General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRomney backs welfare drug-testing (and more WTF?)
By Steve Benen
Asked by an Atlanta reporter about mandatory drug tests for welfare recipients, Mitt Romney announced his enthusiastic support. (Thanks to James Carter for the tip.)
He's not the only one on the right who thinks so. Republican officials in several states have become fans of expanded drug testing, and in perhaps the most notorious instance, Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) pushed through an ambitious drug-testing program, only to see it fail miserably.
<...>
Romney probably sees this as a way to pander just a little more to his party's base, but there are some pretty dramatic flaws with this policy. For one thing, there are constitutional concerns about the government forcing Americans to give up bodily fluid in order to qualify for benefits to which they're entitled. Is this what the right now considers "limited government"?
<...>
I would be curious, though, about how serious Romney is about this. In his answer to the Atlanta reporter, he said he supports drug testing for those receiving "government benefits." Would that include farm subsidies? Defense contractors? Beneficiaries of bank bailouts? Officials in public office?
Or is Romney only focused on targeting the very poor, whom he said last week he's "not concerned" about?
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/09/10365798-romney-backs-welfare-drug-testing
Mitt Romney met privately with a small group of conservative leaders at the conservative conference CPAC in Washington Thursday, CNN reports.
It was a "mix and mingle" session of 30 people and lasted about an hour, according to the report. A participant of the meeting told CNN that the event was a chance for Romney to make conservatives "feel comfortable" ahead of the former Massachusetts governor's speech there.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/cnn-romney-met-privately-with-conservatives-at-cpac
Sen. Rand Paul at CPAC on Thursday asked President Obama: "Do you hate poor people, or do you just hate poor people with jobs?"
Paul later in his speech admitted he doesn't actually think President Obama hates poor people.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/rand-paul-to-obama-do-you-hate-poor
Turbineguy
(37,365 posts)crazy wins the race.
3waygeek
(2,034 posts)After all, you're applying to live in public housing.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law Blocked By Federal Judge
SNIP
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/rick-scott-drug-testing-welfare-florida_n_1029332.html
p.s. Another instance where the GOP doesn't care anything about the U.S. Constitution!
hay rick
(7,639 posts)You know, the guys with multimillion dollar incomes who only pay the 15% "carried interest" tax rate. Better idea: drug test anyone who thinks this practice isn't welfare or who votes for political candidates that support keeping this loophole.
fasttense
(17,301 posts)I bet a good number were doing coke or Koch, however you want to spell it.
If drug testing is good for welfare recipients, it should include ALL welfare recipients banksters and CEOs too. Why should our American tax dollars be paying for a CEOs coke habit?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)And big oil and pharma... every employee from the CEOs down...
And farmers and their families and workers, getting subsidies....
and every congressperson and senator and ambassador...
and every person getting a Federal pension....
And the citizens of Alaska....
And every citizen of any country getting foreign aid....
Boy, the drug testing folks are gonna make a fortune!
Don't forget to test for the 3 martini lunch!
geardaddy
(24,931 posts)They need to be drug-tested. So does congress.
CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)I would advocate for a Dole. A minimal survival ration for every citizen. Get rid of all the bloated programs and send a direct cash payment to all. Pure redistribution. Then people could have a fair starting point and if they work hard could advance to higher tax brackets. To be fair the Dole would have to be paid to everyone. Rich and Poor. 50% would be the max tax but there would be no loopholes deductions or K-Street shenanigans. Reaching the 50% bracket would be the goal.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Bob Dole?
I don't have to feed and house him.... and give him his Viagra, do I?
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Remember how conservatives in Florida touted drug testing of welfare recipients in that state as a sure-fire way to save taxpayers bucketloads of money?
Yeah, not so much.
Net savings to the state: $3,400 to $5,000 annually on one months worth of rejected applicants. Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800 to $60,000 for a program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year.
from: http://bloggingblue.com/2012/02/09/so-how-much-money-did-floridas-drug-testing-of-welfare-recipients-save-taxpayers/
Its not about saving money, its about humiliating the poor and hence a raging success.
