(Missouri) House passes drug testing for welfare recipients

[cali]

By Rudi Keller Columbia Daily Tribune

Monday, January 31, 2011

Advertisement

JEFFERSON CITY — The House yesterday approved a measure that would impose drug-testing on welfare recipients. The measure passed by a vote of 116-27 and now heads to the Senate.

Sponsored by Rep. Ellen Brandom, R-Sikeston, the measure would apply to all new applicants for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, and those who are in TANF work-eligibility programs. If a state welfare worker determined there was “reasonable suspicion” the recipient was using drugs, the applicant would have to submit to a test or have their family benefits cut.

Opponents of the bill used the projected $2 million cost to question whether the bill is cost-effective. Others noted the absence of a requirement that the state provide drug treatment for people who fail the test.

Although the bill requires anyone testing positive be referred to a treatment program, it does not
require the state to provide the treatment.

<snip>

http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/jan/31/house-passes-drug-testing-welfare-recipients/

And Missouri isn't the only state going this route- S.Dakota, Illinois and others are too.

[Newest Reality]

1. Freekin' Brilliant ...

What motivates this, really? Budgets? Cut the rolls? Welfare is, well, the welfare of people in need, not a moralistic indictment vendor.

"Uh-oh! You have smoked a joint recently. Be damned to hell and take your children with you!"

What with all the bailouts and obvious, blatant bullshit going on these days, this is just plain mean-spirited and biased against the people who need help the most.

We have major problems to deal with and those clowns in office are going for the throats of those who are most vulnerable and down and out while we pump everything we have left into the pockets of the deadbeat rich.

Ridiculous, to say the very least. Shameful, to be more precise.

[RegieRocker]

2. I have been very vocal against this utterly stupid idea.

A lot of good it did. The testing is so so but no safety net for the kids and no treatment is downright brainless.

[girl gone mad]

3. When are they going to drug test the Wall Street welfare kings?

[Capnjack]

4. For what?

Wouldn't it make sense if they are on welfare shouldn't they be clean?
If you need assistance then why would you be buying drugs. As long as people who need it
and are staying clean still get help what's the harm? Honest question.

[rfranklin]

6. It's discriminatory...test any legislature and you will find...

a whole boatload of druggies and alcohol abusers.

[Toon Me Out]

8. would explain

a lot.

[cali]

7. it's an act that humiliates people

and it perpetrates a stereotype. It's disgusting.

[Viking12]

10. It's alreay been ruled unconstitutional in Michigan

..and it costs more to do the testing than it will save...

[Cid_B]

5. I'm ok with this...

You want to buy crack and take the chance of going to jail? Good for you but I'd appreciate it if they didn't use tax dollars to do it.

[rfranklin]

9. How about testing legislators for drug and alcohol abuse?

They are living off the taxpayers so it would only be fair. For instance, Speaker of the House Boehner is a well known alcoholic. Should the taxpayers be giving him government money when he's drunk every day?

[Cid_B]

11. You seem to have the ability..

... to type a fairly coherent statement so I'll assume you know the difference between welfare and payment for services (whether you like those services or not).

You want to subsidize meth abuse, then feel free. I don't...

[rfranklin]

16. I don't think there is any difference...

why should I subsidize a drunk or an oxycodone addict? Just because a doctor writes the prescription doesn't mean it isn't drug abuse.

[du_da]

15. More importantly they are our employees.

I think this is a great idea. Although, I am not sure alcohol abuse would count since it isn't legal but they better not being drinking while at the capital building and when in session. Although some leeway would be given when no votes or meetings are scheduled since they don't actually punch a clock. If he is drinking off the clock then that's his business so long as it isn't illegal to do so.

[emilyg]

17. I'm OK with it, too.

[Omaha Steve]

12. IF it passes, the ACLU will fight it

It was discussed for Nebraska, and the ACLU pretty much stopped it. Good for the ACLU.

[Toon Me Out]

13. this is just a facet...

...of the rising Missouri Taliban. If you read further about that state, they've also been getting more squeamish and obsessed with the nudity of their exotic dancers, so they passed new laws simply to harass them. These fundy nuts are elected officials who are intrinsically indistinguishable from Palin, Bachmann, all of their ilk.

[May Hamm]

14. That just makes me want to throw up.