It is assumed by many that people who are receiving public assistance funds are using this money to support their alcohol and or drug addictions. Is drug testing to receive public assistance an answer to this problem? Would making this a condition of eligibility actually push people with serious substance abuse and or dependency problems farther away from the help and treatment they need?
Federal Welfare Reform
The Federal Welfare reform act which, was passed in the mid 1990’s has changed the way our system addresses these issues. PRWORA (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act) provided some distinctive features to address the issues, and changed the idea that there was universal entitlement for all, and helped to reinforce the notion that there is a class of the deserving poor. In 2001 California implemented the policies required and created our version of the TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) called Cal-WORKS (California’s Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids program.) This program has allowed for rules to be implemented such as time limits, work requirements and the availability of substance abuse treatment. (Newell, 2011)
The population and the substances.
According to the National Poverty Center (2004) the numbers have been overstated and the number of people that are on welfare and are abusing substances are lower than originally estimated. The studies have varied widely in their findings due to the different types of measurements used and the fact that most of these reports include other types of assistance such as General Assistance. The number quoted for the TANF programs are approximately 9.6%, these numbers very similar to the rates of use amongst the general population (Jayako...
... middle of paper ...
...e Workers’ View of Substance Abuse and Welfare Reform. Contemporary Drug Problems, 32(3) 429-455.
Jayakody, R., Danziger, S., Seefeldt, K. & Pollack, H. (2004, April). Policy Brief. NPC (National Poverty Center), (2), 1-4.
Newell, W. (2011). Tax Dollars Earmarked for Drugs? The Policy and Constitutionality of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 43(1), 215-254
Radel, L., Joyce, K., & Wulff, C. (2011, October). Drug Testing Welfare Recipients: Recent Proposals and Continuing Controversies. ASPE Issue Brief Office of the Assistanct Sercrtary for Planning and Evaluation Officer Of Human Services Policy U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ,( 2-28.)
Spencer, PhD, M.S., Muroff, MSW, J.R., & Delva, PhD, J. (2000). Conditional Welfare: A Family Social Work Perspective on Mandatory Drug Testing. The Haworth Press Inc., 4 (4), 3-14.
Hays found that initially most welfare workers were optimistic and even excited about the changes. Most workers felt that the Act represented real progress and allowed for positive changes which would positively impact the lives of their clients. Hays spoke to one welfare who said that welfare reform “offered the training and services necessary to 'make our clients' lives better, to make them better mothers, to make them more productive.'” But as she was soon to find out, welfare reform, while it did have a positive impact on the lives of some welfare clients, made the lives of most clients more difficult, not to mention the stress that it caused for the welfare workers who had to deal with the often confusing and illogical new rules.
Poverty in America is a very complex issue that can be looked at from many directions. There are a plethora of statistics and theories about poverty in America that can be confusing and at times contradicting. It is important to objectively view statistics to gain a better understanding of poverty and to wade through the stereotypes and the haze of cultural views that can misrepresent the situation.The official poverty line in America begins with a person making at or below $12,060. To calculate the poverty line for a family, an additional $4,180 is added to the base of $12,060 for each additional member(“Federal Poverty Level Guidelines”). According to the last U.S. census, over 45 million or 14.5% of Americans are at or below the poverty line(Worstall). At this level, the U.S. poverty level has not changed much from the 1970s when the government began a “War on Poverty.” However,
In the summer of 1996, Congress finally passed and the President signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", transforming the nation's welfare system. The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act sets the stage for ongoing reconstruction of welfare systems on a state-by-state basis. The combined programs will increase from nearly $100 billion this year to $130 billion per year in 6 years. Programs included are for food stamps, SSI, child nutrition, foster care, the bloss grant program for child- care, and the new block grant to take the place of AFDC. All of those programs will seek $700 billion over the next 6 years, from the taxpayers of America. This program in its reformed mode will cost $55 billion less than it was assumed to cost if there were no changes and the entitlements were left alone. The current welfare system has failed the very families it was intended to serve. If the present welfare system was working so well we would not be here today.
"States Consider drug testing for Welfare recipients." Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Weekly 21.8 (2009): 4-6. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 04 Feb. 2011
, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, individuals that support the law, express that the plan being put in effect is to ensure that tax payer’s money isn’t being thrown away on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Out of the fifty states, only nine have proceeded with the drug testing of candidates. The drug testing has proven to be quite expensive. Consequently, some of the states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or that have admitted to drug use in the past. Though the proposal of drug testing Welfare applicants appears to be a good idea to weed out spongers from getting assistance, it seems that more money may be wasted on the testing itself, which would be imprudent in proving this law worthwhile.
In today’s America, there are many people who would either be disgusted at the very mention of Welfare or be highly grateful for its existence. I believe that in order for welfare to be more effective in America, there must be reform. From the time of its inceptions in 1935, welfare has lent a helping hand to many in crisis (Constitution Rights Foundation). However, at present many programs within the system are being abused and the people who are in real need are being cheated out of assistance. The year after the creation of welfare unemployment was just about twenty percent (Unemployment Statistics). The need for basic resources to survive was unparallel. Today, many people face the same needs as many did during the 30s. Some issues with
Should Welfare Recipients Be Tested for Drugs? U.S News & World Report. 2014: Pgs 1-2.
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not welfare recipients should be drug tested to receive the benefits. Both sides of the argument have merit. Those who oppose the idea of drug testing say that it is unconstitutional and violates the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, they claim that this law stereotypes and discriminates against those from low socioeconomic demographics, implying that because they are poor, they must be drug addicts. However, those who support the law note that its intended purpose is to ensure that taxpayer money is not being squandered on people who only plan to abuse this assistance. Only nine states so far have instituted drug testing of candidates for welfare assistance. This drug testing has proven to be prohibitively expensive in many cases. Consequently, some states only test subjects with whom they find suspicion, or who have admitted to past drug use. Though proposed drug testing of welfare applicants initially appears to be a good idea to eliminate potential abusers of the system from receiving assistance, it appears that even more money may be wasted on the testing process, which negates the savings that are the primary objective of the law.
By implementing a policy change to require drug-testing to recipients in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) would be beneficial to clients in a clinical setting. For example, evidence has shown that drug testing has the potential to reduce unnecessary government spending and misuse of funds.
Being raised in a single-parent lower class home, I realize first-hand the need for welfare and government assistance programs. I also realize that the system is very complex and can become a crutch to people who become dependent and complacent. As a liberal American I do believe that the government should provide services to the less fortunate and resources to find work. However, as able-bodied citizens we should not become complacent with collecting benefits and it is the government’s job to identify people who take advantage of the system and strip benefits from people who are not making efforts to support themselves independently. I will identify errors that exist within the welfare system and several policy recommendations to implement a change that will counteract the negative conditions that currently exist.
In an effort to make drug testing for employees of the federal government more accurate, to deter false positives and false negatives it has been suggested to use alternative methods of testing. The Associated Press reported a movement by the federal government to "overhaul its employee drug testing program". (TAP, pg 1) Currently, the government tests its employees during the pre-employment selection and when accidents
Poverty is an undeniable problem in America. In 2014, 14.8 percent of the United States was in poverty (“Hunger and Poverty Fact Sheet”). There are more people in the United States than it seems that do not have their basic necessities. In an
Institute for Research on Poverty. (2013). Health & Poverty. Retrieved February 20, 2014, from http://www.irp.wisc.edu/research/health.htm
Mandatory drug tests have proven to help teenagers reduce the use of drugs and alcohol in their daily lives. If young people get used to it when they are young, it’s proven that they would have a difficult time trying to loss their addiction to the substance. Helps the person without any criminal chargers but with all the help needed. They even have different types of drug tests to show the time period of when the person might have taken a drug recently.
... I think this project has affected me in a way that I will remember for the rest of my life. Works Cited American Poverty and Welfare Reform. 2002. The 'Secondary' of the Women's Policy Research - Research. http://www.oycf.org/Perspectives/12_063001/American_poverty_reform.htm>.