Selatius
(20,441 posts)Earth_First
(14,910 posts)One word: "WHOOPS!"
eppur_se_muova
(36,289 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)It's only fair...
Arkansas Granny
(31,528 posts)who got benefits didn't get cash. They got food stamps, their housing was subsidized, medical costs were taken care of, etc. How much actual money do welfare recipients actually get and how much do they think is being used on drugs.
This is not to mention that drug tests have a 5 - 10% chance of showing a false positive. What do they plan on doing if that occurs?
This is just all kinds of messed up. And, yes, I think all of the politicians who support this should also consent to testing.
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)to also giving us a urine sample.
NNN0LHI
(67,190 posts)Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)First of all, this has already been done in Florida, and 98% of welfare recipients passed the drug test. In the end, the cost of administering the drug screening tests exceeded the cost savings gained by denying benefits to the 2% who failed the test.
On top of this, now you have some number of people who not only are in need of public assistance but have an addiction problem also. If there was ever a recipe for a crime problem desperate drug addicts would have to be one of the best.
Finally, if they want to screen people for drugs as a condition of receiving welfare I think they ought to screen politicians as a condition of serving in Congress.
aquamarina
(1,865 posts)Personally, I'd think that all politicians and their staff should be subjected to drug testing since they too are paid off the public dole. For that matter, I'd like all politicians to have to pass an American history exam, and prove they've read and understand the US Constitution. I'd like them to have to wear a "lie-o-meter" so every time they tell a whopper they get zapped with a little electricity. I'd like them to have to wear patches of their corporate sponsors with the dollar amounts they've taken in.
Seriously their attacks on the poor are pathological.
bayareaboy
(793 posts)Bain-Capitol owns a Drug testing firm.
Just wondering?
MilitaryRepublican
(2 posts)If it is unconstitional for a recipient of city, county, state and/or federal funds to be drug tested, then it should be across the board. Hold NO-ONE accountable. So that surgeon cutting on you, or that cop pulling you over, or that pilot flying you across the country could be high, but who cares, cause that would be violating their personal rights to be tested also. Screw you, you can't test me, it violates my privacy. And don't even say, Well..... certain jobs require...., pick one. Test or no test. If i have to be tested to keep my job, then why are they exempt. Because they would not be qualified anymore.
I know that I personally have to take the 'wiz-quiz' twice a year to keep my job, and I have NO problem about it, (because i have nothing to hide). Guess what, 60 piss tests later, and I have never had a false positive either. Imagine that, if you have NOOOO drugs in your system at all, your chances for misreads greatly reduces.
I believe that if you want a pay check, and the requirement is to provide a urine sample to ensure you are obeying the law in that aspect, and not needlessly putting yourself and others at risk, then so be it. Unless, of course, you are spending your check on drugs and not putting food and clothes on your kids like you should be doing. Or as one of the other guys put it, maybe not actual money, but the free housing, water, electricity, day care, food stamps, transportation vouchers, all that stupid essential stuff that people with jobs actually have to work and pay for. But i guess it's my responsibility to support 'poor' people to live and breed isn't it? In fact, don't we give pay raises to 'poor' people to make babies.
Hell, I think they should be audited to find out where the money goes. I love the "you owe me cause i'm breathing, but you can't question me or test me, cause that violates my civil rights." But then, checks and balances were never one of your strong points, was it.
Maynar
(769 posts)We got us a live one here, kids.
schmice
(248 posts)titaniumsalute
(4,742 posts)First off his wife owns the drug testing companies...so put that into your pipe and smoke it.
But the outcome...they said it would save millions of dollars to not allow drug-using individuals to enroll in welfare. However, after 8 months of testing welfare applicants, only 2% didn't pass the drug tests. If that number holds up it will save Florida an annual average of $40,000 to $60,000 of welfare recipients. The cost of drug testing on an annual basis in Florida? $178 million. Nice work Rick the Prick.