drug treatment.
And yes this is treating as a health problem and not a criminal one. Those who choose not to take the advice of their social worker and enroll in drug treatment would simply lose benefits, not go to jail. Once having lost their benefits, they would later be at risk for being arrested by the police if they are caught in that way.