Before N.C. House Speaker Thom Tillis cranks up a campaign to pass mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients, he may want to check out what’s been happening in Florida. As we reported, Tillis recently told a Republican audience that he favors drug testing anyone who gets assistance money from the state. General reaction outside of GOP circles has largely been along the lines of “Are you shitting me, or what?” But back to Florida.
The state known for its wide variety of reptiles elected one of its biggest ones last year as governor. That would be one Rick Scott, a frankly bizarre character who complements his, um, distinctive look with a cultivated air of transparent sliminess. By the way, he’s also the former CEO of a large hospital system that was found guilty of, and fined $1.7 billion for, the biggest Medicare fraud case in U.S. history. Last year, Scott tied himself to the Tea Party bandwagon and rode it to the governor’s office, which should tell you something about Tea Party voters. One of Scott’s first moves was trying to kill off a medical fraud database — the guy is truly shameless. Another of Scott’s big ideas was to drug test everyone in Florida who applies for welfare. The result has been the startling discovery that people on welfare generally cannot afford drugs. Whoa! Who’d-a thought?! Specifically, more than 7,000 welfare applicants have passed the drug test, while a whopping 32 people have failed.
Now, Scott’s big idea faces more bad news: a federal judge, Mary Scriven, appointed by former President George W. Bush, has temporarily blocked the drug testing law, saying it may violate the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures: “This potential interception of positive drug tests by law enforcement implicates a ‘far more substantial’ invasion of privacy than in ordinary civil drug testing cases,” ruled Judge Scriven. The judge’s injunction will remain until she schedules a full hearing. Civil liberties lawyers say they are very confident the law will eventually be thrown out. We hope Thom Tillis takes a tip from the judge, and realizes that it’s not exactly a sign of leadership to push for the further humiliation of some of the state’s neediest citizens. Plus, who’d want to be compared to Rick Scott?
This article appears in Oct 25-31, 2011.
Pot is expensive. If you can afford to smoke pot, you probably dont need to be on welfare.
Excuse me? I work in a mandatory drug testing environment. The tests are conducted to insure employees are not endangering themselves or others while under the influence of an illegal substance and/or alcohol and are able to perform their duties to the best of their abilities. Are my rights being infringed upon due to the mandatory testing? If so, let’s get all drug testing classified as unlawful. However, I believe that if someone is going to benefit from my hard work, i.e. receive benefits from the taxes I pay, while I, myself am subjected to random mandatory tests – then heck yes, test them all! It is no more humiliating to them as it is for me. Consider it a part of the “job” of being on welfare.
Kind got the tail wagging the dog here.
The difference is that the recipients are not employees of the state.
The legislators work for these people.
The funds being distributed do not belong to the legislators.
Under the plan, the state has ONLY had to reimburse one-quarter of a million bucks on testing — to find the 35 individuals — to whom they will STILL make payments through their friends??
More legislative budgetary brilliance. Gee! — Let’s impose this kind of thinking on our national budget – NOT!
Congratulations for the state of Florida’s low drug rate among welfare recipients, 35 out of 7000 – that is commendable. Was that for one month? What is the actual number of recipients in the state of Florida and should we apply the same percentage to those numbers as well? Is that testing fee a monthly costs or an annual fee? Let’s see some real numbers.
No the recipients do not work for the state, actually they work for no one, but they are receiving a check for doing nothing paid for by the people who do work. The People pay their salary – The People are their employers. When someone where I work fails a drug test, their employment is terminated. I guess if the “system” stops the drug testing, the answer to unemployment would be welfare where they can have their drugs and beat it too.