Judge blocks Fla.'s new welfare drug testing law

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
First of all , I think being on Welfare should be temporary and not a lifestyle but I understand that in today's Economic climate the number of people on Welfare is going to raise significantly look no farther then the increasing poverty rates in the U.S.

I think if a State passes a law like this shouldn't the drug test cover EVERYONE who's income comes from the Tax payers of that State?

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-blocks-fla-welfare-drug-testing-law-192910417.html
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,882
4,435
136
Yes to answer your question at the end. People getting a free ride off of tax payers should not be on drugs. IMO at least, and im sure im in the majority of what real americans would want.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
I think there is a difference between getting free assistance and being employed by the government. Not that I would be against testing employees though since we already get tested in the private industry.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
First of all , I think being on Welfare should be temporary and not a lifestyle

That is part of the problem, our society has cultivated a group of people who think they are entitled to welfare.

After Hurricane Andrew passed through Florida, there were stories of people sitting in their front yards waiting for the government to clean up the mess. It was reported that one family had been on welfare for 3 generations.

My personal opinion, welfare has caused more problems then it fixed. Instead of giving people a helping hand, it has become a crutch.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
I think there is a difference between getting free assistance and being employed by the government. Not that I would be against testing employees though since we already get tested in the private industry.

How so when the GOP thinks Public employees are free loaders especially when it comes to Public teachers.:confused::confused:
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
I saw this this morning while having coffee. Somehow, I fail to see how requiring people to be drug tested in order to receive a welfare check is unconstitutional. Someone needs to explain that one. Welfare is not mandatory. What, under the constitution, is being violated here?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
How so when the GOP thinks Public employees are free loaders especially when it comes to Public teachers.:confused::confused:

That's not "what the GOP thinks", but then again, we all know honesty isn't your strong suit.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
I saw this this morning while having coffee. Somehow, I fail to see how requiring people to be drug tested in order to receive a welfare check is unconstitutional. Someone needs to explain that one. Welfare is not mandatory. What, under the constitution, is being violated here?

The people's right to a free ride, and their right to get high, duh.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
That's not "what the GOP thinks", but then again, we all know honesty isn't your strong suit.

Gee let me rephrase this then...State level Republican Legislators. Does this pass your "Truth-o-meter" now?o_O

Oh there is a difference between the truth and what YOU like to hear ;)
 

Dman8777

Senior member
Mar 28, 2011
426
8
81
Didn't Clinton limit welfare benefits to 5 years? How can generations of people continuously live off welfare?
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
First of all , I think being on Welfare should be temporary and not a lifestyle but I understand that in today's Economic climate the number of people on Welfare is going to raise significantly look no farther then the increasing poverty rates in the U.S.

I think if a State passes a law like this shouldn't the drug test cover EVERYONE who's income comes from the Tax payers of that State?

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-blocks-fla-welfare-drug-testing-law-192910417.html

who else is there to test? SocSec and medicare/medicaid? some of those people earned that money, so its not the same thing.


I'm a govt employee and I have been drug tested
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
who else is there to test? SocSec and medicare/medicaid? some of those people earned that money, so its not the same thing.


I'm a govt employee and I have been drug tested

Well there is the Rub because a lot of Conservatives argue that Public employees do not "earn" their wages.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
One huge loophole w\ the whole testing thing is alcohol. It's out of your system very fast. Cocaine is out relatively fast. Marijuana should be legal and stays for up to a month...

So I can see where testing people who get welfare is not accurate at all and really not possibly to be equally enforced. You're going to take the weed smokers money away but give the alchy or crack smoker money just because they can hold their stuff together for a day or so and pass a test?

I'm for testing in principle but for the reasons I stated, it's just not enforceable unless you're just trying to single out people who smoke marijuana.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
Well there is the Rub because a lot of Conservatives argue that Public employees do not "earn" their wages.

Proof? Oh yeah, way to hijack your own thread with total bs nonsense. Props to that. :thumbsup:
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
One huge loophole w\ the whole testing thing is alcohol. It's out of your system very fast. Cocaine is out relatively fast. Marijuana should be legal and stays for up to a month...

So I can see where testing people who get welfare is not accurate at all and really not possibly to be equally enforced. You're going to take the weed smokers money away but give the alchy or crack smoker money just because they can hold their stuff together for a day or so and pass a test?

I'm for testing in principle but for the reasons I stated, it's just not enforceable unless you're just trying to single out people who smoke marijuana.

THC doesn't stay in your urine for a month. Sorry, but your whole argument is based on a bs statement. Even then, you are defending this decision by saying that is unfairly singles out one set of ILLEGAL drug users from the rest of ILLEGAL drug users. That makes perfect sense, for an idiot.
 

jstern01

Senior member
Mar 25, 2010
532
0
71
Yes to answer your question at the end. People getting a free ride off of tax payers should not be on drugs. IMO at least, and im sure im in the majority of what real americans would want.

What about the elected officials? The law exempted elect officials that suck at the teats of the public from drug testing and as a Florida resident, I can tell you its about 50 -50 if a state official is taking drugs most of the time based upon what laws they pass.

In fact Gov. Gollem refused to be drugged tested, so what does that tell you?
 

Fire&Blood

Platinum Member
Jan 13, 2009
2,333
18
81
Maybe we should be more aggressive with welfare recipients. Imagine the savings if we just declared a hunting season on them. Oh and old people get too old nowadays anyway. Let's declare age above 65 illegal and exterminate them as well. While we are at it, those disabled people cost us a lot too. Imagine the savings government could make.

There would be a lot less traffic on the roads, resources and infrastructure would be relieved, Medicaid and pension funds wouldn't be empty. We could even stop broadcasting Matlock, Golden Girls and Murder she wrote reruns, use the bandwidth and air time more efficiently...
/s
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
How so when the GOP thinks Public employees are free loaders especially when it comes to Public teachers.:confused::confused:

Teachers that are not teaching but doing make work to pad the payroll.

Administration staff that is not needed.

1 Secretary for 4-5 administrators worked well 30 years ago;
Why now is there a 1-1 need.

How many Assistant principals are actually needed?
Same for guidance counselors?
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Teachers that are not teaching but doing make work to pad the payroll.

Administration staff that is not needed.

1 Secretary for 4-5 administrators worked well 30 years ago;
Why now is there a 1-1 need.

How many Assistant principals are actually needed?
Same for guidance counselors?

Is this a Nation wide epidemic?
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
26,029
12,270
136
THC doesn't stay in your urine for a month. Sorry, but your whole argument is based on a bs statement. Even then, you are defending this decision by saying that is unfairly singles out one set of ILLEGAL drug users from the rest of ILLEGAL drug users. That makes perfect sense, for an idiot.

It sure does dimwit. I see you continue to spew factless statements.
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
First of all , I think being on Welfare should be temporary and not a lifestyle but I understand that in today's Economic climate the number of people on Welfare is going to raise significantly look no farther then the increasing poverty rates in the U.S.

I think if a State passes a law like this shouldn't the drug test cover EVERYONE who's income comes from the Tax payers of that State?

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-blocks-fla-welfare-drug-testing-law-192910417.html

After spending a Trillion dollars killing people in Iraq and a Billion dollars killing people in Libya. I want my tax dollars feeding, giving health care, and educating people in the US.
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,306
4
81
Good was stupid anyway and blantant in the governors own interests. There's things that should be reformed with welfare, but this feel good tough of crime shit isn't what's needed. Playing to the publics vindictiveness isn't how society is going to be improved.