Require drug testing for recipients of all State and Federal Assistance Programs.
Why should taxpayers dollars support illegal drug use? Urge OUR government to support drug testing for ALL aid recipients.
I am writing to you to express my support for testing all recipients of State and Federal Assistance, for the presence of illegal drugs.
Nowhere in our state or U.S. constitutions is it mandated that financial assistance is a right. Make no mistake, it is a privilege afforded to those in need by the taxpayers via our federal and state governments. Also, unemployment compensation premiums are currently paid by the employer, not the employee; however that may change very soon. We should also remember that illicit drug use is illegal. It is a crime that has criminal penalties.
I think it's time that we get serious about the problem of illegal drug users abusing our public assistance system. We should require random drug testing for every individual receiving welfare, food assistance or unemployment benefits. After all, more and more employers are requiring drug testing. Why not make sure that people who are supposed to be looking for work are already prequalified by being drug free?
Furthermore, encouraging just one drug addicted, welfare supported mother or father, to get clean, would save potentially thousands upon thousands of dollars. For every child born who is inflicted with a lifelong drug abuse related disease, the taxpayer?s incurred expense could be in the hundreds of thousands and potentially millions of dollars.
Opponents claim that this legislation will hurt the children. Evidence clearly indicates that drug addicted parents are the ones truly inflicting the harm. This bill actually helps to protect the children. Someone who fails a drug test will be given two months to get clean before assistance is cut off. Any good parent would clearly choose their children?s best interest over illegal drugs. And, maybe financial resources or the lack there of will be a greater cessation motivator than the addiction itself. Remember, the upfront drug testing expense is minimal compared to the backside taxpayer incurred burden.
As for the constitutional issue, it has never been considered by the US Supreme Court. Furthermore, ?Big Brother? already invades welfare recipient?s lives by requiring proof of need via payroll receipts and bank account information. Interestingly enough, employees can get fired from their job for drug usage, yet receive unemployment compensation benefits which in turn drives up the cost of employer paid unemployment premiums.
In essence, I believe that this requirement will be constitutional. Opponents of this bill are either enablers of bad (illegal) behavior, drug abusers or the most despicable of all...have a personal financial interest/gain in the demise of a certain segment of our society. And, they?ve yet to offer a viable alternative to this legislation.
It?s time we start respecting the taxpayer and get serious about fixing this problem.
Nowhere in our state or U.S. constitutions is it mandated that financial assistance is a right. Make no mistake, it is a privilege afforded to those in need by the taxpayers via our federal and state governments. Also, unemployment compensation premiums are currently paid by the employer, not the employee; however that may change very soon. We should also remember that illicit drug use is illegal. It is a crime that has criminal penalties.
I think it's time that we get serious about the problem of illegal drug users abusing our public assistance system. We should require random drug testing for every individual receiving welfare, food assistance or unemployment benefits. After all, more and more employers are requiring drug testing. Why not make sure that people who are supposed to be looking for work are already prequalified by being drug free?
Furthermore, encouraging just one drug addicted, welfare supported mother or father, to get clean, would save potentially thousands upon thousands of dollars. For every child born who is inflicted with a lifelong drug abuse related disease, the taxpayer?s incurred expense could be in the hundreds of thousands and potentially millions of dollars.
Opponents claim that this legislation will hurt the children. Evidence clearly indicates that drug addicted parents are the ones truly inflicting the harm. This bill actually helps to protect the children. Someone who fails a drug test will be given two months to get clean before assistance is cut off. Any good parent would clearly choose their children?s best interest over illegal drugs. And, maybe financial resources or the lack there of will be a greater cessation motivator than the addiction itself. Remember, the upfront drug testing expense is minimal compared to the backside taxpayer incurred burden.
As for the constitutional issue, it has never been considered by the US Supreme Court. Furthermore, ?Big Brother? already invades welfare recipient?s lives by requiring proof of need via payroll receipts and bank account information. Interestingly enough, employees can get fired from their job for drug usage, yet receive unemployment compensation benefits which in turn drives up the cost of employer paid unemployment premiums.
In essence, I believe that this requirement will be constitutional. Opponents of this bill are either enablers of bad (illegal) behavior, drug abusers or the most despicable of all...have a personal financial interest/gain in the demise of a certain segment of our society. And, they?ve yet to offer a viable alternative to this legislation.
It?s time we start respecting the taxpayer and get serious about fixing this problem.
View Comments