Welcome to PatsFans.com

Florida Welfare Recipients Paid After Drug Testing Halted..

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Sep 9, 2012.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,778
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +363 / 11 / -27

    Must have been that liberal "activist" judge to finagled the constitution again, oh wait she was an appointee of George W...

    Anyways a 35 year old single parent veteran is going to college, finishing up his degree, and he has a son and the state wanted to take away his welfare benefits because he refused drug testing, so he went to the ACLU and they prevailed. The head of the Fla. ACLU commented, "This is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy, that you can't condition getting some benefit from the government by surrendering your constitutional rights."

    What is interesting is the perception that all welfare recipients sit around all day getting high.. while 2300 refused to take the test, of the 4,000 people who took the test only 108 were found to have drugs in their system(2.5%).

    Florida "had to reimburse welfare applicants $113,037 for the cost of the test, regardless of whether they passed it or not. And then, they had to pay out just shy of $595,000 in retroactive benefits to families who were initially denied welfare because they either failed the test or refused to take it." But of course this was all budgeted for..

    With that $364.00 monthly TANF payment for a family of four, bet those 60" flatscreens were flying off other shelf, so they could watch the game with a filet mignon and caviar buffets...

    Florida forced to reimburse welfare recipients after drug testing law struck down - Kingsport Times-News
  2. Hebeill

    Hebeill Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    That criminal governor rick scott just took a hit to the wallet since he ownes part of the company that makes the test kits.
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,778
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +363 / 11 / -27

    That would be a conflict of interest, Mr. Peepers, gee whiz!!!!... Ethics do not matter as long as they get them cheating welfare baztards, the pols line their pockets or create an election sound byte.. that family of four who gets $364.00 a month is really getting ahead in that system.
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2012
  4. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,878
    Likes Received:
    88
    Ratings:
    +172 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    My thoughts

    Why did the 2300(over a full third) refuse he test....righteous protest? Would it be reasonable to assume that a good number of those that refused did so because they knew they did have drugs in their system? I think a you'd find a much higher percentage of drug use among the ones that refused the test. Yes a good number of recipients do sit around getting high. At the same time I think a lot of people getting other government benefits, including tax cuts etc. also get high. If welfare recipients have to get tested then so do everyone else that benefits monetarily from the government. I don't think that's ever going to happen so i don't think anyone should be tested

    Here's another reason to legalize and tax marijuana. Stop draining the system with drug tests and instead tax it and add money into the system.

    I have question though. How can anyone say Bush was so blatantly right wing partisan when it seems all of his judge appointees rule otherwise?
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,778
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +363 / 11 / -27

    Perhaps the judge thing has to do with upholding the consitution, and not about partisan politics.. messing with folks urines is serious business, and should not be taken lightly.

    Not sure why the 2300 refused, perhaps there was some grass roots organizing or perhaps many "toked up" in the past 30-45 days, we will never know.
  6. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Wonder how many failed the alcohol blood tests? What? It's OK to get drunk but not smoke weed?

    Legalize it!

    This is not a partisan issue. CONServatives who profess love for the CONStitution and CONSistency have as much at stake in this case as anyone else.
  7. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Is that true? You gotta be kidding!

    Oh wait...Florida.
  8. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,715
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    No kidding, right? It is real head scratcher how a state elects someone who scammed the government in the biggest case of Medicare fraud in history.
  9. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,888
    Likes Received:
    328
    Ratings:
    +562 / 9 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    Two words:

    Tea Party
  10. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,120
    Likes Received:
    218
    Ratings:
    +519 / 6 / -2

    They should test if the state wants to. If you're going to accept someone else's money, then you also must accept the strings that come attached to it. Don't want to take the test, then dont accept someone else's hard earned money. To me, it's that easy. Now, do I think that half the people collecting welfare are on drugs? Of course not. That doesn't change the basic point that it isn't their money. If a state, and it's people, feel it's necessary that eligibility require a drug free component, so be it.
  11. Hamar

    Hamar Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,474
    Likes Received:
    56
    Ratings:
    +174 / 0 / -1

    Yes, only in Florida could a politician have connects to a company that gets an advantage from said politician.

    I mean, that pretty much is the way our political systems works now.
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2012
  12. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,715
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    I get it, and agree that the majority of politicians do not act ethically. Florida elects an individual who was CEO of the company found guilty of the largest case of Medicare fraud in U.S. history. Then, implements a drug testing policy in which he (wife/whatever) has ownership of the company doing the testing. Do not care what party this guy is affiliated with, he's scum. If you want to defend him that speaks volumes.
  13. Hamar

    Hamar Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,474
    Likes Received:
    56
    Ratings:
    +174 / 0 / -1

    No, what speaks volumes is how you decipher my post into defending the idiot in Florida.
  14. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,715
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    I called him scum. Hmmm, not too high on the defense tactics.
  15. Hamar

    Hamar Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,474
    Likes Received:
    56
    Ratings:
    +174 / 0 / -1

    What part of what you wrote do you not understand?

    You, were basically accusing me of defending him, which I was not.
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2012
  16. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    You musta missed the thread a while back that was about the wierdness and depravity of Florida in recent years. It went along with the Texas wierdness and which one was worse, etc...

    So my point wasn't only in Florida but more that literally anything's possible in Florida.

    That's all.
  17. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Not if it's unconstitutional. There is a valid arguement that the state has no right to require you to submit bodily fluids when there is no reasonable suspicion of any wrongdoing and that may incriminate oneself (4th and 5th Ammendments). Since the state is issuing the funds, they should not be permitted to make this requirement. You can't mandate or vote for something that voilated the Bill of Rights or any other right given by the constitution, court rulings notwithstanding.
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2012
  18. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Maybe it is their money. Maybe they just got on welfare after paying taxes all their adult life? Lots of corporations take federal subsidies which are tax $$$ that's "not their own" money and none of their owners are required to take piss tests for drugs (wouldn't that be fun?). The purposes of drug testing has only been justified in situations where the person is responsible for the safety of others and are therefor required by their company's insurance company to submit. I still disagree with that policy but it seems to be water under the bridge at this point.
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2012
  19. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,778
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +363 / 11 / -27

    Such a move that Florida started, is very costly, has a ton of procedural safeguards which need to be followed and the only one benefitting are the companies who test...

    If implemented over a period of time, probably would cost more than it would save..

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>