want welfare? get drug tested

[Lady Cop]

is this fair or invasive and unconstitutional in your opinion?

(CNN) -- A controversial law requiring adults applying for welfare assistance to undergo drug screening has gone into effect in Florida.

Saying it is "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction," Gov. Rick Scott signed the legislation in June.

"It's the right thing for taxpayers," Scott said after signing the measure. "It's the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don't want to waste tax dollars. And also, we want to give people an incentive to not use drugs."

Under the law, which went into effect on Friday, the Florida Department of Children and Family Services will be required to conduct the drug tests on adults applying to the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.

The aid recipients would be responsible for the cost of the screening, which they would recoup in their assistance if they qualify.

Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.
HUH? will the designated person be tested? that will be fertile ground for fraudulent circumvention of the intention of the law. if the parent is a druggie, then get DCF to intervene.

Shortly after the bill was signed, five Democrats from the state's congressional delegation issued a joint statement attacking the legislation, one calling it "downright unconstitutional."

And the ACLU has filed suit against the state for requiring all state workers to take a drug test and is considering suing the state for drug-testing welfare applicants.

Controversy over the measure was heightened by Scott's past association with a company he co-founded that operates walk-in urgent care clinics in Florida and counts drug screening among the services it provides.

In April, Scott, who had transferred his ownership interest in Solantic Corp. to a trust in his wife's name, said the company would not contract for state business, according to local media reports. He subsequently sold his majority stake in the company, local media reported.

On May 18, the Florida Ethics Commission ruled that two conflict-of-interest complaints against Scott were legally insufficient to warrant investigation, and adopted an opinion that no "prohibited conflict of interest" existed.

Florida is not the first state to pass such legislation. Michigan passed a similar law that the 6^th Circuit Court of Appeals found unconstitutional in 2003 since it violated the U.S. Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens against unreasonable search.

The court said the law would set a dangerous precedent by allowing the government to conduct drug searches for the safety of the public without prior suspicion.

[Luke Warmwater]

long overdue...

[Duchess]

That's awesome to read! Please, please, please let my state adopt that too!

[ZEROSPHERES]

Maybe welfare and food stamps should legally fall under privileges and not rights. It would give the state better enforcement and management of the way funds are distributed.

[Duchess]

Getting something for free SHOULD be considered a privilege.

[Lady Cop]

from Orlando Sentinel:

About 4,000 Floridians each month may be affected by the new law, which applies only to parents with minor children who request temporary cash assistance. The average benefit check per family is $240 a month with a lifetime limit of 48 months.

The 93,000 state residents already receiving such benefits would not be affected unless they reapply. Applicants for food stamps, Medicaid and other programs also would not be affected.

Some details of the drug-testing law have shifted since the first drafts were made public. Initially, DCF spokesmen said a positive drug test, while disqualifying the applicant from receiving the cash benefits for a year, would not necessarily trigger an investigation by child-welfare workers.

Since then, the department has confirmed that all parents who test positive for drugs — including legal drugs not prescribed for the parent — will be reported automatically to the state's abuse hotline.

Department spokesman Joe Follick said that does not necessarily mean there would be a child-abuse or neglect investigation.

"We're talking about individual families with individual sets of circumstances and often facing life difficulties that most of us can't imagine," Follick said. "You can't make a generalization that, if they're using a particular drug, those kids shouldn't be there. You have to go meet the family, talk with the family and find out what services they need."

Only if there is further evidence that the children are in danger would state workers pursue a case against the parents.

Applicants will have to pay for the drug tests themselves, though those who test negative will be reimbursed in the first benefit check they receive. Those who test positive also would have the chance to get a second, more-sophisticated screening — at their own expense of up to $100 — and have an official medical review of the testing. Follick said it is still unclear whether those expenses would be reimbursed if the applicant is ultimately cleared.

"Our rule-making probably will not be done until mid- to late July," he said. "We'll probably have at least one more public meeting until they're finalized."

It's also uncertain how much help will be available for parents with little or no money to get drug treatment.

Though DCF does contract with treatment centers for a limited amount of services for the indigent, those programs have few or no openings.

"We are constantly full," said Todd Dixon, director of community affairs at the Orlando-based Center for Drug-Free Living, which handles the bulk of Central Florida cases. The nonprofit organization also has to give priority to court-ordered clients and those whose cases are most urgent, such as pregnant women.

"That's the biggest problem with this law in general," Dixon said. "If you're going to implement a policy like this, you also have an obligation to serve the people who need it. And that was not included in the legislation … . There was no additional funding to cover these [welfare] applicants."

