Posted on 10/26/2011 5:05:14 PM PDT by dynachrome
Should states require welfare recipients to pass drug tests?
Yes
No
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
No. We shouldn’t have government welfare or welfare recipients. If private charities want to drug-test the recipients of charity, they should be able to.
Yup. I work with people who think they pay income taxes, even if they get it all back at tax filing time
The project for drug testing welfare recipients should be called: “Urine the Money!”
I heard in FL they found only 2% of the people actually were on drugs. The big news the media never mentions is
thousands decided not to take the test to get on government assistance when they heard about it.
Unfortunately I was drinking a soda when I read your comment. Thankfully I barely missed spewing all over my keyboard and screen!
of course they should be drug tested and the results of that poll indicate that the vast majority of Americans agree. 178904 say yes while 44231 say no. spin that CNN. and if the ACLU manages to have this found unconstitutional, states need to stop paying welfare benefits altogether. There’s no constitutional requirement that they do so. We can not allow the bums to control our economic policies.
Well, none of us wrote the tax code. We need the flat tax, Fair Tax, 9-9-9 ... *something* that separates basic revenue raising from social engineering.
(And if it puts all the tax and investment and estate-management professionals out of business, they can get real jobs!)
Should states require welfare recipients to pass drug tests?
Yes80% 179658
No20% 44434
Total votes: 224092
The project for drug testing welfare recipients should be called: “Urine the Money!”
POST OF THE DAY, FOLKS, POST OF THE DAY!! RIGHT HERE!!
Yes 80% 180438
No 20% 44635
Total votes: 225073
Yes 80% 180060
No 20% 44533
Total votes: 224593
Here’s my idea of welfare reform....
(document presented in language of applicant).....Public Assistance Implementation and Usage Contract.
This contract, entered into on (date) and expiring on (18 months from implementation date) by the (state agency) and applicant(s) listed herein (must submit names of applicant and children born to her via birth records),allows for the provision of food,housing allowance,child care and education for the purposes of job placement during the contract period,and is understood by all parties concerned that the provision of aforementioned assistance is on a one-time basis,not to be repeated or reinstated at any time for any reason between the applicant(s) and the agency named herein,and is for the aforementioned time period only,and can only be implemented following presentation of documents proving legal citizenship status and a drug screening process,both of which are to be conducted by the agency.
Once legal citizenship status and drug screen results are known by the agency and the applicant and found to be favorable,this contract can then be implemented.The following covenants hereby apply and are agreed upon by both the named agency herein and the applicant(s) seeking assistance (failure of any one of these covenants will be considered a contract breach on the part of the applicant,and will result in immediate termination of the contract;assistance will be terminated immediately and can never be reinstated at any time in the future for any reason:
applicant will submit to random home visits which will be unannounced and will occur during the 5-day work week,normally during the early afternoon hours;
applicant will submit to random drug testing as directed by the agency;
applicant must not conceive,adopt (formally or informally,including family members,immediate or extended) marry or cohabitate during the contract period;
applicant must attend a one-year vocational program via a voucher provided by the agency;applicant must attend each class ( two absences will be allowed during the contract period and a doctor’s note must be submitted upon returning to class for each absence) and a transportation voucher will be provided by the agency for transportation during class hours;child care will be provided by the agency during class hours only.
Once applicant graduates from vocational training, a two-month job-placement period will commence,with child care provided by the agency; Upon applicant’s employment,there will be an additional 4 months of ongoing assistance to allow applicant enough time to establish themselves in their occupation and to make child-care arrangements for after the contract period.
Once this contract has reached its expiration date,the assistance provided,all provisions and covenants and financial considerations as well,will cease and terminate permanently.The applicant is barred from any and all future assistance.
I,________________ hereby agree to adhere to all covenants,rules,etc of this contract. I realize and fully understand that I am bound by this contract in order to receive assistance in any form,and that any violation or breach will result in my not receiving any form of assistance any further. I agree further that this contract was fully explained to me by the agency caseworker and that I will fully comply. (sign & date here)____________________________
Agency hereby agrees to and will implement to the best of its ability and obligations,all covenants of this contract.
(agency sign & date)_______________________
You can protest all you want that SS and Medicare were paid into, but it won't matter to the big-government crowd who believe all the money is theirs and we're nothing but supplicants.
The problem is too much welfare -- not too few conditions. "Be careful what you wish for" applies here.
Yes 80% 180438
No 20% 44635
>> No. We shouldn’t have government welfare or welfare recipients. If private charities want to drug-test the recipients of charity, they should be able to.
That’s amazingly sane, and to the point. And succinct, too.
You should either be running for office, or else “asking your doctor if Tambien is right for you”. I’m not sure which. :-)
A very fair and excellent start.
Remember what Franklin said, “the man willing to give up his rights for security ends up with neither.”
4th Amendment would just be the start. Give them welfare or don't, don't conjure up excuses!
Yes 80%... total votes 228300
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.