Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure

Originally posted by jrod
Good to see we have a forum full of anti-freedom loving Americans. This measure would have been fine if they tested all the CEOs and executives who got the massive bailouts. I foresee this bill costing tax payers more in the long run because tax payers have to reimburse the applicant for their drug test and there will be many lawsuits after the fact.

If you think drug testing a person is okay then you are against individual rights!

the golden rule dictates that he who has the gold gets to make the rules. if the taxpayer is subsidizing people getting assistance, the taxpayer has a right to insist that the recepient is not taking their hard-earned money and using it to get stoned (or whatever the kids are calling it these days).
speaking of 'rights'...if you're in jail, you forfeit rights. on school or airport property, you forfeit some rights. in the military ditto. so if you want to take taxpayer $...
if someone wants to get high on their own money I really don't much care.

Of course Solantic doesn't need the govt business, as it most likely would get a lot of pre-govt business with new state-mandated drug testing ...

Solantic charges $35 for drug tests. The main customers? People who want advance reassurance they will pass an upcoming drug test for work or parole, and worried parents who bring in wayward teens, Bowling said. Customers can have results sent confidentially to their homes, without involving their employer or insurer.

source

Those in business and govt who are ethically challenged will always find ways to gain advantage.

I have to agree with this, the children should not have to suffer because the parents/parent is a "Smack Tard".

Slippery slope for sure.

Why don't we give breathalyzers too.

What are the results if someone is caught using drugs?

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

What my state does is allows the person a chance to become clean and enroll them in a rehab program. I think it is only fair that they do that. And then people who normally wouldn't have access to rehab treatments can get them.
Cash assistance is for the children. You can't get cash assistance, or TANF, without having kids. To simply not give it to someone isn't fair for them. TANF is used to pay bills, buy food, etc.

show me a drug test that shows wether or not you have USED drugs to a 100% accuracy

as far as i know its fairly impossible with out a bone marrow sample..

I'm on the fence with this one.

One the one hand I do not fell it it right to dictate to folk what they shoudl do with their money, it is essentially thiers once we have given it to them.

HOWEVER!!!!

I work damn hard for my money, and I pay a lot in taxes. Why should I pay out tax money just for someone to go off and buy drugs with it? Not fair, if my money is paying for drugs.........

I don't know - it did say that the money could bo paid via a 3rd party, which sort of defeats the purpose if you ask me.

Corrupt governor Scott used to own the drug-test company until January when he gave it to his wife. Next thing ya know he's pushing for a law to drug-test welfare recipients - a test which his wife's company is qualified to perform. Guaranteed wealth for Mr. & Mrs. Scott, don'cha think?

Just think of all the appeals and recipients' demands for re-tests - more expense for the taxpayer, but it is guaranteed income for Scotty & spouse.

And then, after all this palaver, the positive-tested applicants WILL STILL RECEIVE THEIR FREE MONEY Aunty Doris will hand it over after she's been designated to receive it on their behalf.

So, the point of the tests is .... ?

The corrupt governor and his wife are the only people who will benefit from this law.

The state and it's taxpaying citizens lose out big time.

Really the only people who fail drug tests are serious addicts who need their coke, meth, or pain pills daily or the harmless honest cannabis smoker(who is at a disadvantage because of the long duration cannabis stays in ones system). I've been giving drug tests for employment reasons since I was 16 and those with half a brain that know they are going to fail simply get clean urine from someone else. This is exactly what will happen with this bill and those who collect welfare to fund their drug use.

Believe it or not, many drug users are intelligent enough to beat the system, especially the ones who found a way to get free money from the government to fuel their habit. In theory this a good idea, but in reality drug users know how to beat drug tests and will still find a way to get free money.

Also many homeless in Florida collect benefits, are they too expected to pay out of pocket for their drug tests?

Originally posted by doobydoll
Corrupt governor Scott used to own the drug-test company until January when he gave it to his wife. Next thing ya know he's pushing for a law to drug-test welfare recipients - a test which his wife's company is qualified to perform. Guaranteed wealth for Mr. & Mrs. Scott, don'cha think?

Just think of all the appeals and recipients' demands for re-tests - more expense for the taxpayer, but it is guaranteed income for Scotty & spouse.

And then, after all this palaver, the positive-tested applicants WILL STILL RECEIVE THEIR FREE MONEY

Aunty Doris will hand it over after she's been designated to receive it on their behalf.

So, the point of the tests is .... ?

The corrupt governor and his wife are the only people who will benefit from this law.

