Quantcast

Florida wants your pee.

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,325
16,791
Riding the baggage carousel.
If your applying for assistance that is. This was making the rounds on facebook and I honestly thought it was BS. Google sayeth otherwise. I see both sides of this.:confused:

Discuss.
(CNN) -- Saying it is "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction," Gov. Rick Scott on Tuesday signed legislation requiring adults applying for welfare assistance to undergo drug screening.

"It's the right thing for taxpayers," Scott said after signing the measure. "It's the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don't want to waste tax dollars. And also, we want to give people an incentive to not use drugs."

Under the law, which takes effect on July 1, the Florida Department of Children and Family Services will be required to conduct the drug tests on adults applying to the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. The aid recipients would be responsible for the cost of the screening, which they would recoup in their assistance if they qualify. Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.:-)think:)

Shortly after the bill was signed, five Democrats from the state's congressional delegation issued a joint statement attacking the legislation, one calling it "downright unconstitutional."

"Governor Scott's new drug testing law is not only an affront to families in need and detrimental to our nation's ongoing economic recovery, it is downright unconstitutional," said Rep. Alcee Hastings. "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?"

Rep. Corrine Brown said the tests "represent an extreme and illegal invasion of personal privacy."

"Indeed, investigating people when there is probable cause to suspect they are abusing drugs is one thing," Brown said in the joint statement. "But these tests amount to strip searching our state's most vulnerable residents merely because they rely on the government for financial support during these difficult economic times."

Joining in the statement denouncing the measure were Democratic Reps. Kathy Castor, Ted Deutch and Frederica Wilson.

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.

On May 18, the Florida Ethics Commission ruled that two conflict-of-interest complaints against Scott were legally insufficient to warrant investigation, and adopted an opinion that no "prohibited conflict of interest" existed.

Also on Tuesday, Scott also signed a measure outlawing hallucinogenic designer drugs known as "bath salts."

"The chemical substances found in 'bath salts' constitute a significant threat to health and public safety," the governor's office said in a statement. "Poison control centers in Florida have reported 61 calls of 'bath salts' abuse, making Florida the state with the second-highest volume of calls."

The drugs "are readily available at convenience stores, discount tobacco outlets, gas stations, pawnshops, tattoo parlors, and truck stops, among other locations," the governor's office said.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/01/florida.welfare.drug.testing/index.html
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
If your applying for assistance that is. This was making the rounds on facebook and I honestly thought it was BS. Google sayeth otherwise. I see both sides of this.:confused:

Discuss.
I don't. Let's assume I grow my own weed in my backyard. I wouldn't be paying a penny for it, so the government's not subsidizing anything. Or I'm drug free but a raging alcoholic. That's cool apparently, because the government's fine subsidizing my alcoholism since alcohol is "ok". Ugh.

My wife's working on some state welfare projects, and I'm shocked at the level of hoops the government already makes people jump through to get welfare: they have to have a job or other qualifying activity (32h MINIMUM per week), if you're sick and miss a day of work, you have to have a doctor's note (kinda hard if you don't have health insurance), you can have a maximum of 60 mo (5 years) LIFETIME of benefits, etc. (California just reduced this to a lifetime maximum of 48mo on welfare)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Assistance_for_Needy_Families

It's also telling that banking employees weren't required to undergo drug testing before TARP, either....
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,319
7,744
Where's the evidence showing that this will actually save money?

It seems to me like this will be a) unevenly enforced, b) ridiculously expensive, and c) struck down in the courts.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
You forgot the part where Scott, a Medicare fraud in his corporate life, owns a chain of testing labs.

Oh, sorry, his wife does. That makes it ok.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,325
16,791
Riding the baggage carousel.
I don't. Let's assume I grow my own weed in my backyard. I wouldn't be paying a penny for it, so the government's not subsidizing anything. Or I'm drug free but a raging alcoholic. That's cool apparently, because the government's fine subsidizing my alcoholism since alcohol is "ok". Ugh.

My wife's working on some state welfare projects, and I'm shocked at the level of hoops the government already makes people jump through to get welfare: they have to have a job or other qualifying activity (32h MINIMUM per week), if you're sick and miss a day of work, you have to have a doctor's note (kinda hard if you don't have health insurance), you can have a maximum of 60 mo (5 years) LIFETIME of benefits, etc. (California just reduced this to a lifetime maximum of 48mo on welfare)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Assistance_for_Needy_Families

It's also telling that banking employees weren't required to undergo drug testing before TARP, either....
All excellent points. I must confess to knowing pretty much zilch on this subject other than the mouth breather insistence that anyone accepting government aid is a dope addicted laze about baby factory.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
While in theory I'm not against drug-free welfare recipients, it is just a nuisance bill, a teabagger's wet dream.
 

