People who apply for welfare benefits should be tested for drugs and they should be cleared of all illicit drugs before they receive any benefits in the form of cash or food stamps because, the government spends so much money on welfare and rehabilitation programs and screening welfare recipients will help the government save more money to fix the economy. Most employees are tested of illicit drugs before they are employed by their employer so why shouldn’t welfare recipients also be tested of illicit drug before they receive any kind of assistance? The government deducts so much tax out of worker’s earnings of which part of these deductions go to fund welfare programs, therefore welfare assistance like cash should not be used to purchase illicit drugs by recipients especially when the government is fighting against illegal drugs on the market. Some of the recipients of welfare assistance take advantage of the program and go for welfare aid even when they could live without the support of welfare, this is a clear indication that some recipients abuse the welfare program and therefore there is a need to screen recipients. Since applicants and recipients of welfare programs are not tested of any illicit drugs before they receive benefits from welfare providers and there are no control measures or regulations to make sure that the recipients of these assistance are truly eligible, welfare programs tend to assist drug barons instead of the vulnerable in the society. This does not come as a surprise when the government spends billions of dollars of the tax payer’s money every year to fund drug prevention programs and welfare programs. Unfortunately, most of these drug addicts are poor and bankrupt so they depend on welfare assistance, ...
... middle of paper ...
...at, the purpose of welfare aid is achieved and the recipients truly deserve it.
If applicants of welfare benefits are tested for illicit drugs before they receive any benefits in the form of cash or food stamps, the sale and usage of illicit drugs will reduce drastically and therefore the government will not have to spend more money on drug related programs. According to John E. Johnson of the Neuroscience Research Center, “illicit drugs is the leading cause of preventable deaths and disability in the United States” (Johnson). Its consequences come with huge economic cost and therefore, all states including North Dakota should pass a legislation that will screen applicants and recipients of welfare benefits. Our taxes should be used to help the poor and underclass to live a better life and not to be used to pay for illicit drugs and alcohol by some beneficiaries.
Have you ever questioned the tax taken out of your hard-earned money? Questions similar to that are where the money is going and if it is being used properly. In the U.S. news recently those questions have been on a great deal of State’s minds; reaching back to 2003, this issue has been brought up time and time again. The main topic of tax money is the use of assistance money and are the recipients really using the money for the right reasons. There are many problems with the assistance program but the one that comes to mind the most is that many people abuse the money given to buy the essentials and provide, for their family for illegal drugs. The solution that many state representatives have come up with is drug testing as a requirement for assistance. This will eliminate the abuse of the assistance program; also it will cut down the cost of assistance which is very expensive as a whole.
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not Welfare recipients should be drug tested to receive the benefits. The lines of reasoning from both sides of this argument have unambiguous points. 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 the poor
There has been an ongoing controversy as to whether welfare recipients should have to have drug testing done. Drug testing will ensure that recipients will not abuse the money they’re given by the government. Having people on welfare take drug test is advantageous because it could save the system money, it would help social workers identify children who are around drug abuse, and it would deter people from purchasing and using illegal drugs; however, it does have a downside such as people who are on prescription medication will show false positives, it can be an invasion of privacy and drug testing can take hundreds and even thousands of dollars to administer.
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.
Now is not the time for the United States federal government to decriminalize or legalize illegal drugs, including marijuana. However, nor can the government continue to do nothing about the financially, economically, and socially expensive domestic drug policy it currently follows. The United States Congress should pass legislation to remove mandatory minimum penalties from drug offenses, and the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons should add in-house rehabilitation programs for its incarcerated drug offenders. These policies would increase the cost-effectiveness of current drug policy and reduce crime and drug use, and do not face the political obstacles or have the uncertain consequences of decriminalizing or legalizing drugs.
On 30 January 2011, the Missouri House of Representatives passed a bill and sent it to the senate that would require drug testing for those receiving state Temporary Assistance for Needy Family (TANF) funds. Funding from food stamps, medicare, and public housing would not be affected by this bill (Keller – House). According to Columbia Tribune reporter Rudi Keller, the bill is very similar to the Arizona law which is the only other state that tests welfare recipients. Missouri and Arizona would use a questionare and interview which would determine which applicants to test. The two states are also similar in their caseload of 45,017 people on assistance in Arizona and 42,885 in Missouri. The state would not be obligated to provide treatment for those that fail. Also, children would be protected because the money would be given to them by a third party in the event that their head of household tests positive (Keller- Arizona). According to the Columbia Tribune, TANF is a five year maximum support benefit for people who are attempting to find a job or gain employment skills. The maximum TANF payment is $292 dollars a month with the head of household portion being $58 (Keller- House). The issue of drug testing those on welfare goes back to 1996 with the welfare reform act authorized, but did not require, states to impose mandatory drug testing as a prerequisite to receiving state welfare assistance (Drug Testing).
