[Wildcatk23]

Kentucky state Rep. Lonnie Napier (R-Lancaster) has introduced a bill that would enforce random drug testing for all adult Kentuckians receiving welfare, food stamps or Medicaid, which he told HuffPost would "get people off drugs" and save money for the state.

"I believe there is a place for public assistance for those that really need it, but I don't think there should be public assistance for those using it to buy drugs," Napier said. "It's widely known here and all over the country that they'll take the food-stamp card and buy good groceries with it, and then swap them for illegal drugs. My deal would only be random testing, and this would put the fear in people to keep them drug-clean because they would lose their public assistance if they show up with illegal drugs in their system."

I love it.

[Ballers]

Sounds like a **** of an idea to me..
Put it to the test I say!

[zaga_fan]

Sounds wonderful!

[LWC]

I wonder how many congressmen and women would PUBLICLY support this? I am sure there are many that will agree with him in private. Public support may be hard to find.

That financial demographic does not make up a lot of the votes, if I had to guess, so it might get public support but IDK.

[Old School]

I'm all for it, while were at it let's also test the members of congress.

[foxtrot1]

I love the proposal as well. There are to many people out there getting money, food, housing, etc. who set at home on there butts all day long and do drugs. The statistics don't lie. These people who abuse the systems that are in place to help people who have fallen on hard times are a huge reason our country is in the mess it is in now. Test them all!

[BFritz]

How full proof would this be? Would they show up at people's homes or how would it be random? Would they test both parents or couldn't one stay clean and have the other take the test?

[BlackcatAlum]

Why didn't they think of this sooner?!?!

[Spud6]

Great idea!

[Aslan]

Should of been done a LONG time ago.

[Hoot Gibson]

It will probably shock most of you but I have mixed feelings on this subject. I am not really opposed to drug testing welfare recipients and requiring them to be "clean" to draw a check but I have absolutely no confidence in the federal government actually being able to administer such a program. It would require thousands of new federal and state bureaucrats and would cost far more than it would save.

We have more than 12 million illegal aliens in this country, many of whom are drawing welfare benefits of one kind or another. The federal government is unable (i. e., unwilling) to identify illegal aliens and deny them welfare benefits, so does anybody really believe that Democrats will ever agree to drug test one of their core constituencies and withhold money from them? Especially during a campaign season? (Which includes far more days than not.)

[Wildcatk23]

It will probably shock most of you but I have mixed feelings on this subject. I am not really opposed to drug testing welfare recipients and requiring them to be "clean" to draw a check but I have absolutely no confidence in the federal government actually being able to administer such a program. It would require thousands of new federal and state bureaucrats and would cost far more than it would save.

We have more than 12 million illegal aliens in this country, many of whom are drawing welfare benefits of one kind or another. The federal government is unable (i. e., unwilling) to identify illegal aliens and deny them welfare benefits, so does anybody really believe that Democrats will ever agree to drug test one of their core constituencies and withhold money from them? Especially during a campaign season? (Which includes far more days than not.)

Is everything Republican And Democrat with you. I would rather see the government pay 30$ a drug test with my money than give food stamps to some crackhead thats buying 50 cases of pop and selling it at the pawn shop. Besides Lonnie is a Republican isn't he?

[Hoot Gibson]

Is everything Republican And Democrat with you. I would rather see the government pay 30$ a drug test with my money than give food stamps to some crackhead thats buying 50 cases of pop and selling it at the pawn shop. Besides Lonnie is a Republican isn't he?

Why, when it comes to the welfare state, yes it is. The failure to enforce immigration laws has been a bipartisan effort but handing out welfare checks in exchange for 90% support at the polls has been almost a pure liberal Democrat program for decades. If the feds are unwilling to cut welfare to illegals, then they are never going do it to their own supporters who are legally eligible to vote today.

As for Republicans who support drug testing, like I said I have mixed feelings on the subject, but on balance I think that there are better reforms to the system that would actually save money. I think Republicans who support drug testing are wrong but their intentions are good. However, good intentions are what led to our current broken system.

Drug testing welfare loafers would cost, not save money. And what of those addicts who failed the drug tests? Do you think that they are going to rush out and become solid citizens? Or would they simply turn to crime more often to finance their habits? I think we all know the answer to those questions.

[Wildcatk23]

Why, when it comes to the welfare state, yes it is. The failure to enforce immigration laws has been a bipartisan effort but handing out welfare checks in exchange for 90% support at the polls has been almost a pure liberal Democrat program for decades. If the feds are unwilling to cut welfare to illegals, then they are never going do it to their own supporters who are legally eligible to vote today.

As for Republicans who support drug testing, like I said I have mixed feelings on the subject, but on balance I think that there are better reforms to the system that would actually save money. I think Republicans who support drug testing are wrong but their intentions are good. However, good intentions are what led to our current broken system.

Drug testing welfare loafers would cost, not save money. And what of those addicts who failed the drug tests? Do you think that they are going to rush out and become solid citizens? Or would they simply turn to crime more often to finance their habits? I think we all know the answer to those questions.

How is it going to cost more money that to save money? Can i see you logic? Stats?

[nky]

I'm all for it, while were at it let's also test the members of congress.

or state representatives

[nky]

How is it going to cost more money that to save money? Can i see you logic? Stats?

here's paper on the topic
http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publicat...s/0520.pdf

[nky]

Some other "information" Michigan was the only state that did this and it was struck down as unconstitutional

Before the Michigan policy was halted, only 10% of recipients tested positive for illicit drugs.
Only 3% tested positive for hard drugs, such as cocaine and amphetamines – rates that are in line with the drug use rates of the general population.

