PISS OFF, CONGRESS!!

[HairOfTheDog]

While most Americans like the idea of drug testing for welfare recipients, they LOVE the idea of drug testing for members of Congress.

According to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, 64 percent of Americans favor requiring welfare recipients to submit to random drug testing -- a measure pushed by Republican lawmakers in recent years -- while 18 percent oppose it.

But an even stronger majority said they're in favor of random drug testing for members of Congress, by a 78 percent to 7 percent margin. Sixty-two percent said they "strongly" favor drug testing for congressional lawmakers, compared to only 51 percent who said the same of welfare recipients.

Full story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/02...ostpopular

----------------------------------------------------------

To pee or not to pee? That is the question...

[Duchess]

I'm not opposed to that. They should be held to the highest of standards.

[SIXFOOTERsez]

Agreed, Cops, Lawmakers, public officials...all get measured by a slightly longer yard stick

[Cynical Ninja]

Politicians make important decisons that touch large numbers of peoples lives everyday so yeah I'd prefer to know they aren't regularly chasing the dragon.

How that fat ziphead in Canada is still in office is beyond me. If a politician here was filmed smoking crack they would be instantly dismissed and the police would be automatically involved.

[username]

Hahaha!!! We'd lose half the bunch probably. For the money though, I'd really like welfare recipients tested. Although...suppose they come up positive? They end up on the streets with their kids who are then moved to the foster system? They're enrolled in government funded/mandatory detox? They end up in emergency rooms on the tax payer dime? There's no good answer as far as I can see.

[HairOfTheDog]

I wouldn't actually support drug tests for either welfare recipients or Congresspersons; don't like the personal invasion and think it would create as many problems in administration and enforcement as it could potentially solve.

I did think it was funny that the American public supports drug testing more strongly for those trying to impose it on welfare recipients than we do for the welfare recipients themselves.

Sign of the times, I guess.

[aussiefriend]

I think it's a brilliant idea, you are not enabling drug addiction by instigating these measures. There would also be residual effects that would permeate from these measures, such as children being rescued from these type of substance abuse environments that they survive in.

You will get people trying to dupe and cheat the tests though.

[Maggot]

Ideas are like lightbulbs, to bad they only sell the flourescent ones now. Well you can still get the 40 watt ones.

[aussiefriend]

It won't be just an idea if they make it a law. It should be part of the deal for welfare recipients. It is not discrimination as clearly there is a strong link to the misuse of these funds and what they are to be used for. If it helps saves a child from a life of extreme poverty, neglect and abuse, I say bring it on.

[Duchess]

User has a valid point. You know damn well some of those bitches are going to fail their piss test. No food, no housing, we'd be creating chaos and crime would sky rocket. I don't know what the answer is. I think I might like sittin' around getting high all day but I have to work to help support the ones that do get to do that.

[HairOfTheDog]

It won't be just an idea if they make it a law. It should be part of the deal for welfare recipients. It is not discrimination as clearly there is a strong link to the misuse of these funds and what they are to be used for. If it helps saves a child from a life of extreme poverty, neglect and abuse, I say bring it on.

The problem is that those children removed from their parents would go into foster care.

I don't know anything about foster care in Australia, aussie. Here in the US, there's certainly no guarantee that the child wouldn't simply be placed in a foster family with its own issues of equal or greater significance (drugs or otherwise); a family wherein the guardians are motivated to foster parent for the government paycheck only. Not all foster homes are like that, but it's a crapshoot.

So, you could be separating a child from his siblings and bio parents without improving, maybe even worsening, his lot in life.

Honestly, I think a higher percentage of the Congresspersons tested for substances would fail as compared to welfare recipients. Congresspersons can afford to indulge in drugs and alcohol without typically having to sacrifice food, shelter and clothing to do so.

The issue of drug abuse (prescription or illegal) is widespread. It seems to be equally prevalent amongst those of us who fall somewhere between welfare recipients and US Congresspersons in terms of lifestyle and wealth. I wouldn't like to see the government testing the general population either.

IDK. I think we here in the US have more than enough drug laws that aren't working and a disturbingly high percentage of our population is already incarcerated as it stands.

[aussiefriend]

If you don't want to be drug tested then don't be a recipient of the handout they are giving you. It comes with conditions and here they are. Being entitled to benefits from your government is not a human right, it's a privilege.

