Petition to require drug tests for ALL individuals receiving government aid

[alan1]

In February of 2013, the Indiana House passed Bill 1483, a very half-hearted measure to "drug test selected individuals receiving Welfare benefits". The Bill takes half of the individuals receiving Welfare/TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) and makes these individuals take a written test regarding illegal drug use. If an individual is actually honest regarding drug use or somehow manages to accidentally elude to the fact that they abuse drugs, only then will a drug test be administered.

Under this policy, individuals that fail drug tests will continue to receive the exact same benefits "as long as the individual is seeking rehabilitation" (see also: attending one AA meeting per week actually counts). The Bill does not offer any explanation as to punishment for individuals not seeking treatment or those who continue to fail drug screenings.

Bill 1483 only applies to those receiving Welfare/TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) benefits and does not require individuals receiving Food Stamps/EBT/SNAP and/or Medicaid to undergo drug tests.

Billions of tax dollars every year support government aid programs. Individuals receiving those benefits should be giving back to their local community through community service work. No one can label these benefits as "a free ride" if individuals receiving these types of assistance are in fact doing what they can in order to contribute to their local communities as well.

Please do not remove this post. You may not realize that this cause is important to you if you're not an Indiana resident. The more individual states ramp up qualifications and change policies, the more likely other states are to follow suit.

Share with like-minded individuals you know via Facebook, Twitter, etc.

To learn more about Bill 1483 or to sign the petition, please visit:
change.org/petitions/indiana-general-assembly-provide-random-drug-tests-to-all-individuals-receiving-food-stamps-tanf-welfare-medicaid-provide-harsher-punishment-for-failed-tests-require-those-receiving-aid-to-perform-community-service-work

Michigan is finally getting the idea....they working on putting through a bill that would require people on assistance to volunteer time to help pay for what they're getting.....

"People benefiting from public assistance should do something to give back to the community that is providing them with a helping hand, and that is exactly what my bill does," said Hune. "There is nothing wrong with having folks have a little skin in the game. I am glad that this common sense reform passed out of the Senate."
Bill calls for community service for welfare recipients - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

Involuntary servitude is against the law, I think. I would like to see police officers clean up a little when they aren't doing anything, though.

It's not involuntary servitude. They only serve if they are getting a financial benefit. Their choice to receive the benefit or not.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I disagree. My guess is the main point of such a petition would be to kick millions of minorities out of the system, but it's a slippery slope. Next thing you know they'll be giving you DNA swabs at highway checkpoints etc. Government needs to keep their needles out of our bodies.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let me guess...conservative nutter trying to get government out of people's lives?

Nah, trying to make sure that folks aren't spending their Welfare checks that my taxes pay for on drugs - and wanting those getting freebies to give something back for once.

While violating the Constitution in the process.

 

[candycorn]

I'm fine with anyone on the dole having to piss in a cup. Dignity is for people that aren't getting a hand out.

Whsn the 79 y/o medicare recpient has to pee in a cup to get her medicine, we should stop claiming we're a great country.

 

[Steven_R]

Nobody is stopping that 70 y/o from buying her own medicine without putting her hand in my pocket to do it.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Michigan is finally getting the idea....they working on putting through a bill that would require people on assistance to volunteer time to help pay for what they're getting.....

"People benefiting from public assistance should do something to give back to the community that is providing them with a helping hand, and that is exactly what my bill does," said Hune. "There is nothing wrong with having folks have a little skin in the game. I am glad that this common sense reform passed out of the Senate."
Bill calls for community service for welfare recipients - KCBD NewsChannel 11 Lubbock

Involuntary servitude is against the law, I think. I would like to see police officers clean up a little when they aren't doing anything, though.

It's not involuntary servitude. They only serve if they are getting a financial benefit. Their choice to receive the benefit or not.

It most assuredly is involuntary servitude. Why not workhouses? Press them into work gangs and feed them soup?

They volunteered to be poor, right?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Nobody is stopping that 70 y/o from buying her own medicine without putting her hand in my pocket to do it.

If she put her hand in your pocket she'd come up with moths. That woman paid taxes for years and years. Now she's getting a little back.

I do hope, though, that some young asshole much like you does his best to make your final years as miserable as possible.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

ok....and if i am drug free will you guarantee me that all levels of govt will let me be?....i get to do what i want as long as i am not bothering anyone?.....can you guarantee that?.....or are you going to be just like everyone else.....all talk.....

No, you'd have to stay under surveillance for a mandatory period. The public needs to be safe.

and after the mandatory period?....will i be a free man?.....

No, you'll have to serve a probationary period.

 

[Londoner]

I agree with giving drug tests for people who receive government aid.

I think it starts with our corporations and their investors, who receive subsidies and bailouts far in excess of food stamps and traditional welfare.

It's high time we made Lockheed Martin, Haliburton, Eli Lilly, Citigroup, AIG, Goldman Sachs and Exxon submit to drug tests so we can be assured that they are not squandering their no-bid contracts, subsidies and bailouts.