[nky]

other info

the average cost of a drug test is about $42 per person tested, not including the costs of hiring personnel to administer the tests, to ensure confidentiality of results and to run confirmatory tests to guard against false positives resulting from passive drug exposure, cross-identification with legal, prescription drugs such as codeine and legal substances such as poppy seeds.
Another way to measure the cost is by counting what it costs to “catch” each drug user. Drug testing is not used by many private employers because of the exorbitant cost of catching each person who tests positive. One electronics manufacturer, for example, estimated that the cost of finding each person who tested positive was $20,000, since after testing 10,000 employees, only 49 tested positive. A congressional committee also estimated that the cost of each positive drug test of government employees was $77,000, because the positive rate was only 0.5%

[Wildcatk23]

here's paper on the topic
http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publicat...s/0520.pdf

If jobs requiring drug screening then why not test the people receiving handouts. People here in martin county get their check go to the store, then to the pawn shop. Something needs to be done.

[nky]

Why don't these state Reps stop introducing "silly" make a splash bills and start to do the state's business? Come on guys you can do better in Frankfort, you can do better.

[SKINNYPIG]

Hold on guys. My guess is that a large percent of these recipients are "legally" higher than a kite. I would love to know how many of them are prescribed drugs that our employers wouldn't allow us to work while taking. The doctors will keep them supplied with all they need.

Think about it...It's another stupid Idea our representatives are posturing with.

Wouldn't it just be simpler to cut those that are parasites out of the program?

[nky]

FYI
In 2003 court case Marchwinski v. Howard, the federal Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld a lower court ruling striking down Michigan's drug testing of welfare recipients as a violation of the 4th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The Federal court's decision covers the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee ruled that states cannot drug test welfare recipients because it’s unconstitutional. Those states, and many others, could lose federal funding if the drug testing provision makes it into law

[Hoot Gibson]

If jobs requiring drug screening then why not test the people receiving handouts. People here in martin county get their check go to the store, then to the pawn shop. Something needs to be done.

Employees do not submit to a drug test every time they collect a check. Most are screened as a pre-condition of employment only. What needs to be done is to slash government spending. How many welfare recipients do not manage to buy at least one nice TV and a cell phone? Why is the government still in the housing business? Why are there so many young people collecting SSI payments while climbing the hills hunting for squirrels?

I am surprised to see an Obama supporter supporting this idea. Is this not the same administration that is suing the state of Arizona for attempting to rid itself of criminal illegal immigrants? I don't see how anybody can believe that proposals to drug test American citizen/welfare recipients would be effectively and fairly enforced.

[Hoot Gibson]

Hold on guys. My guess is that a large percent of these recipients are "legally" higher than a kite. I would love to know how many of them are prescribed drugs that our employers wouldn't allow us to work while taking. The doctors will keep them supplied with all they need.

Think about it...It's another stupid Idea our representatives are posturing with.

Wouldn't it just be simpler to cut those that are parasites out of the program?

Are you talking about the parasites collecting welfare or the parasites who serve a very few years in Frankfort and then collect large pensions for life? :biggrin:

Seriously, parasitic politicians are an even bigger problem than welfare cheats. Welfare cheats cannot directly vote themselves big raises for doing nothing constructive.

[nky]

Besides what happens if someone fails? Do you take away the check? All the check, part of it? Do they lose WIC as well? Does a child need to starve to death or is that an unintended consequence?

[Wildcatk23]

So it's unconstitutional to make someone take a drug test before accepting benefits from the government. I Would feel much better know my taxes was being used for drug screenings than some crack head buying drugs.

[Amun-Ra]

Besides what happens if someone fails? Do you take away the check? All the check, part of it? Do they lose WIC as well? Does a child need to starve to death or is that an unintended consequence?

If their parents are buying pills, etc with their welfare money, then the kids aren't getting any of it anyways.

[SKINNYPIG]

if their parents are buying pills, etc with their welfare money, then the kids aren't getting any of it anyways.

Bam!

[SKINNYPIG]

Are you talking about the parasites collecting welfare or the parasites who serve a very few years in Frankfort and then collect large pensions for life? :biggrin:

Seriously, parasitic politicians are an even bigger problem than welfare cheats. Welfare cheats cannot directly vote themselves big raises for doing nothing constructive.

Amen brother.

[Wildcatk23]

Employees do not submit to a drug test every time they collect a check. Most are screened as a pre-condition of employment only. What needs to be done is to slash government spending. How many welfare recipients do not manage to buy at least one nice TV and a cell phone? Why is the government still in the housing business? Why are there so many young people collecting SSI payments while climbing the hills hunting for squirrels?

I am surprised to see an Obama supporter supporting this idea. Is this not the same administration that is suing the state of Arizona for attempting to rid itself of criminal illegal immigrants? I don't see how anybody can believe that proposals to drug test American citizen/welfare recipients would be effectively and fairly enforced.

I didn't see where they said they would be checking every check. I haven't read that anywhere.

And Its the republican trying to get this. IDK how Obama and Arizona applies.

If their parents are buying pills, etc with their welfare money, then the kids aren't getting any of it anyways.

:rockon:

Besides what happens if someone fails? Do you take away the check? All the check, part of it? Do they lose WIC as well? Does a child need to starve to death or is that an unintended consequence?

These kids don't see food anyways. There parents cash in on other stuff. Trading there food stamp card for cash. Buying Pop and trading it in. Then buying drugs.

A big issue in martin county is the pop issue. If they would change Soda to a i believe its called a Cold Food, which would make the shopper pay cash for the item instead of using the stamps. Would be a big help IMO.