Drug free to get gov assistance?

Drug free to get gov assistance?

by Matt | Published on September 12th, 2007, 12:15 pm | Life

Got an e-mail from a friend who works for the State of California. Makes for some interesting thinking. I think he's on the right track. At one time, my family received a form of government assistance (WIC).

Like a lot of folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they
pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with. What I do have a problem with
is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine
test.

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check,
because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I
have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the
other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their butt, and
buy dope and booze with my hard earned money.

Could you imagine how much money the government would save if
people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

I think not only would it save money, it would help cut down on crime and better the lives of those who need help.

Save money? How? Those tests are not free.
Why would cutting someone off from welfare reduce crime? Creating desperate people with no source of income is likely to increase crime - who wouldn't steal to feed themselves or their family.
Welfare barely pays for food and accommodation and is not so generous that it can support a drug habit. Someone with an addiction problem so strong that they substitute drugs for neccessities needs help not abandonment.

Well Dad works for Social Services, so I can ask him directly if there is a policy in NC.

I used to be on Food Stamps, Cash Assistance, WIC, & Health Insurance.... I never had to take a test, but I was required to document every aspect of my job-hunting expierence. In addition I was required to comit to 40 hours per week of job hunting which left me with little or no time to do drugs. Nor did I have the money. We barely made rent, and ate. It is not a utopian program.

We currently still get WIC on one of the children, and believe me, one block of cheese and 5 gallons of milk hasn't made me ran out and do drugs. The constant screaming from the kids, the stress of work, and Republican's in office might, but not that.

A Person wrote:Save money? How? Those tests are not free.
Why would cutting someone off from welfare reduce crime? Creating desperate people with no source of income is likely to increase crime - who wouldn't steal to feed themselves or their family.
Welfare barely pays for food and accommodation and is not so generous that it can support a drug habit. Someone with an addiction problem so strong that they substitute drugs for neccessities needs help not abandonment.

Yes and a testing program can bring to light those who need the help. It wouldn't be an immediate cut off. A person failing the test could be given opportunities for help.

Regarding cost: If you get people who need help the help they need, then they are more likely to work their way toward more of a self-sustaining life. Helping break the cycle of relying on assistence and let folks work their way toward pride and feeling good about working.

Having manditory job hunt reporting would help them dvelop organizational skills as well.

Note these are tasks that would help anyone in the workplace. I see it as a win-win.

Companies have to have a reason for drug testing - usually public or worker safety

What do you see as the primary objective of such a program for welfare recioients?

Identifying those with an addiction to ensure they get help to combat it.
Eliminating people from welfare because their addiction makes them unworthy of help.
Making sure that collecting welfare is as humiliating as possible to encourage them to look for jobs

Keeping the system working for those who want to work with it.

Bonuses can be given for on-time reporting and staying healthy. I think it should be an incentive system.

Keep your appointments, more money.
Keep looking for a job, more money.
Volunteer for city clean up or community help, more money.
Take an educational class, more money.

If they have an addiction, they can get help that maybe they didn't think they could get. If they don't want to help themselves, then there's many more people who need help and strongly desire to improve themselves.

A system like this would prepare them for working in jobs that will fire them for being constantly, late, on drugs, etc. It would help break the cycle and provide self esteem.

For most jobs I've had they only do a single entrance drug test. Only if you get hurt on the job do they do a second. I know some employer do do random tests.... but the only reason employers do it is....

INSURANCE.

The insurance company's say "you have to test everyone at the beginning" so we can make sure your not hiring accident prone people.

Then some companis (especially service industries, where the liklihood of getting hurt is greater) do random test, also for the same reason.

But I've never had a company I've worked for do the "random", so they can't be all that common. Lastly the accident drug test is so the company & it's insurance doesn't have to pay the bill for worker's comp.

So it's obvious taking a drug test is to reduce costs from worker's comp, injury and lawsuits.... On welfare, your suggesting it should be the determining factor for your qualification of welfare... it's apples and oranges in my opinion. People can't sue welfare for hurting themselves doing drugs, so of course they arn't going to require the drug test; there isn't any money in it.

More to the point.... Not all drugs are bad in some people's opinions. Lastly is it fair to bust the marijuana smoker who get's free bud from his neighbor but not the middle aged hollywood drop-out who get's her sedatives from the same guy who pumps her full of botox? Legal drugs, legally prescribed can be just as much wasteful to your tax dollars as illegal ones.