Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dole Links License To Drug Test
Charlotte Observer ^ | October 30, 2002 | Mark Johnson

Posted on 10/31/2002 4:57:12 AM PST by Wolfie

Dole Links License To Drug Test

Elizabeth Dole wants to require all teenagers to pass a drug test before getting a driver's license. Dole, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate and a former transportation secretary, has promised to push for a federal law pressuring states to enforce such a measure. "Wouldn't that help them understand how important it is to be drug free?" Dole asked at a recent campaign stop in Washington, N.C. "It's not cool (to abuse drugs). It kills."

Then-President Bill Clinton proposed a nearly identical measure in 1996 while campaigning against Dole's husband, former Sen. Bob Dole, and offered federal grants to states the following year. Campaign officials for Elizabeth Dole said they were unaware of the Clinton initiative.

Dole included the pre-license drug test as part of her "Dole Plan for North Carolina" this year, proposing that teens who test positive must complete a drug counseling course and pass a subsequent test before getting a license.

The test could be bypassed. Parents who don't want their children to take a drug test could just say no and waive the requirement, said Mary Brown Brewer, Dole's communications director.

"You can't solely address illegal drugs from the supply side. You have to address it from the demand side," Brewer said. "When you turn 16, you look so forward to getting that driver's license ... This is a pretty strong incentive not to do anything that would prevent you from getting that driver's license."

Dole has made "less government" a campaign mantra, as have many Republicans, which makes it striking that she would embrace an invasive expansion of government duties and authority. Last year, nearly 62,000 N.C. teens got their first driver's license.

A spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said he was unaware of any states enacting such a program after the Clinton push.

Dole's opponent, Democrat Erskine Bowles, said he would like to talk with law enforcement officials, parents and teenagers before proposing such a measure.

The testing presents practical obstacles and legal questions. State motor vehicles administrations would suddenly face the costs of processing drug tests through a laboratory, not to mention the idea of testing youngsters who haven't been accused of anything. U.S. courts, though, have repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of drug tests.

Several states have zero tolerance laws on alcohol use, requiring that teens lose their license if caught driving with any of alcohol in their blood. The alcohol tests, though, are administered after a youth has been stopped on suspicion of drinking.

Substance-abuse experts said drug testing works as an incentive to keep youths from abusing drugs but likely only until they pass that checkpoint.

"Drug testing has always been a false promise that it would help us somehow by threatening people and make them stop so they wouldn't get into trouble," said John P. Morgan, a physician and City University of New York medical professor who has studied drug testing for 15 years.

He said the vast majority of positive drug tests detect nothing stronger than marijuana, and occasional smokers need only stop for a couple of weeks to pass.

Carl Shantzis, executive director of Substance Abuse Prevention Services in Charlotte, said prevention policy requires follow-up.

"Once teenagers get a license," Shantzis said, "the question is what kind of other incentives are there to keep them from abusing alcohol or other drugs."


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: bigdruggietears; copernicus2; dopeuberalles; drugtesting; hippiedoperrant; investingstocks; northcarolina; obeyorpay; oldnorthstate; rino; unhelpful
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 441-443 next last
To: Wolfie
That's it, I'm voteing for Bowles.

I didn't like that witch comeing into my state to take our seat in the first place. I was planning on voteing for her, but this pisses me off.

I'm not voteing for the Libertarian candidate, I'm voteing Democrat based on this one issue.

I want Dole to loose.
361 posted on 10/31/2002 12:16:24 PM PST by The FRugitive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Pick your nose - lose your license.
Eat your broccoli - or lose your license.
Like minorities - or lose your license.

Someday, everything that is desirable will be mandatory and everything that isn’t, will be illegal. It’s just a matter of time.
362 posted on 10/31/2002 12:18:56 PM PST by FoxPro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
If you are willing to submit your kids to this, why not do it yourself?

What I would do is not relevant to this.