The state and it's taxpaying citizens lose out big time.

edit on 1-6-2011 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)

Stop spreading misinformation. This is not at ALL true. All family shares of Solantic were sold in mid April to a private investment firm located in New York.

reply to post by jrod


Why is that exactly? Do you not have drug tests at your employer? I do. What is the difference? I have to pass to work, they should have to pass to get things for free!!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by nixie_nox

 

"If Governor Scott wants to drug test recipients of TANF benefits, where does he draw the line? Are families receiving Medicaid, state emergency relief, or educational grants and loans next?"

Yes.

There is already Federal legislation making you ineligible for student loans and grants if you have any drug convictions. Yes, Gov. Scott is also planning to test all state employees.

The only things not affected are Social Security and Emergency relief, because Social Security benefits are earned through your own contributions, and emergency relief is administered by executive orders following a catastrophe, there is no need to drug test.

This law is one of the good ones.

Hooray for fascism! Bravo for for being a valuable tool! Folks who support draconian drug punishments are such valuable Tories against freedom. Yes there are laws forever barring anyone who has been caught with even paraphernalia from getting any help with an education, Bravo! and this helps society be a better place how?
And to all of you pee checking sheep out there it is pretty offensive you think pissing downhill will solve your angst. you don't want these "freeloaders" buying dope with your money but never seem to look overhead at the freeloaders that just fleeced us all and then got a trillion stinking dollars to pay bonuses for lavish coc aine and hooker parties, vacation homes, limos, you feel me?
Things were just fine when the boss just booted you for being loaded at work. But somewhere folks got sold that giving up their rights to drug testing was OK. Or more importantly they ignore the WOD is being waged on us all.
As I said most of you are one catastrophe from needing the meager safety net that exists and your numbers grow everyday. I know I was one. Self employed 20+ yrs paying 5-10000 a year in tax.A farm accident took my savings in medical bills, the failure of the repair took my career, and the loss of my insurance due to lack of income has taken all I worked my life for. I am now on SSD AND state aid ( food stamps, medical,no cash) and would be screwed without it.I struggled for 6 years with an open infection in my Achilles before I was poor enough to get any sort of help. With all of this if they asked for a pee test I would say the only kind I give is a taste test.I have paid for my benefits and also for some other folks too so anyone saying I need to piss for my pie can take a sip.
For the record. I use only a minimum of pharmaceutical drugs and a controlled non-psychoactive derivative of cannabis to maintain my diabetes and heart health.My cannabinoid medication is not tested for and my others are not controlled substances so it is not about "passing" it is about "pissing" And as for my "other" med before anyone says a thing the government just licensed pharma to make the same med I am using for the reasons I use it so skip the "it is illegal" crap.
seed

reply to post by mustard seed


I am sorry you have been through what you have. But this isnt about people on disability, whome I absolutely believe in supporting, this is about people who refuse to work at all, and contribute nothing to society. You have contributed to society.

Should the poor be targets? No

Because no amount of welfare fraud can ever compare to what the corporations have fleeced from us.

Welfare is the option of last resort. It is not someone who is having trouble making ends meet, they couldnt' meet the ends anymore.

People also work on welfare. I have seen people with three jobs who still don't make enough to get by.

But it also can be said that the money that is being wasted on frivilous spending and drug addicts, should be put towards someone else who can really use it.

reply to post by Chrisfishenstein


I'm self employed, so no more drug testing for me. Most drug users are very good at beating drug tests besides, so the bill will NOT prevent welfare money from being used to support someone's illegal drug addiction. We already have many tax dollars wasted on people's legal drug habits being medicare covers prescription narcotics.

I oppose all forms of drug testing because I think they are a slap in the face an individual privacy and is an unreasonable search, however for the military I think they are reasonable given the nature of the jobs and the fact one forfeits many rights when they join the service. Also drug tests are not 100% accurate and there are false positives.

The bottom line you cannot be pro-individual rights to privacy and pro-drug testing. I find that those who blindly support drug tests are usually brainwashed sheeple.

Originally posted by joyride0187

Stop spreading misinformation. This is not at ALL true. All family shares of Solantic were sold in mid April to a private investment firm located in New York.

You are a fool to believe that they(Scott and his wife) are not receiving benefits from Solantic and won't be getting kickbacks if all the mando drug testing helps their bottom line. All 'good' politicians get kickbacks and there is no way he spent millions and millions of his own money and wasn't expecting any return on his investment.

I woul'd have to disagree with this law because it can open the door to other intrusive steps on individual liberty. But to all hell, his wife's company is going to run the drug tests? this law is not there to save the state money.... its there to make those political rats money! Take from the poor to give to the rich? complete bs.

