«

»

Sep 28

Welfare Drug Testing: Pissing Taxpayer Money Down the Drain


drugs on the table smallerWelfare Drug Testing:

Pissing Taxpayer Money

Down the Drain

By Kate Sgouros

You want to know what really gets me worked up, misinformed people that feel compelled to misinform others!! You would think that they would know better, but then again, if they did, they would not be misinformed. More specifically, my ire is directed at those that espouse the belief that drug testing for welfare recipients is a good idea. Let us walk through this alleged, cost-saving scheme and examine how peeing in a cup results in money going down the toilet.

Drug testing is not cheap; pee cups do not grow on trees, the average state drug test costs $35 for each individual.   In 2011, Florida had to pay over $100K from its coffers to find out that 98% of those taking the test passed. In other words, the urine tests failed to cut costs.  The myth of welfare recipients spending their benefits on drugs is just that—a myth.  In Utah, only 12 people out of 466, or 2.5% showed evidence of drug use after a mandatory screening.  The total cost to the state was $25,000, or far more than the cost of providing benefits to a dozen people.  The worst case, by 2012, Arizona had shelled out $200 million in benefits and drug testing costs, and had saved only $560 by disqualifying the single drug user caught by the test.  If stopping waste and saving taxpayer money is your goal, then drug screenings fail the test.

Not only do these tests cost tax payers more, the fallibility of the test process is another issue that needs to be addressed. The media has shown us that there are various methods that drug users can utilize to cheat on drug tests.  On the other end of the spectrum, multiple healthy people have suffered the consequences of false positives for opiates after eating poppy seed pastries for breakfast. Don’t believe me? Snopes backs me up. If you still doubt me, Mythbusters has me covered.

Now, should a private company be allowed to use drug tests to screen applicants for a position? If the applicant knows ahead of time that they will be tested, a company has every right to ask for a test because they are not compelling a person to engage in drug testing. A private company cannot force a free person to do anything; applicants voluntarily apply for the job and have the option of giving or withholding their consent.  Also, private corporations are using their own funds for the tests, not taxpayer money; so if they want to waste it, they can go right ahead.

When it comes to the government, there is no choice in the matter. If you do not like what the government demands, there is no alternative government that you can turn to. The government can compel you by force to piss on command. I do not know about you, but this seems a bit intrusive.  Perhaps government overreach should not occur in the bathroom. Maybe the government should take a more hands-off approach. If you want the government out of YOUR bedroom, living room, wallet, and urine, than it should be out of everybody’s.  It is not cost effective and it is an invasion of all American’s privacy and liberties.

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>