Scott signs law requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

[redrumloa]

Thousands of Florida's poorest people will have to take a drug test if they want to qualify for welfare assistance, under a law signed by Gov. Rick Scott Monday.

The idea, plugged by Scott and the GOP-dominated Legislature, is that drug tests will root out welfare recipients who are using public dollars to buy drugs. But Democrats and advocates for the poor say the requirement could violate individuals’ constitutional rights to privacy, and the American Civil Liberties Union is likely to challenge the law in court.

Scott signs law requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Scott signs law to funnel your tax dollars into his own pocket. Suckers celebrate.

 

[cybereye]

Scott signs law to funnel your tax dollars into his own pocket. Suckers celebrate.

Maybe, but it still better then my tax dollar go to a drug abuse spend more money on drugs that will never get off the welfare. Hopefully drugs users go to California and abuse California’s welfare money. California love to support drugs users and drugs users love free money to support their habits.

 

[the_leander]

Expect a bump in the number of drug related crimes off of the back of this.

I read the article and it doesn't seem to mention any offer of help for those wanting off of drugs.

Hopefully drugs users go to California and abuse California’s welfare money.

Sure, rather than solve the issue, let's just move it to somewhere you're not! What a marvellous idea...

California love to support drugs users and drugs users love free money to support their habits. [/COLOR]

Care to back up this assertion or are you just showing off your inner nimby?

 

[cybereye]

I read the article and it doesn't seem to mention any offer of help for those wanting off of drugs.

It not about helping drugs users. It is about saving tax dollars. There are other Florida organizations drug addiction help out there. You did not read whole message. Welfare drug users can comeback after 6 month from fail the first time to try to come clean. A drug users that don’t want to try to come clean might as well stop wasted my tax dollar.

Sure, rather than solve the issue, let's just move it to somewhere you're not! What a marvellous idea...

If a welfare user is not willing to try to help themself then that user just a freeloader. That freeloader is what I don't care. I would kick them out of my house if they live in my home. the_leander is welcome to take the load off my hands.

Care to back up this assertion or are you just showing off your inner nimby?

I have nothing to backup. It just excite me that my ego got in the way.

 

[the_leander]

It not about helping drugs users. It is about saving tax dollars. There are other Florida organizations drug addiction help out there. You did not read whole message. Welfare drug users can comeback after 6 month from fail the first time to try to come clean. A drug users that don’t want to try to come clean might as well stop wasted my tax dollar.

A drug user will always be wasting your tax dollars in one way or another - in terms of the costs for policing, in terms of medical treatments, not just for themselves but those they hurt etc etc.

All you've done is move the costs to things you haven't had pointed out to you yet.

Perhaps instead of cheering on this kind of crap, you might consider going after the users themselves and getting them off the poison and offering them something to strive for beyond their next fix.

If a welfare user is not willing to try to help themself then that user just a freeloader. That freeloader is what I don't care. I would kick them out of my house if they live in my home. the_leander is welcome to take the load off my hands.

Once again, moving the problem isn't solving it. It just means other people like yourself end up carrying the can, demanding that the problem be moved, possibly back from whence it came.

I have nothing to backup. It just excite me that my ego got in the way.

Heh. Fair enough

 

[redrumloa]

Perhaps instead of cheering on this kind of crap, you might consider going after the users themselves and getting them off the poison and offering them something to strive for beyond their next fix.

A user is not going to quit simply because you throw excessive resources at it. This is not crap either. If you are an enabler as a person or as the government, you are not much better than the drug dealer. People have to stop being enablers and allow the druggie to hit rock bottom. If the person does not want to quit, he/she will never quit.

