Drug tests for welfare recipients?

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2008
Drug tests for welfare recipients?
37
Thu, 03-26-2009 - 2:47pm

Do we give up our privacy when on the dole? Should welfare moms who have a drug problem be identified? What are the ramifications of random drug testing of the poor or unemployed?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/STATES_WELFARE_WITH_STRINGS?SITE=WBBMAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

Want government assistance? Just say no to drugs.

Lawmakers in at least eight states want recipients of food stamps, unemployment benefits or welfare to submit to random drug testing.

The effort comes as more Americans turn to these safety nets to ride out the recession. Poverty and civil liberties advocates fear the strategy could backfire, discouraging some people from seeking financial aid and making already desperate situations worse.

Those in favor of the drug tests say they are motivated out of a concern for their constituents' health and ability to put themselves on more solid financial footing once the economy rebounds. But proponents concede they also want to send a message: you don't get something for nothing.

"Nobody's being forced into these assistance programs," said Craig Blair, a Republican in the West Virginia Legislature who has created a Web site - notwithmytaxdollars.com - that bears a bobble-headed likeness of himself advocating this position. "If so many jobs require random drug tests these days, why not these benefits?"

Blair is proposing the most comprehensive measure in the country, as it would apply to anyone applying for food stamps, unemployment compensation or the federal programs usually known as "welfare": Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Women, Infants and Children.

Lawmakers in other states are offering similar, but more modest proposals.

On Wednesday, the Kansas House of Representatives approved a measure mandating drug testing for the 14,000 or so people getting cash assistance from the state, which now goes before the state senate. In February, the Oklahoma Senate unanimously passed a measure that would require drug testing as a condition of receiving TANF benefits, and similar bills have been introduced in Missouri and Hawaii. A Florida senator has proposed a bill linking unemployment compensation to drug testing, and a member of Minnesota's House of Representatives has a bill requiring drug tests of people who get public assistance under a state program there.

A January attempt in the Arizona Senate to establish such a law failed.

In the past, such efforts have been stymied by legal and cost concerns, said Christine Nelson, a program manager with the National Conference of State Legislatures. But states' bigger fiscal crises, and the surging demand for public assistance, could change that.

"It's an example of where you could cut costs at the expense of a segment of society that's least able to defend themselves," said Frank Crabtree, executive director of the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Drug testing is not the only restriction envisioned for people receiving public assistance: a bill in the Tennessee Legislature would cap lottery winnings for recipients at $600.

There seems to be no coordinated move around the country to push these bills, and similar proposals have arisen periodically since federal welfare reform in the 1990s. But the appearance of a cluster of such proposals in the midst of the recession shows lawmakers are newly engaged about who is getting public assistance.

Particularly troubling to some policy analysts is the drive to drug test people collecting unemployment insurance, whose numbers nationwide now exceed 5.4 million, the highest total on records dating back to 1967.

"It doesn't seem like the kind of thing to bring up during a recession," said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "People who are unemployed, who have lost their job, that's a sympathetic group. Americans are tuned into that, because they're worried they'll be next."

Indeed, these proposals are coming at a time when more Americans find themselves in need of public assistance.

Although the number of TANF recipients has stayed relatively stable at 3.8 million in the last year, claims for unemployment benefits and food stamps have soared.

In December, more than 31.7 million Americans were receiving food stamp benefits, compared with 27.5 million the year before.

The link between public assistance and drug testing stems from the Congressional overhaul of welfare in the 1990s, which allowed states to implement drug testing as a condition of receiving help.

But a federal court struck down a Michigan law that would have allowed for "random, suspicionless" testing, saying it violated the 4th Amendment's protections against unreasonable search and seizure, said Liz Schott, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

At least six states - Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Virginia - tie eligibility for some public assistance to drug testing for convicted felons or parolees, according to the NCSL.

Nelson said programs that screen welfare applicants by assigning them to case workers for interviews have shown some success without the need for drug tests. These alternative measures offer treatment, but can also threaten future benefits if drug problems persist, she said.

They also cost less than the $400 or so needed for tests that can catch a sufficient range of illegal drugs, and rule out false positive results with a follow-up test, she said.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-10-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 1:08am
I hear you, but perhaps this belongs in a different thread? This was about drug testing.
Hornycomments.com for myspace adult comments
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2009
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 1:09am

A couple of things caught my eye, and I was wondering...


Drug testing is not the only restriction envisioned for people receiving public assistance: a bill in the Tennessee Legislature would cap lottery winnings for recipients at $600.


I haven't bought a scratch-off ticket in

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-10-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 1:25am
There is a difference between "broke" and "poor". The poor have no resources to build on. Yet, many begrudge them any pleasure of living!! I found through my experience that many feel so beat down that building themselves up is difficult. Some do not have the skills to find gainful employment. Getting off a addiction is not easy but there are counter drugs for hard drug users. Then if they are lucky they might find an employer that will help.
I see many good jobs are far away no car no way of getting to or getting home!! So they work at low paying, temp or day labor with little hope. It costs money and time to treat hard drug cases. During that time they need a place to stay and food and clothes,and the other things we take for granted.
The system we have now is very bad with "foster homes" etc. If the parents need treatment and help a boarding school with structure and good education is far preferable!!
One point if no money how does one buy laundry soap, shaving creme,bath soap,toilet paper??
Drug testing first is a very bad idea!!
Hornycomments.com for myspace adult comments
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 2:17pm

OK. Well maybe they shouldn't deny them the money. But with the condition that they go get some sort of counseling program scheduled for them and finish the program.

self defense products
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2007
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 2:52pm

Let's face it the whole program needs to be overhauled.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 3:11pm

I agree. Hopefully with a new administration in the White House and some common sense, these things will get better.

self defense products
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-23-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 8:07pm

I think that some people on welfare do use drugs and the authorities should know if they do.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-23-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 8:20pm

That may be true, but an addictive person isn't always going to straighten out.


Addiction in today's society is ramptant we have sex, food, gambling, drug, etc, addictions.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-23-2008
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 8:23pm
It's quite obvious that she isn't capable of bringing up her children and they should be put into foster care until she proves she is off crack.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-30-2002
Sat, 03-28-2009 - 8:30pm

So does someones medical privacy go out the window with welfare? If they are prescribed medicinal marijuana, which is illegal federally, but may be legal in their state, does that mean they should be ineligible for Federal benefits but still eligible for state benefits? Should it matter if they procure their medicinal marijuana through a state lisenced dispensary, grow their own or get it from a street dealer? What if they have a legitimate prescription for..say...methadone or vicodin? How do we know they are staying within the limits of their prescription or when they are over using and procuring additional "legitimate" meds on the street with benefit money (think Rush Limbaugh)? What is the follow up procedure? Do we know someone is legititmately prescribed a medication at one point and have someone that follows their medical condition to see if their drug use continues to be "legititmate" or not (short term vs. long term perscription drug use)?


This really seems like a lot more job security, for a lot more social workers ,and a lot more opportunity for waste in a system already full of waste. I have