Comments on: Drug Testing Welfare Recipients

By: Nancy

Nancy — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 03:16:25 +0000

I believe that ok lets drug test welfare recipients,but let us not throw them to the street.There are other options.Alot of welfare plans include parenting classes and offer help in domestic violence.You people are talking about abolishing and shunning those people,which would make it bad on everyone else.You know if we can pay $50.000 per person in prison,why not spend $5,000 to help an addict in need ,and who’s life can be changed.I myself am an addict and if someone came to me know and said hey I can send you to a long term drug rehab for free ans not lose my son or my assistance for food and health and cash.Alot of us addicts really do want the help with all our being but addicts are also afraid and ashamed of there addictions and what they have done to our loved ones.You can’t get rid of us by throwing us away.Why could’nt the system say ok we can help you but you have to go to this 3 month residential rehab first.Alot of our lives could be saved this way.

By: Bettie Wineberg

Bettie Wineberg — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:00:53 +0000

Everyone seems to loooooovvve this idea. I don’t! All of you seem to think that drug tests are infallible. Talk to someone who has experienced the horrors of a false positive (failed drug test).
Here’s my sad story: I was caught in posession of drugs last year and chose treatment rather than jail. My rehab gives 2 UAs (drug tests) each week. I have been doing well at rehab, mostly because I WANTED to quit using. I have been clean for almost a year now. So…imagine my surprise when my case manager pulled me aside to tell me that I came up “positive” for cocaine on one recent test and I was flagged for “insufficient urine” on another. (Insufficient urine, spilled urine, diluted urine and urine with an unusual ph factor are an automatic “positive”. The assumption is that the addict tampered with the urine.) I have not used cocaine or any other prohibited drug for 8 1/2 months. I wasn’t trying to mess up the other test, either. So, here I am, facing some jail time and the possibility of being kicked out of the rehab program. My next hearing is in January, so I get to spend the holidays and my birthday (December 17) worrying and crying over this. If I was in Arizona, I might be facing a year without food stamps or medical insurance. If the drug testing frenzy ever reaches Social Security ( God forbid!), I would be totally broke and evicted/homeless within a month or two.
Why don’t I work? I have severe arthritis and multiple sclerosis. Some days, I can walk, bend, stretch, carry things, etc… Other days, I am unable to do any of those things. Even putting on clothes or writing a note takes an hour! I would love to be a healthy person with normal energy levels and a great job. Being poor and sick isn’t the endless party that so many welfare-haters think it is. Many poor people use drugs because of physical and emotional pain. Lots of people can’t find a job in today’s economy. Some people CAN’T do those “menial” jobs which all the haters on anti-welfare forums “suggest”.
Anyway, back to the drug testing disaster. So many people are saying: “Well, MY job requires me to take random drug tests, so jobless people should have to do it, too.” In other words, let’s share the misery! I have a fresh new idea: NO
ONE should be drug tested unless their behavior or job performance indicates a problem. Drug testing should be the last resort!
Also… stopping a drug addict’s check will not stop his addiction. It won’t change his need for food, shelter, clothing, etc… As more of these laws are passed, expect a dramatic rise in homelessness and crime. Expect a lot more violence, more in the stressed-out homes of the poor, and more in the streets. And if your knee-jerk answer is something like “okay, then we’ll just throw all of ‘em in prison”, remember how EXPENSIVE that is: $50,000 per year each prisoner, last I heard.

By: Derek

Derek — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:10:18 +0000

They tried this in Florida but it never took off. Problem was they expected the individuals to pay for their own drug tests. When you are seeking employment it is the employer who pays for your drug test. If someone is down on their luck then they should not be required to pay a fee to begin receiving benefits. Other than that it was a great idea.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:03:09 +0000

Guess you should have been more clear that you weren’t talking about high income taxpayers like physicians.

As for “real reform”, the only way anything other than caps is coming is through single payer. For the simple reason that insurers and tobacco and such drive the “reform” train currently, and physicians are just the unwitting face of it. The only other reform will be via single payer and involve a no-fault style for the patient, and some sort of review board for the physician within the Dept. of Health and Human Services or similar agency. Even then there will be someone to present the victim’s case, because they often lack the capacity or understanding to do it themselves. Just like workers comp.

Hope you enjoy the single payer model. I do agree with you it’s coming.

