Drug test welfare recipients

[mustangbangher]

Rep. Mitchell proposal: Drug test welfare recipients
Posted: Tuesday, May 5th, 2009
BY: Janeen Burkholder


jburkholder@theclintonjournal.com

CLINTON—If you receive state Medicaid or TANF benefits, Rep. Bill Mitchell wants you to be able to pass a drug test.
But, that’s not all. He wants his colleagues to pass the test, too.
Mitchell, (R-Forsyth), made a hastily announced tour of his district Monday scheduling media opps, explaining that though he hadn’t yet introduced the legislation, he expected to file later in the day.
“Many private companies require drug testing as a condition for employment. If it is good enough for the private sector, why wouldn’t we make it a condition for receiving benefits that are paid for by the hard-working taxpayers of Illinois,” Mitchell stated in a news release.
He noted that many state jobs require drug testing. A bill is pending in the House that would require student athletes be subject to random drug tests.
Mitchell’s bill would require applicants for “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,” also called TANF, and for Medicaid medical assistance to pass a drug test to be eligible for benefits. Those who test positive can retest. Individuals who have a positive retest would be required to complete a substance abuse treatment program.
He said six other states require drug testing of welfare recipients. He offered this defense for an anticipated attack:
“To the ACLU, who say I am picking on defenseless people, I say OK — make every person running for the General Assembly test for drugs,” he offered. “If they test positive, they are automatically removed from the ballot.”
Mitchell said he’s motivated to keep drug-users from benefiting at a time when the economy is at its worst and the welfare load the heaviest.
He said a drug test could cost up to $400 per person, but in the long run he thinks it would be cheaper to pare the size of the recipient pool.
“I think in the long run it’s cost effective,” Mitchell said at his news stop in Clinton Monday.

“Our booming Medicaid obligation has become a major drain on the state budget,” he wrote in the news release. “Illinois ha a budget deficit ranging somewhere between $7 and $11 billion and owes around $1.7 billion in unpaid Medicaid bills. We owe it to the taxpayers to take a hard look at where their hard-earned dollars are being spent.

“I also believe we need to send a strong message to the recipients that if they want to receive public assistance, they need to stay off drugs.”

He said 52 percent of babies born in Illinois are born into welfare. “Crack babies are very expensive,” Mitchell said in Clinton. At $9 billion, the Medicaid budget is the biggest in state government squeezing out K-12 education, he said.

[CNTLOSE]

I am 100% for this, it would never pass in OH, but I would vote for it if gave the chance.

[NUTTSGT]

I've talked about this before, I'd like to include birth control (like the arm implant) with this too.

[Black Horse]

While I feel for those that truely deserve our support, I think this may be a first step in ridding the system of those that abuse the priviledges.

[04 Venom]

While I feel for those that truely deserve our support, I think this may be a first step in ridding the system of those that abuse the priviledges.

I agree.

[02mingryGT]

I would test not only the welfare or other support recipients but also our representatives. And I believe it can pass in Ohio if everybody actually voted.

[mach_u]

While I feel for those that truely deserve our support, I think this may be a first step in ridding the system of those that abuse the priviledges.
Couldn't agree more! Virtually every job in this country requires you to be drug free (excluding maybe Willie Nelson's roadies. :lol:) - why shouldn't those receiving federal/state assistance be required to do the same thing? Either way, I'm sure this will end up being a racial issue. :rolleyes: I'd love to see it come to a vote in Ohio! I bet it would pass with overwhelming support!

[duststang]

I couldn't agree more. I have been telling my wife this for years!

[MrsAPE]

I'd love to see it come to a vote in Ohio! I bet it would pass with overwhelming support!

I agree that it should be done and would love to see it done however I don't agree with you on this part AJ. All those that are currently on it would be sure to vote it down. Sadly. It sure would be nice though.

[sean]

I have been wanting this for years now. I also think it should be taken away if someone is convicted of a felony.

[DeckerEnt]

We need to do something to control the cost of government and " reducing the recipiant pool " is a good start!!!

[Mista Bone]

Spike the Kool-Aid?

[CNTLOSE]

It would be like Obama getting elected. Registered voters would triple overnight just to vote it down.

[mustang8998]

On the surface, it sounds like a great idea. But, that happens to those who don't pass the drug tests. Rehab (costly) and then throw the money at them? If they don't make it through rehab, then what? Turn to a life of crime?

[Dirtyd0g]

On the surface, it sounds like a great idea. But, that happens to those who don't pass the drug tests. Rehab (costly) and then throw the money at them? If they don't make it through rehab, then what? Turn to a life of crime?

That was my thoughts. I think the plan has the potential of costing even more and increasing our homeless population. I think the other way around. Why does our government worry so much about controlling us when they can't even keep our jobs here. That should be priority. Get the people jobs and they won't need the assistance. A person who lives their life for drugs would be the one who wouldn't be bothered by all this nonsense, they would continue stealing to get what they want anyway.
Alan

[NUTTSGT]

I agree that it should be done and would love to see it done however I don't agree with you on this part AJ. All those that are currently on it would be sure to vote it down. Sadly. It sure would be nice though.

Doubt that, most of those people that are on it, aren't registered voters.

[tcorns]

That was my thoughts. I think the plan has the potential of costing even more and increasing our homeless population. I think the other way around. Why does our government worry so much about controlling us when they can't even keep our jobs here. That should be priority. Get the people jobs and they won't need the assistance. A person who lives their life for drugs would be the one who wouldn't be bothered by all this nonsense, they would continue stealing to get what they want anyway.
Alan


i think that this has the potential to cost a ton more money then it needs to, but then it is the government. i don't think it matters if there are jobs available or not. there are people who will just sit on their butts and collect what they can. look at wilmington a few years ago. there were jobs available to people and yet how many sat at home because they could get a free ride on the government tit. it was bad enough that abx air had to use contract people from cinci, dayton, comlumbus, and other area to fill in the slots. maybe if some of them where to loose the assistance and get kicked out of their house they would see things a bit differently.
it's time that the adults be adults and quit letting the government support people that don't need it.