I would never take an active crackhead into my house because they would freeload, be a real threat to the safety of my family and would be enabling such destructive behavior. Why would I want my hard earned tax dollars to do the very thing I would not do in my own household?
Enablers Delay Recovery of Drug Addicts

An enabler is someone who offers support or resources to an addict. It could be something as simple as providing the addict with housing or transportation because he is spending all his money on drugs. Or, maybe the addict is prostituting herself or stealing in return for drugs, and the enabler supplies financial support because he doesn’t want to see his loved one end up in jail. Whatever the case may be, these behaviors are very dangerous to the health of the addict.
Enablers aren’t always family members. They can be neighbors, friends, co-workers, or even teachers. If the enabler truly understood the harm they were inflicting, they wouldn’t continue to provide support. They are usually people that truly care for the person suffering with addiction. Most have good intentions and want to help—or at minimum, don’t want to cause a scene.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

This is not really about helping addicts or saving money - well, it might be in the mind of some short sighted moralist but it doesn't solve either problem in the real world.

What it will do is save the taxpayers on the welfare side of the equation. A false positive is as good as a real positive. Stops payment for 1 year. Someone who can't scrounge up the $10 (which could be 3 days food instead) also saves the state 1 yr of welfare.

On the other hand, an addict will likely support their habit by less than legit means and and if not they will happily borrow from his dealer at which point the dealer will leverage the debt and FORCE the addict to get money by less than legit means (this method creates a lot of prostitutes - and other trouble).

So what will all the addicts do? Get better? Hmm. With what treatment? Wait - doesn't the governor (I mean, the governor's wife) own a bunch of clinics?

But more than that, what about GEO Group? Doesn't Scott want to sell three Florida mental health facilities to GEO Care? GEO Group gave Scott $3million for his inaugural and spent half a million on Florida Republican candidates, so it would only be fair for the governor to return the favour using tax payer assets. So now the junkie welfare recipients will be able to go to GEO run hospitals to get treated (perhaps even on the public purse because I don't think they'll have the best insurance).

But wait... surely most of the junkies will just end up in prison which costs the state closer to $100 a day. That's a lot more than paying welfare costs. Now, didn't GEO Group used to be known as something else? Oh, yeah, they were once called Wackenhut. They run prisons for profit!

Good god, this is a match made in heaven, no? Scott is so smart that he could end up on the board of GEO Group once he leaves office and he could make a few million a year for 4 hours work - and all it will cost him is other people's money!!!

 

[redrumloa]

@fluffy
I know you said you used to travel a lot and saw a lot of different areas. Have you ever been inside a welfare office in a populated area in the USA? How about the small convenience stores in unsavory neighborhoods? Have you met recovering addicts?

 

[the_leander]

A user is not going to quit simply because you throw excessive resources at it.

Really? I'd have never have guessed!You seem to forget I lived on the streets once. Not for long granted, but it was enough to see plenty thankyouverymuch. Coupled with living for years in one of the most deprived parts of my home town, with a crack den next door and a brothel two doors down, I've a fair amount of first hand experience when it comes to this.

This is not crap either.

It absolutely is crap. If you think for one second this is going to save you a single dime on your taxes then I suggest you take a drugs test yourself.

If you are an enabler as a person or as the government, you are not much better than the drug dealer. People have to stop being enablers and allow the druggie to hit rock bottom. If the person does not want to quit, he/she will never quit.

And pushing them further into illegit means of funding their habit is what exactly? Like I said, all this will do is cause a bump in your states crime statistics.

I would never take an active crackhead into my house because they would freeload, be a real threat to the safety of my family and would be enabling such destructive behavior. Why would I want my hard earned tax dollars to do the very thing I would not do in my own household?

Strawman.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

@fluffy
Have you ever been inside a welfare office in a populated area in the USA?

Not in the US, no. But in Vancouver.

How about the small convenience stores in unsavory neighborhoods?

Not in the US, but in Vancouver.

Have you met recovering addicts?

Yes. And recovered, and not recovering and the occasional one that ended up dead.

Back when I was younger I lived much closer the the Down Town East Side (DTES) which is Canada's Poorest Postal Code and also the original "Skid Row" (though Seattle also claim that they had the first one).

