Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-15-2013, 12:51 PM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 65,518,175 times
Reputation: 15081

Advertisements

Governor McCrory vetoed 'House Bill 392' would have allowed county social services departments that suspect a recipient is using drugs to require a test.
Very smart move and I agree with McCrory it would have been costly for the state. I like the concept but the majority of those seeking assistance are drug free and the state would have to reimburse.

Gov, McCrory vetoed 'House Bill 786', the immigration bill, would also have allowed limited driving privileges for undocumented immigrants. McCrory said the legislation would hurt North Carolina workers. My opinion is

On the drug screening bill, NCGA Speaker Tom Tillis said in a statement:
Quote:
“This bill would establish safeguards for our state’s public assistance system, ensuring compliance with federal laws and guaranteeing that recipients are law-abiding individuals. While Gov. McCrory’s Executive Order shows agreement on important aspects of the bill, I will consult with members of the House and Senate on the questions that remain as we move forward.”
And on the immigration bill, Tillis said:
Quote:
"The primary objective of the bill is to address immigration procedures and policies that Washington has neglected for years, causing serious problems for employers and job creators in North Carolina. The regulatory burden and complexity caused by federal inaction requires us to consider stop-gap measures while we wait for politicians in D.C. to take action."
The governor has 40 days from the end of the legislative session to call the General Assembly back into session to consider overriding his veto.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 08-15-2013 at 02:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-15-2013, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Chapel Hill
128 posts, read 151,411 times
Reputation: 226
Costly for the state? Why? Let the applicant pay. When I took my driving test I paid a fee. My wife and I both are required to be drug tested to keep our jobs. We pay taxes. Why should the feckless not be tested to receive hand outs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2013, 01:35 PM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 65,518,175 times
Reputation: 15081
Quote:
Originally Posted by John EdwardsII View Post
Costly for the state? Why? Let the applicant pay. When I took my driving test I paid a fee. My wife and I both are required to be drug tested to keep our jobs. We pay taxes. Why should the feckless not be tested to receive hand outs?
The way the bill was written the applicant does pay. However if the test showed the applicant is drug free, the state would have to reimburse the applicant.
The Governor stated this.
Quote:
Similar efforts in other states have proved to be expensive for taxpayers and did little to actually help fight drug addiction. It makes no sense to repeat those mistakes in North Carolina.”
This I agree with, it would been costly measure.
However he did sign an executive order to do criminal background checks shared between LE and DSS.
Also in that bill that the vetoed amendment to extend seasonal work from 90 days to 9 months. This would have provided an exemption from E-Verify screening.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 08-15-2013 at 02:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2013, 12:36 PM
 
12,573 posts, read 15,561,868 times
Reputation: 8960
Quote:
Originally Posted by John EdwardsII View Post
Costly for the state? Why? Let the applicant pay. When I took my driving test I paid a fee. My wife and I both are required to be drug tested to keep our jobs. We pay taxes. Why should the feckless not be tested to receive hand outs?
The bill was not about giving away driver's licenses.
I have yet to pay for a drug test required by a prospective and/or current employer and I bet you haven't either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 06:11 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 1,925,027 times
Reputation: 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by WFW&P View Post
The bill was not about giving away driver's licenses.
I have yet to pay for a drug test required by a prospective and/or current employer and I bet you haven't either.
I get reimbursed in full, as long as I pass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:00 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top