[02mingryGT]

maybe if some of them where to loose the assistance and get kicked out of their house they would see things a bit differently.
it's time that the adults be adults and quit letting the government support people that don't need it.

Exactly. And if they turn to a life of crime eventually someone will shoot them dead. Problem solved for everyone. Sounds like a plan.

[MrsAPE]

Doubt that, most of those people that are on it, aren't registered voters.

They are now after our presidental race. :cool1:

[04 Venom]

i think that this has the potential to cost a ton more money then it needs to, but then it is the government. i don't think it matters if there are jobs available or not. there are people who will just sit on their butts and collect what they can. look at wilmington a few years ago. there were jobs available to people and yet how many sat at home because they could get a free ride on the government tit. it was bad enough that abx air had to use contract people from cinci, dayton, comlumbus, and other area to fill in the slots. maybe if some of them where to loose the assistance and get kicked out of their house they would see things a bit differently.
it's time that the adults be adults and quit letting the government support people that don't need it.

TANF is designed to help dependent children, not adults. Job training is also required for adults receiving benefits with dependent children. There is a lifetime maximum of 60 months (states have the discretion to set lower limits) worth of benefits. Here is a link showing the substantial decline in "welfare" benefits since 1996.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Assistance_for_Needy_Families

[mach_u]

They are now after our presidental race. :cool1:
Beat me to it! :lol:

[beefcake]

i agree and i love the bc idea too,

it you can't support your family, you shouldn't be having kids

it's different if your down on your luck for a month or 2, but these people that work and live off the system and keep having kids to get more money are nothing but a drain on society

[Dirtyd0g]

i agree and i love the bc idea too,

it you can't support your family, you shouldn't be having kids

it's different if your down on your luck for a month or 2, but these people that work and live off the system and keep having kids to get more money are nothing but a drain on society


Well that is easy for you to say your job can't pack up and move to China. If your dealership goes under like so many others have you may have a different outlook.It's hard to judge a man (or woman)who spent years working a factory and paying his taxes then had the job move to china. I think he would still deserve the right to have children. There are too many situations to stereotype everyone. The only solution is going to be to actually bring our work back here. Then if they won't work screw em.
Alan

[beefcake]

Well that is easy for you to say your job can't pack up and move to China. If your dealership goes under like so many others have you may have a different outlook.It's hard to judge a man (or woman)who spent years working a factory and paying his taxes then had the job move to china. I think he would still deserve the right to have children. There are too many situations to stereotype everyone. The only solution is going to be to actually bring our work back here. Then if they won't work screw em.
Alan

i'm not talking about that situation, i'm talking about the welfare lifers,

people who are on all the time, don't try, and have no interest in trying

[MrsAPE]

Beat me to it! :lol:

Point! Woot! :cool1:

[Dirtyd0g]

i'm not talking about that situation, i'm talking about the welfare lifers,

people who are on all the time, don't try, and have no interest in trying

I don't think american citizens get welfare anymore that program is pretty much saved for illegal immigrants. The only thing we can get is pretty much food assitance and medical care which would be terrible if they destroyed.
Alan

[Galaxie]

I think its a great Idea as most people have to take a drug test for employment so these lazy asses should have to take one to collect money from the working man .My wife works next to the welfare office and gets pissed of seeing welfare folks driving nice cars , talking on cell phones and wearing new clothes . If they can afford to pay for that stuff they can buy there own food . On the birth control issues Its a known fact that a box of condoms is alot cheaper than a box of diapers . If you cant afford a condom you cant afford a kid.

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

I'd be all for this. I've had to be on assistance a few times myself because of my health, and there's nothing like going down to the office and sitting with a bunch of obvious addicts. If you can't afford to feed your family, then you can't afford drugs.


As for kids, that's a very grey area. It's wrong to tell someone they can't have kids, but there should be some common sense on the parents part that if they can't afford kids they should at least wait. I've had plenty of neighbors who were "career welfarees" who seemed to have a new kid once a year. One couple i know for a fact dealt coke on the side and made crazy money but they still lived in filth, had 7 (yes, SEVEN) kids who half of them would run around in their diaper all day unsupervised. Then somehow they'd always rake it in come tax time even though they didn't work. People like that should be FORCED to take birth conrol...i think once you have 7 kids you've had your chance at parenting. If this particular family were drug tested, i can guarantee you they would fail it. The only perceivable down side to this is that if they lose their free money then their kids would only suffer more, but that's where childrens services should come in and see to it that if it happens they're taken away.

Ultimately the way i see it is if i have to pee in a cup to get a job, they should damn well have to pee in a cup to rake in free money.

[Dirtyd0g]

Ultimately the way i see it is if i have to pee in a cup to get a job, they should damn well have to pee in a cup to rake in free money.

That is for sure, but the question is who actually gets free money. The only way to get anything free from our government is to be from somewhere else.
controlling immigration would make more change to our economy than paying for urine screens which will just cost more. These plans are usually set forth because the senators son started a urine test company and needs to make a few million dollars over the next few months to pay off his yacht. I don't trust any of the government plans anymore. The tobacco tax pays for wealthy families childrens healthcare......Why would congress allow this, simple because it directly saves them money.
Alan