I've been watching
this debacle closely for some time. I think it is a mistake, because not only
does it seem that the premise flawed, but the numbers don't prove out the
theory.
1) There are people complaining that it is OK to drug
test people who work for their money but not those who don't?
First, our tax
money is not paying for the drug testing of those who are applying for or
working at jobs where the EMPLOYER has mandated testing. This is not the government wanting applicants tested. It is the EMPLOYER and accordingly, the EMPLOYER pays for
it.
When the state drug tests welfare recipients or applicants, WE pay for it.
Second, this comparison is
similar to, for example, all attorneys have to take the bar exam to practice
law, but those who had to take that exam feel it's unfair that everyone doesn't
have to take that same bar exam, even when they have no desire to practice law.
Or, I have to endure the pain and humiliation of taking a drug test because my
employer demands it, so even people who are not qualified to hold my job, and
are not trying to take my job from me in some sort of revolt, should be made to
suffer the same humiliation that I agreed to endure as a condition of my
employment. For those who have never had to rely on public assistance, even for
a short time, I can tell you it is an incredibly humbling experience in itself.
Adding forced drug testing makes having to ask for help even more painful.
2) If we can believe
the numbers being reported by independent bean counters, the national drug use
rate is approximately 9.5 percent of ALL people working and not working. But
testing of welfare recipients / applicants in states that mandate testing shows
that, while the rate of positive drug tests in welfare applicants ranged from
0.002% to 8.3%, in all states but one, the rate of positive drug tests was less
than 1%. That's 8.5% LOWER than the national average.
As in most cases where
the government overspends our tax dollars on the ridiculous, these states have
collectively spent nearly $1 million on the effort, and will spend many
millions more in coming years. So where exactly does the "massive abuse" of our system end up? With the state, of course. They will raise our taxes to perform unnecessary testing on people who have a rate of drug abuse significantly lower than the general population. It's like the proverbial beating of the dead horse.
Yes, there will
always be those unethical types that try to game the system, no matter what the
system is. A determined enough criminal will find a way to cheat or steal, but
that does not justify punishing the other 99% who are not.
Personally, I'd
rather see our tax money spent in our schools and on our deteriorating
infrastructure. At least we would see something that actually benefits the
people, creating decent paying jobs and fixing what needs to be fixed. Perhaps we should stop taking
out our frustrations on the poor and powerless and create jobs that pay enough to help them move back into productive society.
Posts