In two-parent households, both adults would have to pass drug tests. If they fail, they could ask a third party, such as an adult relative, to apply for benefits that would be used solely for the children. But that applicant, too, would be required to pass the drug screening.
GOOD, that addresses my question.

[Cynical Ninja]

$240 month?

Wow, I can see why so many Americans are turning to the lucrative career of begging.

[Carsman]

As it should be in "ALL" states!

[Lady Cop]

several states are going to follow suit.

Pennsylvania officials are wading into the controversial territory of drug-testing welfare recipients, testing out a new program Republicans say is meant to prevent beneficiaries from getting a "free ride."

After a federal judge blocked a much broader drug-test rule in Florida, Pennsylvania is taking a more careful approach. Instead of mandating drug tests for all welfare recipients, Pennsylvania plans to randomly test only those with a felony drug conviction within the past five years and those on probation for such offenses.

Officials are taking it slow. A pilot program has started in Pennsylvania's Schuylkill County, which could pave the way for a statewide program this summer if it proves cost effective.

State Sen. David Argall said in a statement last month that the program is "overdue," as officials try to cut costs in the state's most expensive division -- the Department of Public Welfare.

"This initiative seeks to stop the abuse within our welfare system," he said, adding that government benefits should only go to those "who genuinely deserve state assistance."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/...z1lTAbtOZY

[Cracker]

"ATLANTA - A pair of freshmen lawmakers announced Tuesday they are jointly introducing a bill in the House and Senate to require applicants for welfare to take drug tests at their own expense.

One of the authors, Rep. Jason Spencer, R-Woodbine, said a similar law in Florida reduced welfare applications by 48 percent. That state saved $2 million in five months, even after reimbursing the roughly one-in-four applicants who passed the test.

Under Spencer’s measure, House Bill 668, Georgia taxpayers would reimburse the roughly $27 cost of a drug test to applicants who pass. Those who fail would be barred from getting cash benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program for one month. Flunking a second time results in a three-month ban, and three or more failure makes an applicant ineligible for a year."

BFD. No real problem if you fail. You don't even get arrested.

[Cracker]

$240 month?

Wow, I can see why so many Americans are turning to the lucrative career of begging.

I would think you of all people would have a better understanding of benefits.

Cash money for stuff like shampoo or diapers or crack.
Food paid for, buy Ramen noodles and sell the rest of your food stamps for cash or sell people the groceries you buy for half price.
Housing paid for.
Medical paid for.
Some utilities paid for.
You can move a man in to get extra cash for nails and hair.
If you make your child retarded or born addicted to drugs, or you are a drug addict, you get the big payout: Social Security Disability.
AND you don't have to wake up in the mornings. That is priceless.

[IMaDick]

If they went to jail we would just switch how we are supporting them from welfare to jail is a small step as far as the money goes, in fact it would probably cost us more if they were in jail.

[Middle Finger]

Good controversial thread, LC!

[username]

That state saved $2 million in five months, even after reimbursing the roughly one-in-four applicants who passed the test.

Only one-in-four passed? Wow.

I'm for it but it's too bad to the extent it affects the kids of these losers in the short term. Long term, if they get taken away, it's probably for the best.

[Cracker]

If you have limited resources, say welfare, you shouldn't be spending your money on alcohol, drugs, cigs, lottery, etc.

Some of the nicest people I know smoke a little weed or whatever, and they seem to be really good parents. I don't think responsible people should keep their drugs in the house with the kids, but if you have a Bugle can out in the shed out of reach of the kiddies and you only imbibe when they aren't around or are tucked safely in bed, I can deal with that. It is a risk, for sure, but I can't pretend I am overly offended by it.

Some of the most fucked up people in the world are foster parents. I know there are some good ones, but I don't trust anybody to take care of kids as well as the parents/family will. Kids that have fucked up families are in such danger. It makes me sick. Being a bad parent should be a felony. Not just the horrid abuse stuff, but being a bad parent in general.

The issue is spending money you get for your kids on yourself. WTF is wrong with people? Stop making excuses and do something with your life. You only get the one...

[Maggot]

I have heard horror stories of foster parents a few do it to get money from the state.

[Cynical Ninja]

An old work colleague of mine admitted that being a foster carer was akin to winning the fucking lottery.

He was a creep that I wouldn't have trusted with the care of children anyway.

[Cracker]

Maybe orphanages and group homes aren't such a bad idea if they are properly managed. How weird would it be for a little kid to have to go live in a stranger's home. That must be awful.

Unless a kid has loving grandparents or older siblings, they are pretty much screwed.

The only way to change the way people care for their kids is to hold them accountable. If you are a suck parent, you should be forced to pay for a private care home for your kids. If a POS parent loses a kid now they just have another one. Or two or three.

There isn't any real punishment.