Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients Makes Sense
By Gina Miller
DakotaVoice.com
Should we require people who receive taxpayer money welfare handouts to submit to random drug testing? As with most social-fiscal issues, this is a divisive one. Opponents claim this would be a violation of Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search, and of course, some of them play the race card as well and insist that this would be a racist thing to do (do they understand how very old the race card is?). Supporters claim this would save millions in taxpayer dollars and help people get off drugs.
We already see that many employers require their employees to submit to random drug tests, so how is this any different? I have long disliked random drug testing policies where there is no suspicion of wrongdoing, because I view them as a gross invasion of privacy. On the other hand, our society has devolved to the point that bad behavior seems to be almost the norm rather than the exception. So, in one sense, Americans have, in part, brought these kinds of policies on themselves by behaving badly and lawlessly.
Without a doubt of facing court challenges, Florida just passed welfare recipient drug testing legislation, and it was signed into law by Governor Rick Scott on May 30. As the New York Daily News reported,
“Applicants for the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program who test positive for illicit substances won’t be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving the funds for three years.
‘While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction,’ Scott said. ‘This new law will encourage personal accountability and will help to prevent the misuse of tax dollars.’”
How can anyone object to not allowing taxpayer money handouts to drug addicts who can easily turn those “benefits” into illegal drugs? Then again, here we have yet another example of heaping law upon law to try to cause people to do right. There is no amount of laws that can be made that will “create” a moral people. When the soul of a nation turns rotten and the people become lawless, then the leaders will naturally turn to ever increasing heavy-handed legislation to try to control the people. Ultimately, a police state is the result.
Besides saving taxpayer money, a common argument of drug testing proponents is that it will help people overcome their addictions. I just don’t think that is necessarily the case. There are too many ways to beat that system. Also, some of the harder drugs, like cocaine, amphetamines and methamphetamines are not as easy to detect, since they are water-soluble and quickly leave the body. The same is true of alcohol, which, although legal, is the most commonly abused substance in America. Next to phencyclidine (PCP or “angel dust”), marijuana is the substance most likely to be detected in urinalysis, because the active ingredient in marijuana is fat-soluble, and thus stays in the body for a much longer period of time.
I don’t know how effective this kind of law will actually be in the long-run. It has been tried before with mixed results. In 1999, Michigan became the first state in the nation to implement random drug testing of welfare recipients. As a matter of course, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued, and the law was struck down as unconstitutional.
This is an issue that creates unlikely allies from the Left and Right. Although I detest much of what the ACLU does, they occasionally have a valid point. In reporting on random drug testing of welfare recipients, The ACLU cites Judge Victoria Roberts in her ruling against Michigan’s law,
“In halting the implementation of Michigan’s drug testing law, U.S. District Court Judge Victoria Roberts ruled that the state’s rationale for testing welfare recipients ‘could be used for testing the parents of all children who received Medicaid, State Emergency Relief, educational grants or loans, public education or any other benefit from that State.’[18] Indeed, any of the justifications put forth to subject welfare recipients to random drug testing would also by logical extension apply to the entirety of our population that receives some public benefit and/or that is a parent. It is clear that our constitution – and common sense – would object to the random drug testing of this large group of people, making the drug testing of an equally absurd category of people – welfare recipients – unconstitutional as well.”
Again, this brings me back to the question of how it can be acceptable for many non-welfare, working class Americans to be subjected to the humiliation of random drug testing, yet it not be acceptable to apply the same standards to people who receive free taxpayer money. There’s the rub. And, I believe that is a large reason why we are seeing more states willing to consider this type of legislation.
Virginia lawmakers have been working on passage of welfare drug testing legislation, although the legislation is currently stalled. Last week, the Louisiana State Senate voted down welfare recipient drug testing legislation.
The Mississippi Gulf Coast 912 Project, a powerfully influential South Mississippi Tea Party group, is feverishly collecting petition signatures for a welfare recipient/state employee drug testing ballot initiative to be placed on the November 2012 ballot. Unlike other states that have taken up welfare recipient drug testing legislation without voter input, the Gulf Coast 912 Project is working to let the voters of the state decide.
It is Ballot Initiative #33, and it would amend the Mississippi State Constitution. The summary of the initiative states,
“Initiative #33 would amend the Mississippi Constitution to require that persons receiving public assistance, as well as state contractors, subcontractors, and state employees, must undergo random drug testing. Failing two drug tests results in loss of benefits. Persons not currently receiving public assistance must pass drug testing before receiving benefits. This initiative also requires that persons residing in the state illegally are prohibited from receiving public assistance or state salary of any kind.”
As for those who argue against the potential cost of such legislation, Ballot Initiative #33 would require the costs of drug testing to be paid by the recipients themselves, as the money would be subtracted from their welfare or state salary payments.
The ballot initiative also provides yet another check against the illegal alien invasion of America, as no one who is unable to prove their legal citizenship status would be able to get taxpayer money handouts. I think that is an excellent proposition.
The last line in the full text of the ballot initiative states,
“This amendment recognizes that public assistance is a privilege and not a right.”
That’s the bottom line, and it is a strong argument for requiring welfare recipients to undergo the same type of drug testing that many Americans in the workforce are subject to, as well. The stronger point of drug testing welfare recipients is that we are talking about taxpayer money being confiscated from working people and then given to unemployed or underemployed people who have not earned it.
When we are dealing with private sector employers who choose to drug test their employees, that is said to be the choice of the employer, since it is his money going to pay the worker, so how is it that the provider of money to welfare recipients—the American taxpayer—is not given any say in holding welfare recipients accountable in the same way?
The Fourth Amendment argument could easily be said to not apply to drug testing of welfare recipients, because as ballot initiative #33 points out, welfare is a privilege, and no one is forced to receive it. If you do not want to undergo random drug testing to receive taxpayer money handouts, then no one will force you to do so.
The Mississippi Gulf Coast 912 Project is working to collect the 90,000 needed petition signatures of registered voters by the end of September in time for the 2012 ballot. The end of September is a self-imposed deadline of the 912 Project, since the actual State of Missippippi deadline for 2012 is mid-October. The 912 Project members are trying to avoid leaving anything to chance. However, if the true mid-October deadline is missed, then mid-December is the deadline for the 2014 election.
If you are a registered voter in Mississippi and would like to support Ballot Initiative #33, please log on to the Gulf Coast 912 Project’s website for information on where to go in South Mississippi to sign the petition or how to print petitions and collect signatures.
I commend the Mississippi Gulf Coast 912 Project members for their hard work in all they do. It’s easy for me to sit here and write about taking our country back from the communist clutches of the radical Left, but the Gulf Coast 912 Project, and other Tea Party groups like it, are actually going out there and doing the real work, the heavy lifting, it takes to make that happen.
Thank God for the American Patriots!
Gina Miller, a native of Texas, is a radio commentator. She also works with her husband installing and repairing residential irrigation systems and doing landscaping on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.