Should citizens receiving welfare be tested for drugs before being able to receive the aid they “need”? One major problem with drug testing people who collect welfare is if it is worth the effort. Large amounts of money are needed to put people through these tests, and they may not be worth it. Some people argue that the money used to drug test recipients is higher than the amount saved by not giving out the money for welfare. One final argument is the fact of drug tests being legal and constitutional. It is arguable that it infringes on the people’s rights to force them to undergo drug tests. Drug testing welfare recipients has its positives and negatives. Some argue that it is unconstitutional, and others argue that they use the money to buy more drugs. Drug testing welfare recipients is a major point of controversy with problems such as being worth the effort, saving money, and the legality of the tests in general.
A major issue in drug testing welfare beneficiaries is whether it is worth all the effort that is used. Drug tests take time to develop and some citizens may need the money quickly. If a facility does not have the proper technology, results for a drug test could take days to come in. Many states put forth these laws but did not execute them correctly, which resulted in them not doing well (Greenblatt 11). Much time would be needed when “....require drug testing of each and every individual…” (Aversa 16). If one was to drug test every individual, it could take decades to do all of the tests. Many people are required for drug tests with varying degrees and workplaces needed, which would cost even more money. Many different occupations would be needed to be able to apply the drug tests for citizens that apply for welf...
... middle of paper ...
...to receive drug tests for their assistance, then we will have to come up with another way to combat drug use.
Works Cited
Aversa, Salvatore. “Rick Scott’s Drug Testing Florida’s Welfare Recipients Ruled Unconstitutional.” Occupy Democrats. 01 January, 2014. Web. 05 January, 2014. .
Greenblatt, Alan. “Does Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Save Money?” Governing. July 2012. Web. 05 January, 2014. .
Sherman, Amy. “Court Strikes Down Drug Tests for TANF.” Politifact Florida. Tampa Bay Times, 31 December, 2013. Web. 05 January, 2014. .
The ethics of drug testing has become an increased concern for many companies in the recent years. More companies are beginning to use it and more people are starting more to have problems with it. The tests are now more than ever seen as a way to stop the problems of drug abuse in the workplace. This brings up a very large question. Is drug testing an ethical way to decide employee drug use? It is also very hard to decide if the test is an invasion of employee privacy. “The ethical status of workplace drug testing can be expressed as a question of competing interests, between the employer’s right to use testing to reduce drug related harms and maximize profits, over against the employee’s right to privacy, particularly with regard to drug use which occurs outside the workplace.” (Cranford 2) The rights of the employee have to be considered. The Supreme Court case, Griswold vs. Connecticut outlines the idea that every person is entitled to a privacy zone. However this definition covers privacy and protection from government. To work productively especially when the work may be physical it is nearly impossible to keep one’s privacy. The relationship between employer and employee is based on a contract. The employee provides work for the employer and in return he is paid. If the employee cannot provide services because of problems such as drug abuse, then he is violating the contract. Employers have the right to know many things about their employees.
...ult, and some times it does not give a result at all. It is unfair because it only targets certain workers; mainly low wage employees. It is unjust because people are automatically accused of using drugs, and that is why the drug test is given. Drug testing should not be abolished, but it should be a more controlled issue since it is something everyone in the US must go through.
"States Consider Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients." FoxNews.com - Breaking News | Latest News | Current News. 26 March 2009. Web. 31 January 2011
, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, individuals that support the law, express that the plan being put in effect is to ensure that tax payer’s money isn’t being thrown away on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Out of the fifty states, only nine have proceeded with the drug testing of candidates. The drug testing has proven to be quite expensive. Consequently, some of the states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or that have admitted to drug use in the past. Though the proposal of drug testing Welfare applicants appears to be a good idea to weed out spongers from getting assistance, it seems that more money may be wasted on the testing itself, which would be imprudent in proving this law worthwhile.
Should Welfare Recipients Be Tested for Drugs? U.S News & World Report. 2014: Pgs 1-2.
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not welfare recipients should be drug tested to receive the benefits. Both sides of the argument have merit. Those who oppose the idea of drug testing say that it is unconstitutional and violates the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, they claim that this law stereotypes and discriminates against those from low socioeconomic demographics, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, those who support the law note that its intended purpose is to ensure that taxpayer money is not being squandered on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Only nine states so far have instituted drug testing of candidates for welfare assistance. This drug testing has proven to be prohibitively expensive in many cases. Consequently, some states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or who have admitted to past drug use. Though proposed drug testing of welfare applicants initially appears to be a good idea to eliminate potential abusers of the system from receiving assistance, it appears that even more money may be wasted on the testing process, which negates the savings that are the primary objective of the law.