Over the years, drug abuse has been a rising problem in almost every country in the world. Day by day more people are involved in this endless cycle of drug craving, money shortage, and drug related crimes. Congressmen and politicians of United States, seeing this unstoppable crime wave which is about to spread throughout the country, begin to address various kinds of possible solutions to end this crisis in the most efficient and effective way. As discussed in Alan M. Dershowitz's "The Case for Medicalizing Heroin" and Charles B. Rangel's "Legalize Drugs? Not on Your Life," the most popular proposition set forward by growing number of leaders now is to legalize the use of drugs; but will it help solving the problem or make it even worse? I agree with Rangel that in order to end drugs abuse completely, we have to find the root of the problem and use any forces necessary and retain the determination to keep on fighting because it will not be an easy battle.
Illicit drug use and the debate surrounding the various legal options available to the government in an effort to curtail it is nothing new to America. Since the enactment of the Harrison Narcotic Act in 1914 (Erowid) the public has struggled with how to effectively deal with this phenomena, from catching individual users to deciding what to do with those who are convicted (DEA). Complicating the issue further is the ever-expanding list of substances available for abuse. Some are concocted in basements or bathtubs by drug addicts themselves, some in the labs of multinational pharmaceutical companies, and still others are just old compounds waiting for society to discover them.
The harsh punishment for drug crimes in the United States of America is not working. “With roughly half a million people behind bars in the U.S. for nonviolent drug offenses, drugs are as plentiful and widely used as ever” (Grenier, 2013). Even with very harsh long sentences and many people imprisoned drug use is as common as ever in America. ‘We cannot close our eyes anymore’ to the cost in human lives destroyed and taxpayer dollars wasted” (Holcomb, 2015). Harsh drug penalties are destroying American citizens lives and is costing a lot of money from taxpayers. “Yet, people who want treatment can often expect to endure an obstacle course just to get help” (Grenier, 2013). The Unites States government is spending a large amount of money on arresting and imprisoning drug users, yet are putting little to no focus on funding drug medical help for
There has been many cases of fraud that people have lied about housing and unemployment. This leads to questionable debate whether recipients should be drug tested or not. In North Carolina a law has been passes for all of the recipients getting assistance must be drug tested. (Parker 1) “For example, according to The Associated Press, Utah saved $350,000 in its first year of drug-screening welfare applicants, though it found only about 12 people who tested positive” (Parker 1). Many states have questioned this new law to be passed or not because it may save the government money in the long run.
“States Consider Drug Testing For Welfare Recipients.” Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly 21.8 (2009): 4-6 Academic Search Premir. Web. 28 Sept. 2015
More drug testing should be used for welfare recipients because it would help ensure help is going to those who truly need it. If someone fails, it doesn’t mean they would stop receiving assistance, they would just have to prove that it’s prescribed by a physician (Haerens 1). They can enroll in a rehab center or correctional facility of some sort and continue to receive welfare while overcoming they drug abuse. Some people honestly do need it to support their families but others just use it to play the system and spend the money on drugs (Haerens 1).
Presently, many Americans today who are on government aids, but most of them abuse that help that is giving. Many American families in the United State who apply for welfare; dishonestly apply and use the aid for other uses besides what it is intended for. From personal experience, growing up in Texas with my mother being a single parent, the government assistance was needed. Recently the state of Florida passed a law that would require applicants who are applying for welfare to undergo a drug test. A similar was passed couple of years ago in the state of Michigan, but this law was shot down by the supreme court of the United States stated that it violated the 4th amendment. Public Assistance Drug testing law should have been a federal law years ago because the drug epidemic has been going on for years; government aid was being used to that purpose by some Americans. Public assistance is needed to help individuals with financial difficulties for a temporary time; however, restrictions must be placed on the recipients. States should control benefits, offer diverse assistance, and monitor drug use. There are many states, like Georgia, who want to put a law in place like Florida and Michigan because the abuse of government assistance goes far beyond drugs. Yet there are many support groups that are against this law with going back the 4th amendment.
Drug use now in days has grown more over these past years, with the abuse of drugs many people still have the privilege to apply freely to the welfare programs such as WIC, Food Stamps, and TANF. My interest to this topic is why it would be unconstitutional to be able to do a drug testing on welfare applicants.
In order to establish an effective and long-lasting drug policy, governments have to: tailor policy-making to the majority’s beliefs, clearly define the set of established laws, and strictly enforce it amongst the masses. A task that the federal government has failed to accomplish long-term, but states have strived