Drug testing to receive government aid. People who work get randomly tested, why shouldn’t someone on welfare have to do the same?
10 Likes
Seems like a no-brainer. If they have drugs in their system, then they are apparently getting income from somewhere. And equally, if they are on drugs, then the assistance provided them may become a vehicle for them to continue purchasing such drugs. If You offer a starving drug addict a KFC drumstick in one hand and a full syringe in the other hand, what do you think he/she will pick?
2 Likes
Anyone applying or receiving any goverment assistance, i.e. EBT, HUD, S.S.I. and any other assistance, must pass a bi-annual drug test. If you fail, your benefits are terminated and you will not be eligible to apply again for a year.
1 Like
I do not have personal experience with this, but I know someone like this that is dear to me. They have EXCRUCIATING pain from 2 forms of arthritis, and other more personal issues. Trying to get Opioids or pain medication is now pretty impossible. All this person can do now for any relief is to smoke pot. There is absolutely no way this person can work. Arthritis has deformed their feet, fingers, and back.
Now if you want to test for Cocaine or Heroin… I can get behind that. Just leave the things for pain alone. I truly think Trump did a great job last term, but they really did mess up the pain medicine issue. They took it too far.
Throw random tests in there too, and make them observed. They’ll get real creative to pass the test
1 Like
But their children would suffer. The kids are already victims. Don’t victimize them even more by denying them food.
1 Like
If they fail the test, they fail the test. I have to pass one to maintain employment, if I fail one my kids suffer too when I lose my job. It’s called consequences for your actions. Where is their family? If they are living to be high I don’t need to feed them.
1 Like
Sounds like a form of ‘Stockholm Syndrome’. If we took this approach with every welfare case in America, we would be broke in under a week. Then we would be talking about the problem of not being able to feed ANYONE’s kids. Just sayin’.
Yes! I have to be drug tested to work so why shouldn’t they? Also, we need conversation about the structure of the programs; let’s not punish those who want to get a job or go to school, let them work for year without reduction of benefits then they could save some money up and make it on their own. Need to put time limits on receiving benefits if you don’t go to work or school. The way they have it set up now just encourages people to become dependent and in the cycle of it being lifelong. I’m all about helping those in need but also want people to stand on their own two feet and get their lives together. Would absolutely love to see changes be made to help people learn and go on to have great lives!
Yes, I think it is about finding that delicate balance where we dont harm the American People while we try to help those within our society who honestly need help. Too much one way or another is more harmful than helpful.
1 Like
While we’re at it can we also drug test all our politicians and government agencies employees as well. Especially our congress and senate members and include not just drugs but also alcohol testing for them.I seear many of our representatives and senators have either been drunk or high when writing and voting on bills.
1 Like
This would mean people committing more crimes and children starving etc.
Why don’t we use this money that would get spent on testing to address systemic issues of why people are so miserable and broken that they want to do drugs? Are they in pain physically? Are there mental health issues undealt with?
It’s not fair to punish people for being sick in body or mind, especially when there’s no help to be had. Even if it has turned them into drug addicts.
We have an epidemic of people turning to drugs. We need to address the problem instead of punishing people with starvation for having the problem. Especially when you ought to see the problems are designed on purpose and inflicted on them, these days.
Not to mention, this topic keeps coming up, but I don’t recall anyone mentioning a few things:
That Pot is legal in much of the country now. Do people have the right to take away food from people for using a legal substance? What about beer? Someone else may have bought it by the way, people do share. And a lot of people on food stamps have a job and some income, just not enough to get by. Food stamps give them a way to have enough food to eat and/ or better nutrition, which is cheaper for the nation in the long run in health care costs, especially with growing children.
Is being substance abstinent a prerequisite of having food stamps by the way? I don’t think it says so currently.
And that not everyone who uses a drug is an addict. Sometimes people use a substance only once. Some use a substance now and then. It’s not accurate to assume anyone who has had a substance at any given time is an addict.
What about their rights to do what they wish? I’m kinda curious that people will throw the gauntlet down over these libertarian ‘your freedom’ rants in other posts, so adamant for someone’s rights to use porn even when other people are being trafficked into sex slavery to supply it to them, or the rights of people to be Satanists, etc, but for example, smoke some pot on the weekend or whatever when someone came over and passed it around and now people have the right to take your food away. But no one finds that the teensiest bit Gestapo?
I don’t mean to be rude, but this is the kind of subject that it’s really easy to make sweeping generalizations about imaginary people while revving each other up in virtual high fives. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone who wants to be an addict. I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone who wouldn’t rather be respectable, have a good job, live in a nice house. Have it all together.
They aren’t out there waggling their butts at you, calling you suckers for paying taxes to feed them, all happy to skip off to the local drug depot and blow their brains out on whatever.
People aren’t enabled by food stamps to buy drugs. If they are an addict, they’re going to buy their drugs no matter what. They will prostitute themselves, steal, commit fraud, whatever. Because drugs to an addict are like air and needing to breathe. What the food stamps do is keep these people and their kids alive longer so that maybe some help might get to them.
What’s missing is the help to get them off the drugs and the preventative measure to keep them from doing it in the first place.
Food is life. You’re talking about taking life from these people. And you’ll get horrific results. Look for the crime rates to skyrocket and more news stories of …the terrible things desperate people do.
There ARE some people who make a lifestyle out of this, generationally, not because of drugs but because of culture. That’s the exception though, not the rule, and that discussion is all full of topics too delicate to say so I’ll leave it.
Tell it to people who are determined to divide the drugs to “light” and heavy”.
Tell it to people, on this forum including, who scream that marihuana use should be decriminalized and allowed, in general.
I just saw a guy, on an asphalt-laying vehicle, lighting up one - the smell goes over that of the fresh-hot asphalt — he is “presumably” being tested regularly (and “randomly too, as per DOT and others’ requirements). No one cares to even say anything, because they are afraid of being labeled as oppressors: “oh, come on, it is just a recreational drug”… right?. That asphalt crew, btw, are from the city…
And I laughed of another responder here - she came up with predetermined terms already: every 6 months - tests, restricted from assistance for 1 year…
How about help people to get OFF the assistance? And to prohibit one to those who abuse the system? It is NOT normal in a developed society when people live off “the assistance” for years!!, except for irreversibly handicapped and incapacitated, of course.