X3pilot

Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
5,860
1
SoMD
My wife's working on some state welfare projects, and I'm shocked at the level of hoops the government already makes people jump through to get welfare: they have to have a job or other qualifying activity (32h MINIMUM per week), if you're sick and miss a day of work, you have to have a doctor's note (kinda hard if you don't have health insurance), you can have a maximum of 60 mo (5 years) LIFETIME of benefits, etc. (California just reduced this to a lifetime maximum of 48mo on welfare)
Wasn't welfare designed to be a temporary relief system, not a life long career?
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,448
1,975
Front Range, dude...
That's certainly the propaganda they spread to get your teabagger vote.

See silver's post for the real reason.
So you want to subsidize drug addicts on welfare? And of course there is hypocrisy involved, this is politics...and I am not a teabagger by any means.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Pee away. Want free money, obey the rules of the folks giving out said money.
So you want to subsidize drug addicts on welfare? And of course there is hypocrisy involved, this is politics...and I am not a teabagger by any means.
I'm not calling you a teabagger, I'm just stating the front they used as the bullshlt that it is to get support for it.

You want to test church members for stupidity before they get their tax exempt status?


I do.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
24
SF, CA
So you want to subsidize drug addicts on welfare? And of course there is hypocrisy involved, this is politics...and I am not a teabagger by any means.
Do you want to spend $300 per welfare recipient to prevent an average of $10 per recipient being spent on drugs? Tea-bagger economics right there.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,325
16,791
Riding the baggage carousel.
Ohio makes a good point. What does the average whiz-quiz cost? I'm sure it must depend on the spectrum of drugs your looking for. I'm subject to DOT regulations for my job, and everyone gets a pre-employment as well as being subject to randoms, I wonder what is spent a year for that?


*edit: Teh google provides answers. Kind of an interesting read.
 
Last edited:

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,319
7,744
Ohio made the same point that I made back in post #4! :grumbles: :D
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,342
924
East Bay, Cali
Ohio makes a good point. What does the average whiz-quiz cost? I'm sure it must depend on the spectrum of drugs your looking for. I'm subject to DOT regulations for my job, and everyone gets a pre-employment as well as being subject to randoms, I wonder what is spent a year for that?


*edit: Teh google provides answers. Kind of an interesting read.
As long as all that money is fairly distributed through no bid contracts with Scott's cronies then I'm happy!
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
85,981
24,535
media blackout
Where's the evidence showing that this will actually save money?

It seems to me like this will be a) unevenly enforced, b) ridiculously expensive, and c) struck down in the courts.
from my understanding back when this first came up, it should in fact save money.

-individual pays up front out of pocket. if you pass, the state will reimburse you. if you fail, tough luck. money gone.

-if you fail once, you can't reapply for 6 months. fail a second time, its 2 years.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,319
7,744
Uh, making individuals pay up front isn't going to work when they're on WELFARE in the first place. Just sayin'.

Not to mention that if the drug use rate is sufficiently low (population average is ~7%) then the program will still lose money even with this doubly-punitive scheme.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
85,981
24,535
media blackout
Uh, making individuals pay up front isn't going to work when they're on WELFARE in the first place. Just sayin'.
i didn't write the bill

Not to mention that if the drug use rate is sufficiently low (population average is ~7%) then the program will still lose money even with this doubly-punitive scheme.
that's overall population average. find me numbers broken down by income brackets. I'll bet you about tree fiddy that the percentage increases.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,319
7,744
that's overall population average. find me numbers broken down by income brackets. I'll bet you about tree fiddy that the percentage increases.
You're right, drug use does to up with decreasing employment status, but I'm still willing to bet that the program (if ever let fly by the courts) would be a net money loser.