If people really wanted to protect their rights and save money for their states in the first place, you need to get rid of big government and the monopolies governments control which in turn lead to laws such as this one that infringes on individual liberties. So whose next to be tested for drugs? any government employee? OK if it goes that far, then who is next after that; all tax payers? Would all you tax payers on here take a drug test taken out of your own pocket to please the state? how would that make you feel if there was a law to test them/you? I would like to hear your answers on this one. Its easy to defend yourself, and judge others. But when it comes to the state looking into your own personal life; I want to hear what you have to say.

Ill leave a little quote to remind you that this law can fit in this statement.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me. - Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)

reply to post by jrod


You have a very good point but what I ask is should I pay out of my own pocket to help support some junky who is to lazy to work,these are hard times and as a hard working American I refuse to help some drug out person with 10 kids when there is so many people who really need the help and get denied when they apply.Something has got to change and the drugged out people should be the first. Sorry If I offend it is a touchy subject

reply to post by ugie1028


He is already a billionaire, the money just doesn't seem that important.

He is also an egotist. He made the state put his name on all the Welcome to Florida signs at a cost of millions. It seems he probably has designs on the presidency and he wants his name on everything possible!

Regardless, drug testing state employees, and drug testing welfare recipients both seem like good initiatives.

Originally posted by DZAG Wright

If you really want to do something, everytime a politician wage a war on the poor inform them you don't want to hear about Piss-Poor Peter, you want to watch the money of Millionaire Mikey.

I don't consider this waging war on the poor!

I consider this as waging war on people who get free tax payers money and go out and piss it away on drugs, not exactly what that free tax payers money was intended to do for them!

MAYBE if they got off the drugs, due to being tested, more of them might be able to find a decent enough job to not need this hand out anymore, also, without this money, they wouldn't be able to afford drugs.

People have to jump through a lot of "hoops" to qualify for this money, I say let drug testing also be one of those "hoops".

Bottom line is, how can anybody condone giving money to a druggy just so he can continue drugging?

Is this money actually helping them like it was intended?

(PS - I think the stock in anti-oxidants just might make some leaps and bounds here in the near future)

Originally posted by joyride0187

Originally posted by doobydoll
Corrupt governor Scott used to own the drug-test company until January when he gave it to his wife. Next thing ya know he's pushing for a law to drug-test welfare recipients - a test which his wife's company is qualified to perform. Guaranteed wealth for Mr. & Mrs. Scott, don'cha think?

Just think of all the appeals and recipients' demands for re-tests - more expense for the taxpayer, but it is guaranteed income for Scotty & spouse.

And then, after all this palaver, the positive-tested applicants WILL STILL RECEIVE THEIR FREE MONEY

Aunty Doris will hand it over after she's been designated to receive it on their behalf.

So, the point of the tests is .... ?

The corrupt governor and his wife are the only people who will benefit from this law.

The state and it's taxpaying citizens lose out big time.

edit on 1-6-2011 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)

Stop spreading misinformation. This is not at ALL true. All family shares of Solantic were sold in mid April to a private investment firm located in New York.

We only have HIS word for that.
This, posted 14th April, is all I can find so far that refers to the supposed sale:

Running government isn't like running a business. Consider the case of Gov. Rick Scott, founder of the star-crossed Solantic chain of walk-in clinics. While he always believes in making a profit in private business, Scott says he had to sell his ownership in the company at a loss for public-relations reasons.

How can he sell a company he hasn't owned since January 2010?

Then, when he became governor, Scott quietly transferred his ownership to his wife's trust. But now, Scott seems to suggest he owned it all along.

He's corrupt and a liar.

Edit to Add Source Link

Originally posted by ugie1028
But to all hell, his wife's company is going to run the drug tests? this law is not there to save the state money.... its there to make those political rats money! Take from the poor to give to the rich? complete bs.

Nope!

Not according to the OP"s source article, ...

Florida Governor Signs Welfare Drug-Screen Measure

Controversy over the measure was heightened by Scott's past association with a company he co-founded that operates walk-in urgent care clinics in Florida and counts drug screening among the services it provides. In April, Scott, who had transferred his ownership interest in Solantic Corp. to a trust in his wife's name, said the company would not contract for state business, according to local media reports. He subsequently sold his majority stake in the company, local media reported.

reply to post by getreadyalready


in essence, yes the idea is good, but a step like this just opens the door to other intrusions in a persons personal life & liberty.

if these welfare recipients do fail any of these tests (And i assume a lot will fail.) that would place them in a more stressful position far worse than what they are in now. Now what would be the fallout from this?

More homeless, more orphans, and in turn more stresses on society as a whole?

If you plug up a hole, others will show themselves as time moves forward.