I am afraid that it does have every relevance to the topic at hand. You appear unwilling to test your own kids, unless you hold suspicions, but you want the state to test my kid just to enter school, play sports, or get a driver's license. Further evidence of your disingenuousness in the discussion of this topic.

Why don't you currently test your kids for drugs? Why don't you make their participation in fun things outside the home like sleepovers or going to the movies (or even inside the home like wathching their favorite TV show) dependent upon their passing a drug test? If you say they are too young at this point - well wouldn't that be the best time to start testing them, so they get used to it before they are really able to protest? Why don't you test your own kids? You must have some reasons, let's hear them.

363 posted on 10/31/2002 12:20:05 PM PST by citizenK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: Hatteras
Anyhow, I could go on & on about this subject parsing Dole's record & statements (on trade, on baby-killing, on the welfare state) but there's no need or use. I haven't commented before on FR about Dole because I generally refrain from criticizing even the RINOs like Linc Chafee (why he doesn't go 'rat and get it over with is beyond me..) This report just annoyed me because it reminded me of all the reasons I dislike Liddy Dole.
364 posted on 10/31/2002 12:20:23 PM PST by AntiGuv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Neither of these is true with the situation we're considering.

Ever hear the line...Give em an inch and they will take a mile?

Well, in the case of government, it's ALWAYS... Give em an inch and they will take a thousand miles !!

Where do YOU draw the line?


365 posted on 10/31/2002 12:23:12 PM PST by unixfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: citizenK
Why don't you currently test your kids for drugs? Why don't you make their participation in fun things outside the home like sleepovers or going to the movies (or even inside the home like wathching their favorite TV show) dependent upon their passing a drug test?

Come back to this universe, citizenK. I don't believe my kids endanger anyone - but I know that other kids endanger mine. I'm willing to have them ALL tested to prevent such danger - including my own. That's perfectly consistent. And actually, I'd be happy to have my kids have to be tested - then I can know they're drug free without having to confront or question them.

366 posted on 10/31/2002 12:27:54 PM PST by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: The FRugitive
"I want Dole to loose."

She's 66 years-old, she's bound to be loose in a few places atleast. Now, Bob Dole, that's different. I'm sure he's pretty much loose all over...

367 posted on 10/31/2002 12:30:24 PM PST by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: Hatteras
Actually, one last thing. I'm not much thrilled with squeezing the tobacco industry into oblivion either. If you really want my opinion - there aren't enough ways left for stupid people to kill themselves off anymore (and that's mostly the Democrats fault, I might add). However, if they're going to regulate them out of existence, then the Feds should at least compensate the farmers with a fair tobacco buyout program.
368 posted on 10/31/2002 12:30:56 PM PST by AntiGuv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
"The test could be bypassed. Parents who don't want their children to take a drug test could just say no and waive the requirement, said Mary Brown Brewer, Dole's communications director."

So here is the weasel clause. If parents want their kids tested, fine; if they don't, that's okay too.

369 posted on 10/31/2002 12:31:50 PM PST by ladylib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
I don't believe my kids endanger anyone - but I know that other kids endanger mine.

*Grin*

So, what happens when every parent says what you just posted? "Its not MY kids, its those OTHER kids".

Its always "the other kids".

370 posted on 10/31/2002 12:31:56 PM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
In my town in one year. Care to guess how many towns there are in my state? In the country?

The fallacy is in assuming that if the kids had passed a drug test before they got their license, none of these events would have occured.

371 posted on 10/31/2002 12:33:27 PM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: The FRugitive
"I'm not voteing for the Libertarian candidate, I'm voteing Democrat based on this one issue."

Tell me, did you hook driver's ed today so you could post that comment?

372 posted on 10/31/2002 12:33:41 PM PST by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: ladylib
So here is the weasel clause. If parents want their kids tested, fine; if they don't, that's okay too.

Yep, just like with her seatbelt law. First, not mandatory, then it is. First, they say people will never be stopped for just a seatbelt, now there are all sorts of initiatives to stop drivers.

You honestly don't think this wouldn't be mandatory, with expulsions from school and criminal pealties, in a few short years, do you?