Here are the data, tables H.16 and onward: http://oas.samhsa.gov/NHSDA/2k1NHSDA/vol2/appendixh_1.htm
 

eaterofdog

ass grabber
Sep 8, 2006
8,326
1,570
Central Florida
I just wanted to add in here that our scumbag governor has the lowest approval rating in the US (bout 25%)

Old people and rednecks are stupid and easy to fool for a little while. Then the rest of us have to suffer.
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,212
17
Blindly running into cactus
Wasn't welfare designed to be a temporary relief system, not a life long career?
welfare was designed as a "stepping stone to self sufficiency" according to FDR in the New Deal. It has instead become a "stepping stone to government dependance." I wrote a research proposal in college on the correlation between the amount of time a person receives government assistance, in the form of housing, to their perception of entitlement and level of dependance on government. there is a ton of research out there on this subject that suggests that a finite time frame for government assistance will actually decrease dependency and encourage self-reliance, thus eliminating the need for drug testing in the first place.

my unit at work is contracted through HUD to work specifically within public housing. one of my duties is enforcing the lease agreement. so whenever a tenant gets charged with criminal activity that affects the health and/or well being of their neighbors, i write them a lease violation. some violations, like for drugs, serious assaults, and other dangerous behaviors require a 7 day eviction from the time the lease violation reaches the public housing office. even with the possibility of a 7-day eviction it's amazing how many people still use and sell drugs from their apartments. we also write violations for unauthorized live-ins..you know, defrauding the government over who is living with you...kind of like paying for 2 occupants in a hotel room and sneaking in 6..but on a longer time line ;)

here's the kicker on this subject, and this is probably specific to my state: each resident gets free cable and utilities, equivalent to $110 a month. they have to have a job to apply for housing but, once they're in, they are actually PAID to not have a job. (this was the main reason for my research proposal). for example, lets say that sarah works at Mcd's for $8 an hour. she has 4 kids and was approved for a 4 bedroom house in public housing for $65 a month. lets say that two months after moving in, sarah decides that she doesn't want to work anymore or gets laid off. she files a hardship request and, get this, they PAY HER a $110 "utilities credit" so that she can make her rent. yes..she gets to keep her cable and the power stays on but they also credit back to her money she didn't pay in the first place so that she can stay there! now tell me that's not institutional oppression via dependency.

so you see..making someone take a drug test may actually prevent them from getting stuck in this cycle. ;)
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
so you see..making someone take a drug test may actually prevent them from getting stuck in this cycle. ;)
And will personally enrich the guy who was chairman and CEO of this mess:

In settlements reached in 2000 and 2002, Columbia/HCA plead guilty to 14 felonies and agreed to a $600+ million fine in the largest fraud settlement in US history. Columbia/HCA admitted systematically overcharging the government by claiming marketing costs as reimbursable, by striking illegal deals with home care agencies, and by filing false data about use of hospital space. They also admitted fraudulently billing Medicare and other health programs by inflating the seriousness of diagnoses and to giving doctors partnerships in company hospitals as a kickback for the doctors referring patients to HCA. They filed false cost reports, fraudulently billing Medicare for home health care workers, and paid kickbacks in the sale of home health agencies and to doctors to refer patients. In addition, they gave doctors "loans" never intending to be repaid, free rent, free office furniture, and free drugs from hospital pharmacies.

But, of course, I'm sure this is a well thought out idea.

****, some of you don't even need to be sewn asshole to mouth to eagerly gobble down sh!t. You do it willingly.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,319
7,744
even with the possibility of a 7-day eviction it's amazing how many people still use and sell drugs from their apartments.
How many McMansions have you dropped in on recently in order to check up on white peoples' rates of drug use for comparison purposes?
 

heavy metal

Monkey
Mar 31, 2011
193
4
HI
drug tests just catch weed smokers. I can smoke a fat rock and still get my welfare check if I wait a few days. suck on that tea party!
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,212
17
Blindly running into cactus
How many McMansions have you dropped in on recently in order to check up on white peoples' rates of drug use for comparison purposes?
i never stated any particular rate of drug use, you inferred that. i simply said that i am amazed that people still use and deal drugs even with the threat of losing their home. in fact, it's a small percentage of tenants who are evicted for this on a quarterly basis, probably less than 1%. a far greater number are evicted for failure to pay rent, even after being GIVEN the $110 to pay said rent.

as far as dropping in on white people in mcmansions...who do you think supplies these drugs? we hit upper-middle class suburbia regularly on search warrants for trafficking and stash houses but since they actually pay for their houses we can't do anything about eviction...that whole property rights thing gets in the way. when you're living in a house at the pleasure of the tax-paying society, you should expect certain rules that may not apply to a homeowner.

besides, the last time i checked, most Mcmansion owners obtained their Mcmansion through some form of work (and i use that term lightly). The problem is that our current systems rewards, no, demands that the welfare recipients remain jobless thus furthering the wealth gap. if you know that you don't have to work to get by, why not just sit around and blaze all day? why not demand that public housing be a safe place to live with a time limit where people can use it for what it was intended instead of a dependency factory.