Another issue that
has arisen in our state is a proposal to administer drug tests to individuals
applying for assistance (welfare, etc.).
I guess this has
been tried before and defeated in the courts when the ACLU challenged the law.
I am re-thinking my age-old support of the ACLU because more and more, I find
myself disagreeing with them.
From a “common
sense” perspective, you don’t want tax payer money going to an individual that
uses that money to buy drugs; taxpayer supported drug addiction. Common sense
also informs us that a person on drugs cannot use 100% of his or her faculties
to get back on their financial feet and end public support.
Parents receiving
aid through “family assistance” programs who test positive for drugs / alcohol
also are hindered in their roles as parents, taking care of their children’s
needs, when they are “high”.
There is absolutely
no valid argument for allowing people on public assistance to use drugs; hell,
I don’t think they should even be allowed to smoke cigarettes since they
obviously cannot afford to do that either.
So if common sense
guides us in a certain direction, what could possible be utilized to argue
“for” allowing people on public assistance to use drugs or as in this case,
what is the argument for not testing these people to determine if they ARE
using drugs?
In a Detroit Free
Press editorial on 1-9-2012, the title of the editorial was: DRUG-TESTING
PROPOSAL DESCRIMINATES AGAINST POOR.
The courts in the
past, have ruled against this testing because it discriminates against a specific
group; the group receiving public assistance. I guess on the surface, this
could be called discriminatory because it selects a specific group “only”…so I
guess if the government is going to conduct drug testing, they need to conduct
it on all people having something to do with the government?
I will admit that I
do not know the laws governing discrimination in these matters so I will only
use “common sense “arguments”.
One argument against
testing says it costs too much; have the state pay for it.
Another states that
if a positive drug test denies assistance to a person or family, they would
suffer. True… so how about mandating a drug recovery program for those testing
positive while allowing them to receive assistance?
I think if smart
people put their heads together, they can come up with a plan that is fair to
the taxpayers and is fair to the people requesting public assistance and in the
meantime, may actually help those poor that need help ending their addiction
and getting back on their own two feet and maybe even helping their kids break
the poverty / drug cycle…win/win…common sense wins!
No comments:
Post a Comment