A lot of the people down there are damaged. Many of them are mentally ill, and since we closed the institutions a couple of decades ago it got worse. Also, since the police station is down there, there is an unfortunate effect that people arrested in other places end up getting let out there. It's quite crazy down there but you can get a good breakfast for next to nothing.

We are also pretty much the last point west. People head out west when they aren't making it at home, looking for the sidewalks paved with gold or just a winter that is less likely to kill you when you sleep outdoors. Some places even bought bus tickets for their destitute just to get them out of town - and they send them to Vancouver.

There are some pretty F'ed up people in there but there are lots of good people too.

I've also found people living in bushes in other parts of town and Stanley Park has quite a large hidden population which I found out while on a search party for a friend who, unfortunately, killed himself in the park.

Most of the troubled users I've known were injection users but most of the dealers I've met are pot. Back when I was living closer to that hood it was mostly the Hell's Angels that were running the drugs and the women (including most of the strippers). The Italians were staying out of those things and mostly run games and guns.

Lots of those people are on welfare but the welfare tends to go to the landlords. There isn't anything left over for drugs, and if they don't live in the "hotels" down there then they squat because there are abandoned buildings and if they don't squat then they sleep in the street.

But I've known a lot more people who have had to use welfare who were just people out of luck. Some collected for years but don't now.

 

[redrumloa]

@Fluffy
Thank you for the lengthy reply. I didn't know Vancouver specifically had such a problem.

For the first ~2 years of my wife and I started our family, we received minimal public assistance. We would get food stamps and WIC (government cheese). I absolutely hated every moment of it. I was working a job barely above minimum wage and was the only household income. I started off taking any overtime available and was working 50-60 hour weeks. They would complain that I made too much and threaten to cut off assistance. Instead of bowing to laziness, I pushed harder and started working 80-100 hours a week which disqualified me for any assistance. Eventually I landed a better job but I worked 80-100 hour weeks for about 7 years. First with one job and overtime and then with 2 full time jobs, which I did for over 4 years.

Why do I mention this? In the early days on occasion I stood in line in the welfare office. Our story is certainly not typical. The people you find in the welfare line typically do not want to better themselves. You find stereotypes like the black mother dropped off by the boyfriend driving the low rider with $10K in rims alone with marijuana smoke rolling out the windows. You see the woman with 7 kids from 7 different baby daddy's. You see the guy so high he soils himself while in line.

Maybe I read it wrong, but the_leander and you seem to think people have this opinon because they are unaware, possibly living in upper class secluded environments . Not only have I been there but drugs have taken a toll on many close to me. Only a few weeks ago we had to disown another friend due to fallout of extreme drug abuse. Cybereye knows who I am talking about and the situation was not good. We thought he mostly cleaned up his act, but in reality we were enablers for years. Addicts need to hit a personal rock bottom or they will never change. That is not a straw man, it is a fact. Any truly recovered addict will say this. Most addicts will fail, but enabling only makes things worse.

 

[the_leander]

Maybe I read it wrong, but the_leander and you seem to think people have this opinon because they are unaware, possibly living in upper class secluded environments .

Funnily enough, how you've responded to both of us comes off as making that same implication.

Addicts need to hit a personal rock bottom or they will never change.

There is a difference between being an "enabler" and slowing their rate of descent enough so that the impact with the bottom doesn't result in a crater with a pulpy mess at the bottom.

No, you're not going to save everyone. And yes there are plenty of people even over here that tick all the boxes on the stereotypes lists as far as welfare go too (we call them "chavs"). But the above plan, whilst it might have a certain amount of feel good factor to it will not fix anything. What it will do is simply move (and quite probably increase) the costs involved in dealing with the addicts as the ones who haven't hit their rock bottom inevitably turn to other means to keep themselves going (read: they'll turn to crime).

I'm sorry that you've had to cut someone in your life off due to drugs, I really am.

 

[cecilia]

It not about helping drugs users. It is about saving tax dollars.

yeah, because for some in America Money is way more valuable than people.

