I came across this today and it kind of stunned me. I was unaware of many states previous attempts at trying this out. I can see why the ACLU jumped on this and filed a lawsuit. I don’t have much to say as I am very biased since I am a recovering substance abuser. I will say that I was shocked at the estimates of the cost to implement this. 5.9 billion dollars was set aside to implement a pilot program and that is just the pilot. No telling how much the real program will cost.
Couldn’t that money be better spent on solving the problem proactively with treatment instead of punishing people with problems after the fact? I would not want my tax dollars going to keep up a person’s addiction but still wouldn’t want 5.9 billion dollars spent for drug testing of welfare recipients. 5.9 billion dollars would get a lot of people help through treatment or counseling and still work on solving the problem.
“But a number of Republicans on the committee argued that it's an important way to get low-income adults on the path to self-sufficiency.”
I can think of a lot better ways of getting low income people back on the path to self-sufficiency with 5.9 billion dollars. How about better funding job training and rehabilitation? How about putting some of that money in education for low income people? Better education many times equals better and higher paying jobs.
I do wonder what they would consider a drug. I consider alcohol and nicotine drugs but I am sure these are not tested for since they are legal but are very expensive for someone on a fixed income. My presumption is that they are going after crack cocaine and marijuana users (or similar drugs). I wonder how they deal with legal prescription narcotics or the abuse there of? Where do you draw the line? I hate to say it but this would be an ideal way to discriminate against minorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment