Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Kentuckians to pass drug test before receiving public assistance?? Could it be?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by clearconscience, Jan 13, 2011.

  1. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    7,150
    Introduced by a lawmaker in Kentucky.
    How the crap isn't this a federal law to have people getting welfare, food stamps, housing take a drug test? How many millions will this save the country? And make those dirtbags pay for it! If their getting hundreds of dollars in tax payer money they can shell out $30 for a drug test.



    Will Kentuckians soon have to take a drug test before they receive public assistance? One lawmaker introduced a bill to make that a reality.

    A recession and a struggling economy has put a strain on many Kentucky families, causing longer lines at unemployment offices and more people requiring Government assistance.

    Representative Lonnie Napier a Republican from Lancaster says some people are taking advantage of the tax payers.

    He says, "The food stamp and medical program is being abused."

    Napier says that is the inspiration behind his bill, requiring those looking for assistance of all kinds of assistance of all kinds to first take a drug test.

    The idea behind the bill he says; If they fail the drug test, they don't get money.

    Napier says the test will likely cost about $30 per test, not comforting news to people like Jack Burch, the executive director of Community Action Council.

    Burch says, "There are about 750, 000 people who get some type of assistance we're going to spend millions on the tests."

    Napier's idea is to have those applying for the aid pay themselves. Burch also says the bill unfairly attacks the less fortunate and is designed to embarrass some people.

    When the session resumes, Napier hopes his bill will be heard in committee.
     
  2. gearhead

    gearhead NC Active Member

    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    42
    one of the best ideas I've heard from a politician in quite a while. Maybe we should all be pressing our lawmakers for this kind of thing. The military spends money for me to be drug tested all the time, but people don't seem to have a problem with that. I think the money spent for testing in this case would at least equal, if not be a fraction of what would be saved by the program. Bottom line -if you can't afford to buy food or pay the rent, you have no business buying drugs and having the rest of the taxpayers feed you and put a roof over your head.
     
  3. salmonriverjohn

    salmonriverjohn N.W Oregon coast, Gods country Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    4,279
    "Napier says the test will likely cost about $30 per test, not comforting news to people like Jack Burch, the executive director of Community Action Council".

    So he's worried about an expenditure of $30 dollars, but has no problem handing out possibly millions of taxpayers dollars to addicts and users? :paranoid:

    People that would allow their children to go hungry while they indulge in self medication of illegal drugs,, well that goes beyond description. While I fully understand hard times, from a personal point of view the first things to go need to be alcohol, cigarettes,, cable TV And any illicit drugs. I applaud this attempt, now will it become law?:confused:
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2011
  4. Mason3379

    Mason3379 Oregon City Active Member

    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    116
    This should have been done years ago!!:thumbup:
     
  5. Bigbaddude

    Bigbaddude West linn Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    282
    The ones who can't pass the test will just move to Oregon.
     
  6. M.Link

    M.Link Guest

    It needs to be a Federal requirment! I personally have know people who do drugs (pot) and are on unemployment or other things like it.
     
  7. drew

    drew OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    970
    I'm surprised this state doesn't provide drugs to welfare recipients. Quick get our crack team of legislators on it.:laugh:

    I'd reduce the hardship on people by reimbursing the cost of the test to those who pass.
     
  8. eriknemily

    eriknemily Tillamook County (Cheese!) Member

    Messages:
    779
    Likes Received:
    21
    I've thought this would be a great idea for years. Fat chance of ever getting it passed. The last thing the politicians want is fewer people relying on the govt!!!
     
  9. PlayboyPenguin

    PlayboyPenguin Pacific Northwest Well-Known Member 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    4,833
    Likes Received:
    1,744
    I am in favor of the idea, but how much would it cost tax payers? Often ideas like this cost more than they save. Then you find out they are sponsored by someone whose brother-n-law owns the company that would do the testing. Whenever politicians do something that seems like common sense I am always skeptical.
     
  10. oasis618

    oasis618 Tacoma, Wa Active Member

    Messages:
    955
    Likes Received:
    87
    A good idea in theory but once you open that door there is no telling where it would end. Drug test to get your carry permit? Drug test to get your driver's license? Drug test to apply for financial aid for school? Don't get me wrong, I think there should definitely be stricter regulations on who gets public assistance and especially for how long those people get it but everything has possible negative repercussions.

    Unrelated but similar in my mind is how Washington voters just turned down a proposition to enact a state income tax on the rich... sounds great for the blue collar guy but once that state tax exists you can be sure that eventually it will end up your pay stub and mine.

    Just a thought.
     
  11. Ravenous

    Ravenous West Linn, OR Member

    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    8
    While I have no problem with any of that(drug free), those are all programs where you are essentially paying the government for permission to do something. I think it is and should be different when the government is giving you a handout.
     
  12. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    7,150
    Yeah and one of my old friends went to school with a girl that took out $20k in student loans and spent it in a month on nose candy.

    So maybe they should?

    If your a loser and don't want to work and expect for me to pay for you to get fat and drunk then you should have to stay clean and not get high and have more babies you won't take care of that I have to help pay for and will probably rob me in 15 years.