 

[candycorn]

Nobody is stopping that 70 y/o from buying her own medicine without putting her hand in my pocket to do it.

If she put her hand in your pocket she'd come up with moths. That woman paid taxes for years and years. Now she's getting a little back.

I do hope, though, that some young asshole much like you does his best to make your final years as miserable as possible.

That compassionate conservatism has such a soft edge...doesn't it?

 

[alan1]

Involuntary servitude is against the law, I think. I would like to see police officers clean up a little when they aren't doing anything, though.

It's not involuntary servitude. They only serve if they are getting a financial benefit. Their choice to receive the benefit or not.

It most assuredly is involuntary servitude. Why not workhouses? Press them into work gangs and feed them soup?

They volunteered to be poor, right?

They didn't volunteer to be poor, they volunteered to take financial benefit from the American taxpayer (me, and probably you).

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Nobody is stopping that 70 y/o from buying her own medicine without putting her hand in my pocket to do it.

If she put her hand in your pocket she'd come up with moths. That woman paid taxes for years and years. Now she's getting a little back.

I do hope, though, that some young asshole much like you does his best to make your final years as miserable as possible.

That compassionate conservatism has such a soft edge...doesn't it?

I'm very much a conservative. I don't believe in throwing little old ladies out in the street in order to bring about a market-driven economy, though. That's just stupid.

Instead of working to end the corporate control of America and letting competition bring medical costs in line with demand, some would prefer to inflict misery on others just to buy another steak for the table. People like that worry me.

The AMA, our educational system and big government brought about this crisis in medical care. There are intelligent, free market solutions to the problem. Feeding the poor to the wolves is not one of them.

 

[alan1]

Let me guess...conservative nutter trying to get government out of people's lives?

Nah, trying to make sure that folks aren't spending their Welfare checks that my taxes pay for on drugs - and wanting those getting freebies to give something back for once.

While violating the Constitution in the process.

Please tell, where in the Constitution does it say that the state (AKA taxpayer) is responsible for providing for the well being of the poor or indigent?

I suppose we can eliminate your stated violation of the Constitution by adhering to my point concerning the Constitution.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

It's not involuntary servitude. They only serve if they are getting a financial benefit. Their choice to receive the benefit or not.

It most assuredly is involuntary servitude. Why not workhouses? Press them into work gangs and feed them soup?

They volunteered to be poor, right?

The didn't volunteer to be poor, they volunteered to take financial benefit from the American taxpayer (me, and probably you).

I realize that you probably lead a miserable existence yanking your boss's pants down and kissing his ass every day in order to survive. I feel sorry for you, really I do. That's no reason to marginalize and humiliate others, though.

What you might want to do is come up with work programs that pay people for meaningful work that would benefit the community. How about something constructive that benefits both people who need help and the community?

But no, it's just enough to humiliate and stereotype them, isn't it?

You are a sick puppy and a disgrace to conservatism.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Nah, trying to make sure that folks aren't spending their Welfare checks that my taxes pay for on drugs - and wanting those getting freebies to give something back for once.

While violating the Constitution in the process.

Please tell, where in the Constitution does it say that the state (AKA taxpayer) is responsible for providing for the well being of the poor or indigent?

I suppose we can eliminate your stated violation of the Constitution by adhering to my point concerning the Constitution.

It doesn't say it in the Constitution because the Constitution was written for a free people imbued with the Christian virtue of charity and during a time when it was entirely possible for anyone with shit, grit and a little mother wit to make it in the world.

The plain simple fact is that people trapped in cities with no real chance at gainful employment present a problem to our society. Unless we do something meaningful to help these people, we are going to have both a permanent under class and a permanent criminal class. People robbed of their dignity and with no hope present a grave danger to our society.. not to mention that it is a national shame that we have fallen to such depths.

If you want to get technical, forcing someone to give his or her bodily fluids for government inspection is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

It's a clear violation of the common law notion of privacy.

It is an affront to human dignity.

I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.

It is up to thinking conservatives to build a government that allows and encourages people to take care of themselves. Somehow, I don't think forcing them to piss into a cup helps that goal along.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Failing to gain approval was a proposal to require some recipients of Indiana Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to pass a drug test. The bill was authored by State Representative Jud McMillin (R-Brookville).

House Bill 1483 had earlier passed the Senate, but many senators had one lingering, last minute concern with the bill: how to ensure children continue to have financial support if their parents or guardians lose benefits by failing a drug test.

Eagle Country 99.3 FM | Lawrenceburg, IN

That the bill failed to become law saved Indiana taxpayers the cost of defending the proposed measure in Federal court – and losing:

In a strongly-worded opinion, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit affirmed a lower court's October 2011 finding that Florida failed to demonstrate a special need for drug testing poverty-stricken parents who apply for cash benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.

"The evidence in this record does not suggest that the population of TANF recipients engages in illegal drug use or that they misappropriate government funds for drugs at the expense of their own and their children's basic subsistence," the three-judge panel wrote. "The State has presented no evidence that simply because an applicant for TANF benefits is having financial problems, he is also drug addicted or prone to fraudulent and neglectful behavior."

Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law Gets No Reprieve From Appeals Court

Republicans' contempt for the Constitution knows no bounds.

 

[freedombecki]

It most assuredly is involuntary servitude. Why not workhouses? Press them into work gangs and feed them soup?

They volunteered to be poor, right?

The didn't volunteer to be poor, they volunteered to take financial benefit from the American taxpayer (me, and probably you).

I realize that you probably lead a miserable existence yanking your boss's pants down and kissing his ass every day in order to survive. I feel sorry for you, really I do. That's no reason to marginalize and humiliate others, though.

What you might want to do is come up with work programs that pay people for meaningful work that would benefit the community. How about something constructive that benefits both people who need help and the community?

But no, it's just enough to humiliate and stereotype them, isn't it?

You are a sick puppy and a disgrace to conservatism.

No he isn't, and no he isn't.

 

[freedombecki]

While violating the Constitution in the process.

Please tell, where in the Constitution does it say that the state (AKA taxpayer) is responsible for providing for the well being of the poor or indigent?

I suppose we can eliminate your stated violation of the Constitution by adhering to my point concerning the Constitution.

It doesn't say it in the Constitution because the Constitution was written for a free people imbued with the Christian virtue of charity and during a time when it was entirely possible for anyone with shit, grit and a little mother wit to make it in the world.

The plain simple fact is that people trapped in cities with no real chance at gainful employment present a problem to our society. Unless we do something meaningful to help these people, we are going to have both a permanent under class and a permanent criminal class. People robbed of their dignity and with no hope present a grave danger to our society.. not to mention that it is a national shame that we have fallen to such depths.

If you want to get technical, forcing someone to give his or her bodily fluids for government inspection is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

It's a clear violation of the common law notion of privacy.

It is an affront to human dignity.

I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.

It is up to thinking conservatives to build a government that allows and encourages people to take care of themselves. Somehow, I don't think forcing them to piss into a cup helps that goal along.

It's obvious you're a know-nothing on medical panaceas for addiction therapy, and one thing that does work is constant supervision to change the behavior. Drug testing is one way to supervise the errant whose addiction threatens others on the streets of America and at home where addictions take, take, and take and never give back anything but trouble to its victim and its victim's family and friends.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Please tell, where in the Constitution does it say that the state (AKA taxpayer) is responsible for providing for the well being of the poor or indigent?

I suppose we can eliminate your stated violation of the Constitution by adhering to my point concerning the Constitution.

It doesn't say it in the Constitution because the Constitution was written for a free people imbued with the Christian virtue of charity and during a time when it was entirely possible for anyone with shit, grit and a little mother wit to make it in the world.

The plain simple fact is that people trapped in cities with no real chance at gainful employment present a problem to our society. Unless we do something meaningful to help these people, we are going to have both a permanent under class and a permanent criminal class. People robbed of their dignity and with no hope present a grave danger to our society.. not to mention that it is a national shame that we have fallen to such depths.

If you want to get technical, forcing someone to give his or her bodily fluids for government inspection is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

It's a clear violation of the common law notion of privacy.

It is an affront to human dignity.

I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.

It is up to thinking conservatives to build a government that allows and encourages people to take care of themselves. Somehow, I don't think forcing them to piss into a cup helps that goal along.

It's obvious you're a know-nothing on medical panaceas for addiction therapy, and one thing that does work is constant supervision to change the behavior. Drug testing is one way to supervise the errant whose addiction threatens others on the streets of America and at home where addictions take, take, and take and never give back anything but trouble to its victim and its victim's family and friends.

It's obvious that you are a control freak who cares nothing about individual human freedom.

 

[Sarah G]

Please tell, where in the Constitution does it say that the state (AKA taxpayer) is responsible for providing for the well being of the poor or indigent?

I suppose we can eliminate your stated violation of the Constitution by adhering to my point concerning the Constitution.

It doesn't say it in the Constitution because the Constitution was written for a free people imbued with the Christian virtue of charity and during a time when it was entirely possible for anyone with shit, grit and a little mother wit to make it in the world.

The plain simple fact is that people trapped in cities with no real chance at gainful employment present a problem to our society. Unless we do something meaningful to help these people, we are going to have both a permanent under class and a permanent criminal class. People robbed of their dignity and with no hope present a grave danger to our society.. not to mention that it is a national shame that we have fallen to such depths.

If you want to get technical, forcing someone to give his or her bodily fluids for government inspection is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

It's a clear violation of the common law notion of privacy.

It is an affront to human dignity.

I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.

It is up to thinking conservatives to build a government that allows and encourages people to take care of themselves. Somehow, I don't think forcing them to piss into a cup helps that goal along.

It's obvious you're a know-nothing on medical panaceas for addiction therapy, and one thing that does work is constant supervision to change the behavior. Drug testing is one way to supervise the errant whose addiction threatens others on the streets of America and at home where addictions take, take, and take and never give back anything but trouble to its victim and its victim's family and friends.

This is never going to happen.