373 posted on 10/31/2002 12:34:52 PM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
"Well, they reflect the intelligence of US. We're responsible for those we elect."

And may God have mercy on us, for we know not what we do....

374 posted on 10/31/2002 12:35:55 PM PST by azhenfud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
You know, Mr. Hyperbole is not always your friend.

It's not "hyperbole", it's a fact of life. The greens with the help Clinton administration turned a subdivision in my county into a ghost town. First they said they only wanted 7,500 acres and only from "willing sellers". Now they have 70,000 acres and are in the process of condemning all remaining "willing sellers".

Just to the north of there is another sub division where they're using the exact same business model. Not only are we being completely ignored by our useless scumbag RINOs (I've gotten used to that), but they are actively promoting this abomination of justice so they can continue to bed the super rich watermelon land barons.

Why do you think the Klamath/Darby convoy drove 5,000 miles at their own expense to come here? To participate in my "hyperbole"?

When I say every single GOP politician in my chain of representation (from county commissioners all the way up) is taking part in the total destruction of my community, I am not overstating it. Every single solitary one is, there is not a single one that's not.

Sorry AP, I don't do "hyperbole".

375 posted on 10/31/2002 12:36:23 PM PST by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: cork
Maybe I'm missing something here. I had to pass a drug test to get my Commercial Drivers License, and was subject to random testing from my company. To be hired in the steel mills (when they were hiring) they used hair samples. There are many many jobs that require drug testing. I don't see much wrong with testing teens in order for them to get their driver's license. If my son tested positive he would not have to ever worry about getting his license or driving any of my vehicles. Every action has a reaction.
376 posted on 10/31/2002 12:38:47 PM PST by cork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: galt-jw
Cant wait for all the statist vomit to come from the ignorant, intellectually vacant, emotional soccer mom, flag waving, brown shirt, useful idiot man-girls.

LOL Not sure if I agree with you wholeheartedly or not(though I think I do), that has GOT to be the funniest phrasing that I've seen in a long time!

377 posted on 10/31/2002 12:46:15 PM PST by cmak9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cork
To be hired in the steel mills (when they were hiring) they used hair samples. There are many many jobs that require drug testing. I don't see much wrong with testing teens in order for them to get their driver's license.

You just switched from private companies with requirements for employment to "public law" placing a stipulation on the the natural right to travel. A private business has every right to make rules which people who volunarily work for them must follow. The key word is voluntarily. I don't have a right to have a specific job; likewsie, I can start my own company and make my own rules.

Because "drugs" are illegal and there are "laws" covering a driver's license, there is a presumption of guilt if one is required to prove they are not engaging in some activity that is "illegal" to acquire the license. A private business is not the State(government) and has no police power.

The difference is huge.

378 posted on 10/31/2002 12:48:59 PM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Well I don't believe my kids are a danger to anyone either, and I think you should keep your nose out of their urine!

You don't get it do you?
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, eh?

You have not answered a key question either - how would your drug testing your kids (yourself) impact your relationship with them?

They wouldn't like it would they? They would resent you for it too, wouldn't they (especially if they passed)? What sort of message does it send your kids if you force them to be drug tested? Don't you think there are issues of trust at play here? Don't you think they would wonder why you don't trust them?

Do you not think the same psychology plays into the society as a whole, with respect to the relationship between the government and our coming of age citizens?

You are hiding behind the government and asking them to do for you what you are unwilling to do yourself where it comes to raising your kids. It's no wonder you don't think our government is socialist, you are a socialist yourself. (BTW, only take that as an insult if you want to, it's just an observation.)

379 posted on 10/31/2002 12:51:22 PM PST by citizenK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
No, I realize that you shouldn't let the camel get its nose under the tent. The weasel clause will not be included in the federal legislation. States will also jump on the bandwagon. I wouldn't be surprised if states aren't looking into this now.

The woman is a statist liberal masquerading as a Republican.
380 posted on 10/31/2002 12:57:08 PM PST by ladylib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 441-443 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson