Just listen....can you hear it?....The left calling him worse than Hitler.

Quote: Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder signed new legislation Friday to enact a drug-testing program for adult welfare recipients.

The one-year pilot program will be implemented in three counties that have not yet been determined, the Associated Press.

Welfare recipients or applicants suspected of drug use will be required to take a drug test. Anyone who refuses to take the test will be suspended from welfare benefits for six months.

If a person tests positive for drugs they will be referred to a treatment program and required to submit periodic drug tests. Refusal to participate in the rehab program will result in a termination of welfare benefits. But benefits can be restored after a person submits a clean drug test.

Mr. Snyder said that the program is intended to help people get clean so they can get good jobs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...ng-for-we/

How many more times are the Republicans going to try this failed experiment before they give up on it?

Anyone with any knowledge of those with drug problems knows that just telling a drug user to pass a drug test is not going to help them get clean. They need treatment which costs a lot of money. Money they don't have because they're drug users!

Quote:Under the pilot, three counties in Michigan to be determined will administer a suspicion-based screening and testing program to Family Independence Program recipients suspected of drug use. If the screening prompts the Michigan Department of Human Services staff to suspect use of a controlled substance, the applicant or recipient must take a substance abuse test. Refusal to take the test results in ineligibility of benefits for six months.

Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

This is good. Drugs cause health problems so getting people to stop using them will save us money trying to treat them. It will also reduce crime and make useless people useful.

And then there's this gem regarding the ACLU: Other groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union argue that drug testing welfare recipients discriminates against poor people who don’t use drugs at a higher rate than the general population.

That's absolutely insane. should we arrest poor murderers at a lower rate just to keep even with rich murderers? And where was this talk of discrimination when some azzwipe decided that people no money get free health insurance and people with none don't?

Someone needs to shut down the ACLU and level their buildings; they are nothing but a stain in this country's underwear.

(12-31-2014 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

Think about it, Tom. With your comment you're already suspecting a certain type of people. Why?

Racist.

(12-31-2014 01:59 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  This is good. Drugs cause health problems so getting people to stop using them will save us money trying to treat them. It will also reduce crime and make useless people useful.

And then there's this gem regarding the ACLU: Other groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union argue that drug testing welfare recipients discriminates against poor people who don’t use drugs at a higher rate than the general population.

That's absolutely insane. should we arrest poor murderers at a lower rate just to keep even with rich murderers? And where was this talk of discrimination when some azzwipe decided that people no money get free health insurance and people with none don't?

Someone needs to shut down the ACLU and level their buildings; they are nothing but a stain in this country's underwear.

So can I put down as in favor or the state paying to get all these drug users clean? You do know that this will likely cost way more than what will be saved in not paying benefits for those who don't enter treatment don't you? If they go into treatment the state will still pay their benefits.

(12-31-2014 02:00 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

Think about it, Tom. With your comment you're already suspecting a certain type of people. Why?

Racist.

You mistyped again. The word is realist.

(12-31-2014 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 01:59 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  This is good. Drugs cause health problems so getting people to stop using them will save us money trying to treat them. It will also reduce crime and make useless people useful.

And then there's this gem regarding the ACLU: Other groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union argue that drug testing welfare recipients discriminates against poor people who don’t use drugs at a higher rate than the general population.

That's absolutely insane. should we arrest poor murderers at a lower rate just to keep even with rich murderers? And where was this talk of discrimination when some azzwipe decided that people no money get free health insurance and people with none don't?

Someone needs to shut down the ACLU and level their buildings; they are nothing but a stain in this country's underwear.

So can I put down as in favor or the state paying to get all these drug users clean? You do know that this will likely cost way more than what will be saved in not paying them benefits don't you? Not to mention that if they go into treatment the state will still pay their benefits.

There you go, assuming that I need to pay for drug treatment for losers. Let the losers get the treatment and pay back the money through deductions from their Welfare or when they get jobs.

Exactly when did responsible people become entirely responsible for the irresponsible?

(12-31-2014 02:03 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 02:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 01:59 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  This is good. Drugs cause health problems so getting people to stop using them will save us money trying to treat them. It will also reduce crime and make useless people useful.

And then there's this gem regarding the ACLU: Other groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union argue that drug testing welfare recipients discriminates against poor people who don’t use drugs at a higher rate than the general population.

That's absolutely insane. should we arrest poor murderers at a lower rate just to keep even with rich murderers? And where was this talk of discrimination when some azzwipe decided that people no money get free health insurance and people with none don't?

Someone needs to shut down the ACLU and level their buildings; they are nothing but a stain in this country's underwear.

So can I put down as in favor or the state paying to get all these drug users clean? You do know that this will likely cost way more than what will be saved in not paying them benefits don't you? Not to mention that if they go into treatment the state will still pay their benefits.

There you go, assuming that I need to pay for drug treatment for losers. Let the losers get the treatment and pay back the money through deductions from their Welfare or when they get jobs.

Exactly when did responsible people become entirely responsible for the irresponsible?

Dude, they don't have money...that's why they're on welfare!

So all drug users are losers? You do know that for many that it's a disease don't you?

(12-31-2014 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 02:00 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

Think about it, Tom. With your comment you're already suspecting a certain type of people. Why?

Racist.

You mistyped again. The word is realist.

No, Tom. You have in your mind a type of person who would most likely use drugs. If I had said that you'd crucify me.

(12-31-2014 02:05 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 02:00 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

Think about it, Tom. With your comment you're already suspecting a certain type of people. Why?

Racist.

You mistyped again. The word is realist.

No, Tom. You have in your mind a type of person who would most likely use drugs. If I had said that you'd crucify me.

No, not at all. More whites abuse drugs than blacks. I'm saying that with the stereotype that they'll suspect blacks first.
When It Comes To Illegal Drug Use, White America Does The Crime, Black America Gets The Time

(12-31-2014 02:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude, they don't have money...that's why they're on welfare!

Like I said, they can pay it back, sorta like a college loan.

(12-31-2014 02:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So all drug users are losers? You do know that for many that it's a disease don't you?

Most of them. What would you call them, winners?

Unconstitutional

I really don't understand what this legislation is supposed to accomplish.
What happens to a welfare recipient who flunks his/her drug test? Do they get cut off? Where do they go from there?

(12-31-2014 03:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't understand what this legislation is supposed to accomplish.
What happens to a welfare recipient who flunks his/her drug test? Do they get cut off? Where do they go from there?

They have to pass tests and get treatment. I'm guessing the state pays for all that. If they do, they still get paid.

Then there's the 400 pound gorilla on how they determine who gets tested.

No way this won't cost more money then what they will save on those who don't seek treatment.

Again, we've tried this several times in other states and nowhere has it saved money or shown that welfare recipients have a higher instance of drug use than the general populous...in fact, I think it's always been less.

(12-31-2014 03:07 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't understand what this legislation is supposed to accomplish.
What happens to a welfare recipient who flunks his/her drug test? Do they get cut off? Where do they go from there?

They have to pass tests and get treatment. I'm guessing the state pays for all that. If they do, they still get paid.
Then there's the 400 pound gorilla on how they determine who gets tested.
No way this won't cost more money then what they will save on those who don't seek treatment.
Again, we've tried this several times in other states and nowhere has it saved money or shown that welfare recipients have a higher instance of drug use than the general populous...in fact, I think it's always been less.

This is one of the few places we will agree, so let's celebrate. Happy New Year!

The drug test aren't aimed at "fixing" their drug problem. It's aimed at fixing their priorities.

If you have money for drugs, but are using Welfare to provide for one of yours or your family's basic needs (food), than your priorities are way wrong. That's all the law is meant to do. Perhaps convince some people to change their priorities by threatening to take away a gift because they're making bad decisions.

It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

(12-31-2014 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:07 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't understand what this legislation is supposed to accomplish.
What happens to a welfare recipient who flunks his/her drug test? Do they get cut off? Where do they go from there?

They have to pass tests and get treatment. I'm guessing the state pays for all that. If they do, they still get paid.
Then there's the 400 pound gorilla on how they determine who gets tested.
No way this won't cost more money then what they will save on those who don't seek treatment.
Again, we've tried this several times in other states and nowhere has it saved money or shown that welfare recipients have a higher instance of drug use than the general populous...in fact, I think it's always been less.

This is one of the few places we will agree, so let's celebrate. Happy New Year!

I too agree. Florida tried this and found it to be a big failure. Here's an excerpt from a Time article about it:

The testing is meant to assure taxpayers their money isn’t being “wasted” on the less desirable, those who would somehow manage to buy drugs with the assistance. But in Tennessee, where drug testing was enacted for welfare recipients last month, only one person in the 800 who applied for help tested positive. In Florida, during the four months the state tested for drug use, only 2.6% of applicants tested positive. Meanwhile, Florida has an illegal drug use rate of 8%, meaning far fewer people on services are using drugs than their better-off counterparts. The drug testing cost taxpayers more money than it saved, and was ruled unconstitutional last year.

This sort of thing is pure Lee Atwater politics.

(12-31-2014 06:08 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:07 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-31-2014 03:02 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't understand what this legislation is supposed to accomplish.
What happens to a welfare recipient who flunks his/her drug test? Do they get cut off? Where do they go from there?

They have to pass tests and get treatment. I'm guessing the state pays for all that. If they do, they still get paid.
Then there's the 400 pound gorilla on how they determine who gets tested.
No way this won't cost more money then what they will save on those who don't seek treatment.
Again, we've tried this several times in other states and nowhere has it saved money or shown that welfare recipients have a higher instance of drug use than the general populous...in fact, I think it's always been less.

This is one of the few places we will agree, so let's celebrate. Happy New Year!

I too agree. Florida tried this and found it to be a big failure. Here's an excerpt from a Time article about it:

The testing is meant to assure taxpayers their money isn’t being “wasted” on the less desirable, those who would somehow manage to buy drugs with the assistance. But in Tennessee, where drug testing was enacted for welfare recipients last month, only one person in the 800 who applied for help tested positive. In Florida, during the four months the state tested for drug use, only 2.6% of applicants tested positive. Meanwhile, Florida has an illegal drug use rate of 8%, meaning far fewer people on services are using drugs than their better-off counterparts. The drug testing cost taxpayers more money than it saved, and was ruled unconstitutional last year.

This sort of thing is pure Lee Atwater politics.

Lol, it says welfare recipients were mostly drug free. Wasn't that the whole idea?

Come on people, stopping crack heads from using their welfare to get high is just terrible. The kids can starve, but they deserve their drugs.

(12-31-2014 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  How many more times are the Republicans going to try this failed experiment before they give up on it?

Anyone with any knowledge of those with drug problems knows that just telling a drug user to pass a drug test is not going to help them get clean. They need treatment which costs a lot of money. Money they don't have because they're drug users!

Quote:Under the pilot, three counties in Michigan to be determined will administer a suspicion-based screening and testing program to Family Independence Program recipients suspected of drug use. If the screening prompts the Michigan Department of Human Services staff to suspect use of a controlled substance, the applicant or recipient must take a substance abuse test. Refusal to take the test results in ineligibility of benefits for six months.

Gee...I wonder who will be suspected?

I think they might start with the drug users or those with drug history first.