Georgia signs bill to drug-test welfare recipients
Over the years, as the recession came and went, leaving in its wake an untold number relying on government assistance, we have watched from afar the batting around of landmark legislation.
In the U.S., there has long been support for a contentious, controversial new law that would force welfare recipients to pass a drug test before receiving benefits.
The proposals have been social nightmares for American lawmakers, who feel the wrath of civil liberties groups for even breathing word that such a law may gain traction.
And indeed it seemed for a while that none may ever take hold. Last October, the most aggressive state in pursuing such legislation, Florida, blocked the motion, the presiding judge writing that “the constitutional rights of a class of citizen are at stake.”
But one state north, and progress – or, if you prefer, regression – has been made.
*Bing: Who is eligible for welfare in Canada?
Georgia signed House Bill 861 on Monday, stating that new drug-testing policies will overhaul how the state doles out welfare benefits.
Under the new law, parents who apply for the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program will need to pay for, and pass, a drug test that will cost at least $17.
Already, Georgia officials estimate that should prevent some 800 recipients from receiving benefits the state infers would be used to purchase illegal narcotics. This would be, to backers of the law, the best-case scenario.
Though of course opponents are rearing their heads: “We are disappointed the governor (Nathan Deal) signed the bill, given an almost identical law in Florida has been declared unconstitutional,” an attorney for the Southern Center for Human Rights said. A lawsuit against the state has been threatened.
But then it all comes back to the same question we’ve still yet to hear an answer for: what, exactly, is the drawback to ensuring public money isn’t smoked, snorted or shot?
The most glaring consequence of drug-testing welfare recipients is that they’re on the hook for the cost of the test, but even then that’s only $17, and it only has to be completed once. That seems like a fair compromise.
And once more, what is the defence? Opponents of drug-testing laws cry for the privacy of citizens, but not once do they address why, nor do they acknowledge just what a drain wasted welfare dough is on taxpayers.
What it boils down to is this: drug-testing an employee of a company may stretch the boundaries of intrusion, though the rules change when public cash is handed out. A recipient of welfare, an important service to many, is not earning that money in the same way most citizens do. Since it is taxpayer money subsidizing or providing their income, it must face a higher standard.
By Jason Buckland, MSN Money
Posted by: ted | Apr 19, 2021 8:21:21 PM
its agreat step as long as alcohol is included, as it should also be included in private employment hiring practices
Posted by: SP | Apr 19, 2021 8:22:26 PM
Test EVERYBODY that receives a penny from the government. The frequency of the tests should be determined by the amount of $ received from the Gov't.
Thus the party leaders, Judges, Doctors etc should be tested weekly. Down to twice yearly tests for pensioners and a single yearly test for people on welfare.
God, the number of people commenting here who have NO idea where their tax dollars are going makes one weep at the result of one person one vote.
Don't mind me though, keep hating the poor while you're financially raped by the wealthy.
Posted by: ted | Apr 19, 2021 8:41:35 PM
hasnt anyone heard of the charter of rights . anyone study human behavior most people abusing drugs need help. i could agree if all those identified as drug and alcohol abusers were given a choice to enter treatment ,in or out reatment while recieving benefits. if your going to check social asisstance, recipeients we should also check unemployment recipients as welll .the list could get big,real big .start checking politicians ,doctors lawyers ,police every three months ,for lawenforcement personal. nurses to.in fact anyone getting taxpayer dollars should be tested ,EVERYONE.
Posted by: Dave | Apr 19, 2021 9:45:02 PM
So you can be an alcoholic and still receive welfare because alcohol is legal!!
It's also the most dangerous drug there is..and yes, alcohol is a drug.
So what do we do about the elderly,the physically and mentally disabled,children who's parents lost their jobs and/or homes,etc.
What is this bs..is it about not doing drugs or about not using welfare money to buy drugs?
There would have to be the assumption that welfare money was used..the drugs might have been bought by someone else and shared.
So all you employed drug users should be very carefull..you might not be employed for ever and someday you might need welfare.
What's next...no welfare for cigarette smokers!
Posted by: Shannon Lee | Apr 19, 2021 10:31:33 PM
The welfare system is there to do just that, provide welfare or sustanance to those of poverty and help them get on their feet. I don't believe in drug testing on any citizen, however, if someone is controled or overtaken by drugs, isn't it up to us in society to help that individual overcomer their addictions and claim a better place in life.
Who are we to judge those whom we have never known and assess where they should be in life according to us or our expectations. I don't want to see people in our society living off the welfare system, I want to see results, I want to see people using the system to become educated as they may never had a chance to do so in the past.
Let's all get our heads out of our butts and help the less fortunate instead of condeming them for faults that are not of their doing and showing people that with a little effort they can overcome all the tragities and suffering they may have lead them to the place they are now in and don't know or don't have the education to get out of.
Written by a former homeless woman.
Posted by: Ted Cronk | Apr 19, 2021 10:42:35 PM
Good for Georgia state! I hope Canadian provinces follow their lead. Most of the we;fare recipients I know in my small northern BC community spend their social assistance cheques on drugs and alcohol. The money is gone in one or two days. This is why we call it Mardi Gra day. After their money is gone they go back to panhandling. Lots of prostitution, theft and violence. I look for employers that demand a piss test to cut the odds of an injury to me by a co-work on drugs. It is a far safer work environment. I was on welfare and made do with the money I was entrusted with to spend on my basic needs until I found work. In my opinion, piss testing social assistance recipients is best bang for the taxpayer dollar. By doing pre-benefit testing with consentual random testing at least once every year and by providing drop -in rehab assistance to anyone needing it to qualify for or maintain their benefits, will again i my opinion help return a user to a productive member of the community and loer crime due to the basic fact that the 0person has cleaned up their act. To have the government continue to just dole out pary money is just like throwing gasoline on a fire every month. It is long over due in taking away the fuel from those that use taxpayer dollars irresponsibly causing stress and grief to those they come in contact with.
Posted by: chad | Apr 19, 2021 11:29:09 PM
From canada and Totally agree with this, but also believe you should have to do some sort of community service to recieve these hand outs from the government!! Get these people out doing something constructive instead of geating into trouble, or waisting there time away doing nothing, sitting on there ass!!
Posted by: David PCS | Apr 20, 2021 12:11:20 AM
YES! I agree 100%. I know MANY people who spend $440 towards rent, the remaining goes toward drugs (usually weed - approx $500 of it) and they then eat at foodbanks and churches for the month (in Canada near Toronto).
I'm sick of it. Of course, the person above is a friend so I would never turn them in but it pisses me off. I work lots of hours every week. I can't afford dental work that I need. Yet my roommate smokes dope all month long. Sits at home watching tv and movies. Gets regular dental checkups and cleanings. And he's not even disabled. He can work. Thats ONE friend. My 4 previous roommates and about 20 of their friends (and mine) all are on social assistence and spend it on alcohol, oxycotin, and weed. Very little goes to rent.
Canada will never allow the testing so I'm out of luck here. Too bad for your "rights". If companies can do it - I'm all for making everyone collecting the tax payer money to be screened regularly.
ALSO - most of them cash their checks at moneymart or some other check cashing service. If the Govenment see checks cashed through those services they should deduct that amount from their allowance.
Drives me crazy! Makes me so mad. But, how can I say anything? They are all my friends. I have struggled my entire life to NOT be on assistence (had major surgery on my knee in 1997). These people really piss me off.
Posted by: Jack | Apr 20, 2021 5:16:29 PM
@ David PCS... sounds like these friends are not really good friends. Maybe you might want to rethink whether or not you should turn them in. It would probably be for their benefits (and the rest of us taxpayers as well).
Posted by: mikerroni | Apr 21, 2021 12:04:50 AM
First and foremost,
You people need to consider the 'liberal' ideals nations so fortunate to have embraced a liberalism ideology as the U.S (where you have civil liberties, guaranteed rights and freedoms), have. Ok, let me explain what I mean because I am 100% sure that the vast majority of you cognitive misers do not even understand what and ideology is, let alone the ideology of 'liberalism' is. Therefore, I will take my elitist view and pragmatic facts to bestow upon you for your leisure; enjoy this free and enlightening perspective of the bigger picture: you, the ones who rationalized how an entire socioeconomic class can be justly disenfranchised from the liberal ideals of a welfare state; however, in all honesty? The U.S, although the world standard for everything, and I admire, but this? When you freely and openly allow such segregation of an entire impoverished element of society; whom, by the way, regardless of the perceived notion of 'being lazy, stupid, or not wanting to work'. I ask thee? Based off what notion is it acceptable to criminalize an entire... Group of people? Because they may have addictions and are recipients of social assistance?
Oh and don't let me forget to mention this inherently infringes upon the civil liberties entrusted to everyone within society and whom is to have a 'minimum' standard of care regardless of the socioeconomic factors and why they are in their state of tutelage (the recipients of welfare); the addictions, illness, mental health issues, learning disabilities, substance abuse, etc.
I can continue rambling and ranting on butIi won't. The just of this is the fact that to deny an entire socioeconomic, disadvantaged group of people in society is completely unacceptable.
You cannot deny anyone their inherent civil liberties and justify actions as legitimate in a welfare state that has a duty to care for all within society; regardless of a drug problem, substance abuse, etc.
This is bullshit and I cannot believe such a Law was passed by a State government? And, for what? To save a few dollars?? It's not as if, those who are on welfare, want to be their in the first place! And, I dare say they could have ended up on welfare for any variety of reasons but are not considered. No one wants to be receiving 'free money' from the government that is to say, much less money than working a menial job for a sustenance existence. No one wishes to be poor or have to revert to the State for a social security cheque to ensure their existence for another day; which that probably isn't even being used for drugs in the first place.
Often, it isn't nearly as simple as the masses quasi-legitimate (all of you in favour of drug testing for welfare benefits) excuse of: 'Just get a job, or go to work'. No, nothing is every that simple. Consider the socioeconomic element before disadvantaging an entire element of society who needs help for the position they are in a reduced state of being that no body wishes to be in!
Welfare is not some glorious vacation, nor does anyone wish to be on social assistance. Social assistance isn't a livelihood, it's a mundane existence at best; and the drug problems of those on welfare is because of the cycle of dependency these people are in which doe nothing to address the societal problems at hand. That is to say, negatively affecting those on welfare. But, apparently the answer is just as simple as: "Get a job, you bum" or "You want welfare, you have to pass a drug test because I have to pass a drug test for a job." Are you kidding me, seriously?
Oh, and I haven't even began to criticize the horribly inefficient state the welfare system is in. wow.. I cannot believe you people and I only wish you were able to walk in the shoes of some person who will not qualify for welfare because they have an addiction issue and they will be forced to, I dare say, 'live'? IF you can call it, 'living', on the streets. How about the single mother who has addictions that is barely surviving and her children are at risk? Now that mother whose addictions were never addressed, nor was she given a fair chance at utilizing and correcting the ailments that negatively affected her life to become a productive member of society (where is the benefit of the doubt??). These people are as good as dead and the following recourse (increased crime, sexually transmitted infections, substance abuse, violence against women and the elderly) will all increase exponentially.
Bravo to the State government of Georgia. The ensuing recourse is all on your hands.. Bravo!
Posted by: mikerroni | Apr 21, 2021 12:42:00 AM
@David PCS
So, what you expect me to believe is that the Ontario Provincial Government gives welfare benefits in excess of 900 dollars monthly? wow.. And, I'm the student here living on that monthly incurring significant debt in hopes of reaping the rewards of the fruit of my labour..
I'll have to find a credible source and cite it regarding your claim, of those on welfare, in Ontario receive over 900 dollars monthly.. WOW!
Ontario Works Act, 1997. PART VI CALCULATION OF ASSISTANCE: Section 41. (General Budgetary Requirements)
The amount payable for basic needs determined in accordance with the following Table:
Recipient: $ 227.00 - Basic needs (single person).
And;
Recipient: $ 372.00 - Maximum monthly shelter allowance (single person).
So, assuming a 'single person' is applying for 'Ontario Works' funding, which is some sort of social benefit; essentially welfare.
A single person in the province of Ontario can receive up to: $ 599.00 a month while on social assistance of 'Ontario Works'.
David PCS, you lie. You cannot lie too me David. You cannot. Indeed. I doubt your credibility at this point in time David...
Case in point: Being a recipient of social assistance is a very tight existence to say the very least. I don't know about you but I sure as shit couldn't live off $ 599.00 monthly.. And, I live off like $ 950 a month through Student Financial Assistance.. LOL!