    See once they give them money they will keep taking it!:paranoid:
     
  13. iusmc2002

    iusmc2002 Colville, WA Active Member

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    207
    It will never come into law, its infringing on others rights. Just a snippet of the crap that will come from it is that comment from the Community Action Council, it might "embaress" them, we can't have that! I have to take a Whiz Quiz to remain employed, and actually bubbleguming work for my bubbleguming money! Why can't these people do it? The leeching needs to stop. Some people genuinely need the assistance, and I have no problem giving someone a hand-UP, but take exception to my taxes being used for hand-OUTS. Just like public officials, there needs to be term/time limits on how long you can use it.
     
  14. eriknemily

    eriknemily Tillamook County (Cheese!) Member

    Messages:
    779
    Likes Received:
    21
    Another thing that irritates me about the entirety of the welfare systems is that lack restrictions for recipients. Do they still have elaborate cell phone plans? Cable/Satellite? Pop in the fridge? Beer? Smokes? There's an endless list of things I think people should be expected to give up when they come to the govt. (us) for help! I too have no problems helping someone that genuinely needs it. But if they are still spending money on NON ESSENTIAL items then I think they should go pound sand!
     
  15. Wheeler44

    Wheeler44 SW Washington Member

    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    8
    Yeah.....Why won't the police take the "whiz quiz"??? They are livin' off of the public, and working for the public. I have to test for every project that I work on, Why don't they?
     
  16. oasis618

    oasis618 Tacoma, Wa Active Member

    Messages:
    955
    Likes Received:
    87
    A guy in front of me in line at the grocery store yesterday was using his EBT card to buy a giant "Go Seahawks" sheet cake and a case of Mountain Dew. While this is technically food... it was still slightly irritating to know a portion of my paycheck is buying this guy a football Sunday party. I guess everyone needs a happy moment.
     
  17. eriknemily

    eriknemily Tillamook County (Cheese!) Member

    Messages:
    779
    Likes Received:
    21
    Not on my dime they don't. If a happy moment has to be purchased I have to pay for with my own sweat. I won't do it on someone else's unless they offer to do it. I haven't offered up anything in my paycheck. I'm forced to give out taxes that pay for foodstamps.
     
  18. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    I was thinking the same thing, Portland police union has fought drug testing for years, I am still in favor of drug testing especially random drug testing for welfare recipients.
     
  19. teflon97239

    teflon97239 Portland, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,057
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    In relatively good times, and really bad, I have facilitated "find a job" workshops in a number of arenas, two of which could not have been more polar.

    In one setting, former employers paid the private company I worked for to provide re-employment services for their laid-off workforce. Habitually employed people, suddenly displaced, seemed anxious and motivated to get back on their feet quickly. Realizing the benefit was short and finite, they showed up promptly every day, dressed in "Friday casual" (some in suits). They focused on class materials, networked relentlessly and honed their resumes and sales pitches. Many had to downgrade, but most found something sooner than later. They got services. No money.

    In a state run (un)employment office, the services I provided were not significantly different, but ohhhhh, the clientele...

    To be fair, at least half of my customers were exactly what I described above, serious and focused, trying to move on with their lives in spite of a cruelly sh*tty economy. "Minimize this interruption" was the mantra. Again with downgrades, most were successful if they stuck with it.

    And then there were the "career unemployed" whose standard uniform was bed-hair, meth scabs, TV watching attire and visible irritation at having to attend 2-3 hours of mandatory classes (and turn in clumsily fabricated job-search logs) in exchange for weekly checks. They interrupted class exercizes, blabbered incessantly, and yawned loudly to convey boredom and aggravation at rising before noon - as if it were not abundantly apparent already.

    Invariably, the first minute of my introduction would be interrupted by someone in a holey sweatshirt, flip-flops and pajama bottoms... "so do we get a smoke break?" Many stunk of booze, stale and fresh - at 9 in the morning. Staffers and I did what we could to discourage sleeping and p*rn surfing in the computer resource room, to little effect. An atmosphere of entitlement to a paycheck for doing little/nothing prevailed.

    Again, this is not to defame ANY of the sincere, hardworking people I was happy to assist. I supported their efforts enthusiastically and still do in other capacities. I believe they agree with me that looking for a job IS A JOB. A half-*ssed effort, late, stoned on weed/crystal, and hungover is not a fair trade for state and federal funds aimed at assisting people who work at finding work.

    Many companies insist on the whiz-quiz for their employees. So is mandatory random compliance with zero-tolerance for illegal (and expensive) drugs too much to ask while you're receiving compensation? It is, after all, just temporary isn't it?

    [crickets chirping...]

    Isn't it?
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2011
  20. Silver Fox

    Silver Fox Puyallup, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,187
    Likes Received:
    290
    Hmmmmmm..... $30.00 for a drug test.... Seems like a bargain when compared to how much the .gov spends on military drug testing. If only someone who wasn't in the military that had enough moxie to pursue such info under the freedom of information act..... Hmmmmmmm if only someone like that existed..... $30.00 is a bargain.

    SF-