Mo. bill ties drug testing to welfare

[usregimechange]

JEFFERSON CITY — Welfare recipients in Missouri would have to undergo drug testing under legislation expected to hit the state House floor this week.

Supporters of the proposal say the state shouldn't subsidize drug use. But critics say the law targets the poor and that the state's drug treatment programs already have lengthy waiting lists, leaving few options for people who want to get clean.

Applicants for the state's welfare program who tested positive for drug use would be ineligible to receive benefits for some time under the proposal, at most three years. However, other family members would still be eligible for assistance through a third-party provider...

This isn't the first time Missouri's Republican lawmakers have proposed drug testing for welfare beneficiaries. Brandom proposed nearly identical bills about drug screening in 2009 and 2008. Last year, a proposal passed in the House but was held up in the Senate.

Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, has proposed legislation to require drug testing for the state's welfare recipients for the last four years. He said such measures would push welfare recipients to get clean or face losing their funding. "You can't work if you're doing meth," he said.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/DF6C0FE73D42405A862576BD00074203?OpenDocument


Meth addict: "Wow, I think I need to quite using meth because I could lose my food stamps."

Counselor: What was it about an increased risk of sudden death by cardiac arrest, years of lost freedom, and losing your kids that was so unpersuasive?

[RZM]

1. lol

'Critics say the law targets the poor' . . . I would think a law regarding welfare would indeed target the poor.

[usregimechange]

2. Poor people are poor because they use drugs, obviously.

[RZM]

6. Wow, I didn't imply anything like that at all

I just thought it was a bit amusing. It would be the same if the story were about taxing millionaires and read 'critics say the law targets the rich.' Well obviously :)

[leftstreet]

3. Not necessarily. We could use some laws that target corporate welfare

[Cleita]

4. And speaking of drugs, we could start with big PhRMA and their

welfare checks from Medicare Part D.

[usregimechange]

7. Its the fastest growing addiction in America.

[Cleita]

8. Corporate greed in emptying taxpayers' money from the Treasury?

You betcha.

[Skittles]

5. bullshit

ever heard of corporate welfare? look it up

[RZM]

10. Congrats on your outrage over semantics

If you want to refer to corporate handouts as welfare, be my guest. Lots of people do. I don't because it can be confusing. They both signify 'free money,' but the purposes, recipients, and scales are quite different. I used welfare in its 'traditional' sense, which seems to be what you are objecting to.

[Skittles]

12. you mean in the traditional, stereotypical sense

[northofdenali]

15. Mom, can I kick ass NOW? Pleeze? n/t

[RZM]

16. Yes

You know, the way it was used in the post we're all commenting on.

[Lyric]

9. What part of "unConstitutional violation of the right to privacy"

do these people not understand? The government can't just "search" our bodies on a whim. They have to have a compelling state interest in doing so, and it has to be SO compelling that it overrides the individual's right to privacy. Unless someone is specifically suspected of being a drug dealer or user BEFOREHAND, then there is no compelling state interest that overrides the privacy issue. We cannot assume that welfare recipients are drug users en masse and drug test them all in a "fishing expedition".

The ONLY things that this legislation will accomplish are:

1. Punish the innocent children of a poor person who either did use a drug, or who was unfortunate enough to have eaten a poppy seed muffin or have taken some Sudafed that morning.

2. Punish innocent poor adults who are the victims of a false positive result.

3. Increased hunger and poverty as poor people who DO occasionally share a joint with a friend (that they probably didn't pay for) get weeded out of the system.

4. Make idiotic, greedy, punishment-happy Republican voters feel warm and fuzzy inside...or at least until...

5. The law gets thrown out by the Supreme Court as a violation of the 4th Amendment.

[LuvNewcastle]

11. I think that before they are allowed

to pass such a law, they should have to pass a law that drug testing for elected state officials is mandatory. After all, many of them handle state funds and a drug addict would be tempted to embezzle.

[cabluedem]

14. Lets drug test all public workers, including cops for steriod use. Lot of cops are roid' addicts. nt

[suede1]

13. Not surprising with all the BS outrage on FB about this.

Now tell the RWer's their taxes have to go up to pay for it.

[The Straight Story]

17. David Duke tried this back in the 90's (nt)