By: igloodoc

igloodoc — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:36:51 +0000

Matt
I was referring to average tax paying people… why would they stay in a state that incentivizes not working. The average tax payer would and should work in a state where their work is valued and their income is taxed less, and not paid to non-working citizens (that don’t have a damn good reason not to work).

As for your physician-California analogy… California does not have real tort reform. No state in the United States does. Monetary caps is not reform… it is a bandaid for a dying system. Real reform does not involve lawyers at all. And it will come.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:00:32 +0000

You asked why you would stay in California if you’re employed. I simply reminded you of what so many physicians say: tort reform is key to keeping physicians. Cali has had it for 30 years, and it’s the harshest one around – so there’s a great reason for you physicians to stay.

If you don’t want your questions answered, why do you ask them?

Read what you type, igloo.

By: igloodoc

igloodoc — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 04:42:59 +0000

Huh?

Let’s see — incentivizing druggies with welfare = physicians kills a kid for 250,000.

Yup.. no leap of logic here. Move along, nothing to see here.

Sleep it off, Matt.

By: SeaSpray

SeaSpray — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:45:37 +0000

Matt ..you’ve got a point. It’s all so frustrating.

In the end.. there will always be an element of the population looking to scam the system for their benefit. The ones who are not addicted, yet scam the system for their gain actually act more egregiously ..again assuming they are of sound mind. But it’s all just *wrong*. I am not excusing drug addicts. I still think they should be accountable… because to do nothing allows their behavior to remain the status quo.

There needs to be more follow up..reevaluate criteria, strict adherence protocols, etc., but budgets are cut and so if anything..there is less.

Heck..we have a government that sends out tax refunds to dead people! Or pays how many hundreds of dollars for a regular toilet seat? (old story) There is so much waste all around us. I don’t think it is just the recipients of government monies..but also corruption within the system. Acorn anyone? I know..apples and oranges.. but the problems are pervasive.

Then with welfare..it is generational since it’s inception. Children are born into this free ride mentality, perpetuating the cycle.

People can come from other countries and never having contributed anything to this country..then get on the public systems. Then you have people in this country..who for whatever reason.. work hard ..but in menial jobs and so live at poverty level..yet make too much to qualify for any assistance and so they fall in between the cracks.

I wonder what would’ve happened if the programs were never instituted?

I believe with all my heart that we should help the poor.. but the flip side are the ones who take advantage..commit fraud and milk every program they can for all they can get. Oh and then some work on the side and don’t claim it on their federal taxes.

Then look who is in charge of the treasury..who also evaded paying taxes.

How do we fix this?

I think it has to be a from the ground up revamping of the entire system. But they say..once you have these programs..so many people become dependent. I don’t know if this is true..but I’ve also heard that if this healthcare program goes through… we won’t be able to undo it.

Sorry about the mini rant WC.

One last thing ..I have too admit.. I have wondered like Throck does …about *some* people on disability. I have seen people who collect and really do seem like they can work. One guy had a vascular problem with his *legs*, was on full disability and yet opened his own limo service and was *driving all the time*. ? Where was the follow up? But he did work and so that is a good thing.

I have a friend who was initially *denied* disability who 100% deserved it. His whole life was ruined because while a volunteer in the local FD..was hit in the head by the ladder during a call. They didn’t know that was the cause until years later, but he began having serious seizures that exacerbated to the point that he had to give up his license, could not work because of the frequency and unpredictability of the seizures which after all these years has caused additional damage. This man would love to work, earn his own money and have his life back. *He was denied disability*. Fortunately ..a nun who moved in near him became aware of his situation..told him he should have it, went to bat for him and he was awarded back payments..plus disability.

I WONDER who and why do they deny someone like him and award it to someone much less deserving?

If only there could be an accurate way to determine eligibility.

Maybe at least if there was random drug testing ..they could be forced into a rehab program and be put on notice there will be more frequent random drug tests. ?

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:23:36 +0000

I have no problem with random drug testing, but how does cutting someone who can’t stop using actually do anything? They’re not then employable if they can’t pass a drug test, are they? Now that they can’t pay the rent how have we accomplished anything for the taxpayer? I guess we shifted them to receiving food and shelter, if any, from nonprofits.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:21:52 +0000

Well, if you’re a physician, you stay for the tort reform. That’s why California has so many more physicians, and it’s so much better to practice there, and health care is so much cheaper there than anywhere else in the country! Because if you injure or kill a kid with your malpractice all their life is worth is $250,000!