Not being a drug user I don't have much patience with it, but even I can see it's a MEDICAL/ social problem. not a legal one. What people need is education. I fully realize not everyone will be able to do that...but throwing people away like trash is hardly human.

and it's not Christian...... for those that like to call themselves that.

instead of building all those privatized prisons which are actually killing people........they need to build schools and half-way houses that addresses these issues rather than treat people as expendable.

 

[cybereye]

What an active thread. All of people that complain about not helping people seem to think that there is no helping. There are many Florida government and private organizations that help drug addiction. Welfare drug users can choose to go to any organizations if they want to. We are not force them to go to the organizations. It a drug users’ right to keep using drugs as long they don’t violated the laws. So what the problem here? Rick Scott did signs it into law because the government is paying the drug dealers to feed the drugs users. Why support the drug dealers that making the social worst problem.

yeah, because for some in America Money is way more valuable than people.

I agree with that statement. Drug dealers should get a real job or an education.

Not being a drug user I don't have much patience with it, but even I can see it's a MEDICAL/ social problem. not a legal one. What people need is education. I fully realize not everyone will be able to do that...but throwing people away like trash is hardly human.

and it's not Christian...... for those that like to call themselves that.

I don't like to treat people like trash either. I had help few people that are needed as redrumloa have said. I don't think it have anything to do with religion. There is a bible that says “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” There are people trying to help and may not realize that that they are enablers to support the drug users as “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day." The people think they are teaching how to fish and they are not teaching, but feeding. That time I had finally waked up and everything become so clear that I was supporting his habit, not with cash. He did not want my help. How can I teach a man to fish if he does not want to learn it. I don't see that as throwing people away like trash. He did not want my help. You can't force them to stop. I agree with education and that only work if they have the desire to do it. I can't force you to teach engineers. That is the same for drug users.

instead of building all those privatized prisons which are actually killing people........they need to build schools and half-way houses that addresses these issues rather than treat people as expendable.

Again, there are many Florida government and private organizations that help drug addiction. It only works if they have the desire to do it. You can't force it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

There is a bible that says “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

Just to be pedantic - there is no such thing in the bible. I know lots of people tend to attribute quotes they are familiar with or that they like to the bible, I guess because they assume it is the source of all wisdom, but this particular proverb is not in that book. It is usually held to be Chinese though the source is uncertain.

The bible version is that given 5 loaves and a couple of fish the son of god can feed 5000 people (Gospel of John) or if you go by Mark or Matthew then it's 7 loaves and a few small fish but it only feeds 4000 people. Quite a different lesson.

 

[Wayne]

I dont' know if they're talking about testing EVERY recipient, versus randoms like you get in a work environment.

Personally, I've zero problems with randomly drug testing welfare people. They're sucking on the public tit, and I'd rather have them homeless than pay for their drugs. That's just me though.

 

[Robert]

Will they also be testing for alcohol and tobacco?

 

[Robert]

Thousands of Florida's poorest people will have to take a drug test if they want to qualify for welfare assistance, under a law signed by Gov. Rick Scott Monday.

The idea, plugged by Scott and the GOP-dominated Legislature, is that drug tests will root out welfare recipients who are using public dollars to buy drugs. But Democrats and advocates for the poor say the requirement could violate individuals’ constitutional rights to privacy, and the American Civil Liberties Union is likely to challenge the law in court.

Scott signs law requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

OK Wayne, I've now scanned the whole article and couldn't find anything it explaining exactly which drugs are to be tested for and why.

All I see are repeated, generic references to "drugs" (are bad, mmmkay), which could mean anything from caffeine to asprin.

Given that you're so in favour of this, I assume you understand it how it will work well enough to enlighten me?

If the logic behind this is simply that people claiming welfare shouldn't be allowed to spend any of that money on enjoying themselves, then it's completely idiotic.

 

[Robert]

Not being a drug user......

I've shared a pint or two with you, Cecilia. Just because alcohol is legal doesn't mean it's not a drug.

Almost everyone on the planet is a drug user.