It’s a headline that you could see coming to Kentucky. On May 31 Florida’s Governor, Rick Scott signed a bill into law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test in order to qualify for temporary cash assistance. The law went into effect on July 1st making Florida the first state to require testing of welfare recipients.
Missouri’s Governor Jay Nixon followed Florida’s lead and signed into law House Bill 73. This law requires the state Department of Social Services to “develop a program to screen each applicant or recipient who is otherwise eligible for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,” the federal government’s cash-assistance program. The new law says that if there is “reasonable cause to believe” he or she “engages in illegal use of controlled substances,” then they may be subjected to a drug test.
Some opponents to the new laws argue this process is “unconstitutional” and in 2003 a federal court agreed by declaring similar law in Michigan unconstitutional. However, with the recent passage of the new laws in Florida and Missouri other states including Kentucky, Kansas, West Virginia, and Illinois are considering their own versions of the drug testing policy.
So Martin County do you think any form of drug testing to welfare recipients is unconstitutional or do you think this is a fair way to keep the system in check?
If they truly need help, submitting to a drug test should not be a problem — too many individuals do not use the money they are given for what they say they need. Most employers require drug testing before hiring someone, what is the difference?
No where in the Constitution does it say “Investigation into possible wrongdoing is unconstitutional.” The reason there is conflict with the Constitution is because the Constitution is not a Socialist driven device. But it does say in the Preamble that our posterity is protected by it … gee, arent my unborn children my posterity? Throw that stupid document out!! We do not need it unless we want to protect those who disregard the law. Welfare is a priviledge, not a right.
there is nothing unconstitutional about it. to do illegal drugs is not a constitutional right, I am a tax payer and I also understand the statistics on lower income/unemployed persons. Drugs sadly fester in these conditions. I say if you want a handout, prove you are clean, I’m really not sure what could possibly be unconstitutional. I have had so many jobs or interviews that require drug tests… are you implying that I could take them to court if I refuse a drug test and they refuse to hire me??? No, because it is an employers right to have a clean, reliable employee. So think of those collecting welfare as state employees, would you want a governor or president on drugs?
This is exactly the point I was making in my first essay. If people rely on government, they become slaves (again, political slaves, not chattel). They have no choice; they want to be dependent on government, they must do what they are told. Folks, that’s called tyranny.
I live in Ohio and truly hope they will do this soon I believe if I have to take a drug test for my job then they should do the same with people on public assitance because there is people who need to be on it and can’t because there are people abusing the system and doing drugs.
There is no constitutional mandate that forces states to even HAVE
a welfare program at all.
They could simply repeal the whole welfare law
and circumvent these liberal judges