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.
They tried this in Florida where the contract for lab work was awarded to a company owned by a relative of then-governor Rick Scott. They spent more in lab costs than they did "saving" money by denying benefits.
The fiscal argument is a failure.
Still, if it's a moral argument then anyone receiving government funds must be tested, not just the poor. That includes judges, law enforcement, elected officials and entities receiving corporate welfare (looking at you, auto/bank bailouts).
This proposal is just another way to demonize and criminalize poverty and line the pockets of wealthy politicians.
Good. After other states implemented this, the number of people collecting food stamps dropped precipitously. Seems like they wouldn't give up their drugs long enough to clean up and pass a pee test. In other words they liked their drugs more than their handouts. Win-win.
I guess the appropriate question is - which AL legislator is going to get rich selling drug testing services to the state? You know there is at least one.
I guess the appropriate question is - which AL legislator is going to get rich selling drug testing services to the state? You know there is at least one.
Amen to this. As usual, follow the money.
This has proven to be a waste of time and money in other states except for the companies (and owners) that raked in big bucks.
Good. After other states implemented this, the number of people collecting food stamps dropped precipitously. Seems like they wouldn't give up their drugs long enough to clean up and pass a pee test. In other words they liked their drugs more than their handouts. Win-win.
How is it good, when its costing more than what they would save, to do all the testing?
I think ultimately this will just create a bunch of new drug dealers...if they get their income cut off suddenly they are going to do the next easiest thing to continue bringing money in, since they are already using drugs, its not difficult to make the jump to selling, in fact thats how many low level addicts support their own habits, they are just addicts themselves.
They tried this in Florida where the contract for lab work was awarded to a company owned by a relative of then-governor Rick Scott. They spent more in lab costs than they did "saving" money by denying benefits.
The fiscal argument is a failure.
Still, if it's a moral argument then anyone receiving government funds must be tested, not just the poor. That includes judges, law enforcement, elected officials and entities receiving corporate welfare (looking at you, auto/bank bailouts).
This proposal is just another way to demonize and criminalize poverty and line the pockets of wealthy politicians.
Number of states have tried this and found it to not be worth the money and effort. It makes people who are misinformed happy because they think if you are on food stamps it is because you are some illegal drug taking imbecile.
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.
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.