“Should Welfare Recipients Be Tested for Drugs?” Debate Club, U.S News and World Report. http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-welfare-recipients-be-tested-for-drugs
Meth, marijuana, cocaine, and heroin are among the top drugs that many people use and utilized as money making tactics. As we all know, drugs are found and they are heavily used in low income areas, not only do they pose a significant effect on one’s health but they pose a significant effect on our economy. Generally it is perceived that those who reside in low income areas are the ones who resort to drugs, evidently they are. Likewise, they are also the ones who are assumed to be enlisted on government assistance programs. Some of these programs include; health care, child care, ebt benefits, and even housing assistance programs. So the substantial question is “Should people who receive government assistance undergo drug tests?”
In my opinion I feel that this time of authority drug test are not effective. ” It would seem that if this policy were to make way that there would not be such a large rate of recidivism” (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1999). It takes more that sending a person to prison to break them of their habits. The means which are necessary to aid the cause of ending a drug habit are not available with this policy. Under the Bill of rights, the four rights that this policy violates are, The right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty, the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to be treated the same as others.
The law requires random testing of anyone who has had a felony drug conviction in the previous 10 years. For failing a drug test once, a recipient’s benefits are reduced by 30 percent. For failing twice, a recipient is disqualified from permanently receiving his/her benefits. The law applies to those receiving benefits under the state’s general assistance. The law was strengthened in 2012 with a measure of data sharing about convicted drug felons between the State Corrections and Human Services Departments. Which then also brought more debate on the law. The purpose is to prevent welfare fraud. “We don’t want to see well intended and generous welfare dollars that are for kids to be used for drugs instead.” says Rep. Steve Drazkowski.
Drug use now in days has grown more over these past years, with the abuse of drugs many people still have the privilege to apply freely to the welfare programs such as WIC, Food Stamps, and TANF. My interest to this topic is why it would be unconstitutional to be able to do a drug testing on welfare applicants.
As the common phrase goes, “where there’s a will, there’s a way.” Change in the welfare system is a must now more than ever because the government is in such a bad economic state, and it must and should be ensured that the tax payers know exactly where their money is going once those welfare checks are administered. Drug testing is a top priority in welfare reform and it should be; tax payers’ money should not be used for the purchase of illegal substances. The state of Texas and the United States face problems with misuse of welfare funds and there must be a change in the system in order to combat this. The purpose of welfare is to aid those that are in financial need to purchase the essentials required for survival. Individuals receiving welfare should subject to a drug test at any moment to ensure that the assistance they are getting is not misused. There are a number of reasons why the recipients should take a drug test and these are the top three: ensuring that tax payers money is not misused, reduce drug use, and to be fair to the working citizens of America.
Drug testing kits have become relatively inexpensive over the last few years due to our increased imports from China. The annual savings of promoting good health by screening out a drug addicted applicant is substantial when comparing the difference in taxpayer money that was lost after a recipient misused their benefits to support a chemical addiction. After a welfare recipient passes an initial drug screening and receives their electronic benefit card, the food stamp account should be monitored monthly to verify nutritious foods are being bought. Buying nutritious foods instead of selling or trading food stamps for illegal drugs or alcohol promotes the overall health of a mind and body. A healthy mind and body then creates an individual who makes adequate progress in their daily
More than half of the states are considering drug-test requirements for people on welfare. Not only would this help save money in the welfare program, it would also allow the government to get help for drug users on public assistance. The tests could either be urine based, or written tests that could help flag down drug users (Grovum). According to Jake Grovum’s article “Some States Still Pushing Drug Testing for Welfare”, Alabama may have come up with the most sensible law. The law, which has passed in their state senate, states that anyone who has been convicted of a drug offense in the last five years must undergo, and pay for, a drug test as a part of their welfare application. I am aware that not all people on welfare are using drugs and many former drug users get the help they need and get off their addiction, but I think taxpayers in the U.S. have the right of knowing their hard earned money is going to the right
There are many advantages to drug testing welfare recipients. One advantage is that people that are abusing drugs will stop taking advantage of the benefits that are provided to them by our government. If the working taxpayers are required to take a drug test in order to work, then individuals that are receiving aid from our government should be required to do the same. (Miran, 2015.). These individuals will have to decide what is more important to them, food and shelter or drugs? This proposal could also potentially save taxpayers money by eliminating recipients who are abusing drugs and manipulating the system. They will no longer receive benefits from the government, thus saving the taxpayers money. A great advantage that