[ramseycat]

If you don't want to be drug tested then don't be a recipient of the handout they are giving you. It comes with conditions and here they are. Being entitled to benefits from your government is not a human right, it's a privilege.

I wish we had a like button.

[ramseycat]

I agree that all government employees should be randomly tested on a regular basis. Especially congress people. They are the ones making the laws if this country. They should not be able to break them.

[aussiefriend]

I don't know anything about foster care in Australia, aussie. Here in the US, there's certainly no guarantee that the child wouldn't simply be placed in a foster family with its own issues of equal or greater significance (drugs or otherwise); a family wherein the guardians are motivated to foster parent for the government paycheck only. Not all foster homes are like that, but it's a crapshoot.

Don't fucking piss me off HoTD with your excuses. You snooze you lose. You wanna take drugs you don't do it at the taxpayers expense you fucking cuntface leech. You fucking go out and earn your fucking money and smoke your crystal meth on your own time. Do not think that you can have people like HoTD to help you out, because people like me will not tolerate you.

These foster people have at least undergone some kind of stringent expert evaluation, unlike the crack meth lab people. Bring it HoTD. Do not get politically correct on this one, because I am a parent and ful....on Heineken.

[HairOfTheDog]

I'm not compelled to argue with you, aussie. It would actually be politically correct to agree with you and ramsey and jump on the "drug test them all!" bandwagon. Nobody wants to pay for welfare recipients and politicians who abuse drugs. I can be PC all day long, it's easy.

You and ramsey can tackle creating another governmental agency (or another department of an existing one) to administer drug tests at tax payers' expense. And, what quantity/measurement of the thousands of prescription drugs that are abused should constitute a failure - abuse of legally available drugs is more widespread than meth, so that'll be very important. And, how many Heinekins would constitute abusing alcohol and disqualify a welfare recipient from parenthood and continued assistance. And, how to deal with denying food to those welfare recipients who fail a drug test. You can't toss them in jail and feed them with that pool of taxpayer revenue - unless you also wanna change the laws about probable cause and evidence and all that silly stuff, and build more prisons, or let other criminals out of the already over-crowded facilities to make room for the new drug abusers. You'll need more taxpayer revenue to fund all those extra public defenders, and judges, and court personnel as well.

Since taxpayer expense doesn't really seem to be your concern after all and the betterment of children's lives is really your motive, you'll probably wanna push for new legislation and taxpayer revenues to drug test foster parents as well - that's not currently part of the stringent expert qualifications in place for those receiving governmental/taxpayer assistance for taking in children. A plan for where to next shuffle all the kids whose foster parents fail will be necessary, too.

When you have all those pesky little details ("excuses") ironed out, I'd consider supporting drug testing for welfare recipients and Congresspersons despite my general objection to more governmental intervention. I haven't seen a plan that solves more problems than it creates and no one claims to really have one, but maybe the Congresspersons investigating the options are all on meth and need level headed parents like you and ramsey to figure it all out - for the children.

[Duchess]

These foster people have at least undergone some kind of stringent expert evaluation

Over here foster homes are notoriously bad, not all of them of course but enough that they are stereotyped and in many cases as bad of an environment or worse than the kid/s come from. Many of the people offering a home are in it for the money not because they care about the welfare of the child.

You know how I feel about supporting those mongrels, if I thought drug testing was the answer I'd be all over that shit.

[crash]

Foster careers don't have anywhere near as bad a reputation in this country as the US. For one, you'd be doing it for love and humanity, not for the money; the funding isn't even enough to look after them. There are rigorous check mechanisms in place for people volunteering to be foster carers.

In saying that, the system is not perfect and only recently there were a couple of guys who had abused young girls in their care. One asshole's wife was on her deathbed with cancer and the motherfucker was sexually abusing a 14 year old foster child in their care. The judge gave that scum the maximum sentence unopposed, thank fuck.

[ramseycat]

Unfortunately, HOTD is right. There is no easy way to address the Welfare drug problem. Prison guards undergo random drug resting. So do men in the military. They can do it to Congress too. It can be funded by a tax taken out of their paychecks.

[aussiefriend]

That was a low blow to bring up my Heinekin abuse tonight. I mean, I get up at 5.30am in the freezing cold to pay for this shit. And my mother was here to drive when I ran out of the shit. It was all above board, all legal, all once of the year shit. I am dealing with some relationship issues too. Fucking give me a break before you fucking put me in with a fucking crystal meth drug lab parent.