+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/23/2018 11:06 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  3.395 Visits   1 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
03/25/2011 12:58 AM ID: 88451 Permalink   

Random Drug Tests for Florida State Employees and Welfare Recipients


Governor Rick Scott ordered mandatory drug testing for all State employees and applicants as well as anyone receiving cash-assistance welfare. Near 100,000 state employees could be affected by this order costing Florida $3.5 million.

The bill requiring welfare recipients to be drug tested was put forth by Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland of the Criminal Justice Committee. Those welfare recipients being tested will have to pay for their own test at around $35 per test.

Random drug testing of this nature was declared unconstitutional in 2004. According to ACLU Executive Director Howard Simon, “The state of Florida cannot force people to surrender their constitutional rights in order to work for the state.”

    WebReporter: Valkyrie123 Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  *all* US employees should require random tests  
Holding down a job in this day and age is an admirable virtue isn´t it?
Surely you´d want only deserving people to have jobs right? All positive test should be barred from employment and benefits for 2 years.

You can see where this is headed right?
Good intentions; road to hell, thin-end of wedge and all other truisms.
  by: redstain   03/25/2011 04:53 AM     
Yes, Death by starvation for marijuana use. I see that.
  by: VermiciousG     03/25/2011 02:14 PM     
Lets drug test these people before we elect them.
  by: smgordon1259   03/25/2011 02:28 PM     
  Drug Testing  
You do it to the criminals, then you do it to the welfare reciptients then you do it to cops, then you do it to the government employees, then the private sector will be free to do it willy nilly to you.
  by: kmazzawi     03/25/2011 04:02 PM     
  The last dozen jobs I had...  
I had to take a drug test and pass a background check.

What´s the big deal?
If you don´t want to be drug tested, don´t work someplace that will test you.

If you want welfare, don´t take drugs. If you´re abusing drugs, that´s probably why you can´t hold down a job and why you´re living on handouts.

You have a decision to make:
1) Stay drug-free and get yourself off welfare (or get to keep your job with the state).
2) Make drugs a higher priority than financial help (or your paycheck) and find yourself SOL all the way around.

Make your own bed.
  by: carnold     03/25/2011 04:51 PM     
  Might be a good thing...  
When you have enough starving Americans they might learn how to walk like Egyptians and march like soldiers straight to Washington and start taking heads like French revolutionaries. Take back OUR Nation.
  by: Valkyrie123     03/25/2011 04:53 PM     
I cannot even believe in saying this but I agree with CArnold.

Look the fact is I´m sick of everyone boo-wah crying about how our tax dollars are spent on all these people who don´t deserve it and people who abuse the system. This is a viable solution and if you notice it says welface recipients that recieve CASH ASSISTANCE. Not food stamps (no one is gunna starve) Not medical care. (no one is gunna die). This is called accountability. Even homeless shelters do this. You can stay but you have to be out at 6am and back in at 9pm for lights out. They get the right to tell you what to do because YOU are living off of THEIR services. Same applies here. Its a choice. Live on welfare and live an addiction free life or get off of it and do your drugs. "If you live under my roof you do as I say". No one is holding a gun to these people´s heads saying you have to drug test. If you are going to live off of everyone else´s charity we want to know that it isn´t going to harming our communities. You wouldnt let your wayward brother borrow money off of you to buy heroin time after time. This is exactly the same.

[ edited by MissCinna ]
  by: MissCinna   03/25/2011 07:06 PM     
  How About Banning Smoking For Welfare / Employees  
Smoking runs up the medical costs . It is unhealthy.

Ban alcohol for state employees and welfare recipients. It is not necessary for life.

Heck fire em and ban em for going to get a Big Mac. Its not the best for you

There are lots of things you can do to demonize classes of people. Why stop at drugs?

[ edited by ichi ]
  by: ichi     03/25/2011 07:25 PM     
  ^--- And this one right here...  
Is always trying to demonize others by blaming them for demonizing.

Those points went right over your head, didn´t they?
  by: carnold     03/25/2011 08:26 PM     
Wait. Are you seriously suggesting that people should be allowed to spend their government assistance on drugs and using other lifestyle points as grounds for justification? If so please PLEASE don´t expect any sympathy from anyone if some drugged out welfare recipient kills your child driving under the influence of the drugs he purchased with your family´s tax monies, or breaks into your home because he was all cracked out on meth.

Fat people kill themselves. - Less cash handouts

As for alcohol, lets start with drugs which are currently illegal and work our way up.

Smokers kill themselves. See previous solution.

Someone ought to slap you with their tax money purchased kilo.

[ edited by misscinna ]
  by: misscinna   03/25/2011 09:17 PM     
  @anyone who thinks this saves money  
Did nobody notice the price tag here? $3.5 million. Sure, welfare recipients have to pay for their own tests but then there´s also the administrative costs of monitoring and conducting the tests, the paperwork, etc. etc... Beyond that, let´s assume that a welfare recipient tests positive for illegal substances. You then have confirmation tests on your hands, the administrative costs of tagging that welfare recipient in the system, police costs, etc. etc.

We´re talking a huge, huge price tag for a gamble that may or may not net any financial gain, and if it is a gain it will only be in dollars not going out via welfare.
  by: zirschky     03/25/2011 10:24 PM     
  Where I Worked We Had Random Drug Tests  

The cost per hit was enormous. If it was not mandated by the feds my employer would have dumped it in a heart beat.

Just the UA cost them $45.00 per test.

Tell your constituents you want to test 100,000 plus people at $45.00 a whack with a very low percentage of positives as a reward.


I would be no happier than if your daughter is texting while driving and kills my child. Your argument that a welfare or state employee is a druggy and needs testing is just what I mean about demonizing fails. and associating welfare and state employees as druggys is most definitely trying to demonize by association.

Wash your hands boy, You are throwing poo again.

[ edited by ichi ]
  by: ichi     03/26/2011 12:05 AM     
  For all...  
I suggest that anyone asking for hand-outs be tested for drug use and the results be made public...

I mean look at James O´Keefe... A conservative asking for handouts!!!

WTF is HE on?! I´d sure like to know.
  by: richie65x   03/26/2011 06:48 AM     
When are we going to get over the notion that we´re the arbiters of what other people want to do with their own bodies?

If you don´t want welfare recipients to spend their money on drugs, give them electronic points in a database accessible at grocery stores via an ID number that must be matched to a state ID. No muss, no fuss.

And all employees, public or private, deserve to be judged on their job performance and their job performance alone. It´s none of your employer´s business what you do in your time off.
  by: Ben_Reilly     03/27/2011 06:24 PM     
  Years ago...  
I was in a conversation where it was suggested that if prostitution were made legal throughout the U.S. of A., there would be no need for welfare.

Not sure how all of that would add up, but I like the concept.

I would add that; It would put the poor, needy and indignant on the same level as our elected officials in many ways!
  by: richie65x   03/27/2011 06:59 PM     
  probable cause and all that...  
Hey, here´s a better idea: you get caught using, you lose benefits. This is nothing but an added burden on people who ALREADY need help. Rather than test everyone, actually punish those who break the law. I know! How crazy is that?
Also, why is no one asking who will do the testing? Remember Rick Scott has deep ties to the medical industry. I´m sure his friends will be thrilled to get an extra 200k+ tests a year.
  by: justaperson     03/27/2011 07:59 PM     
Quote:If you don´t want welfare recipients to spend their money on drugs, give them electronic points in a database accessible at grocery stores via an ID number that must be matched to a state ID. No muss, no fuss.

Problem with that is they will buy food, sell it and buy drugs anyway. I think they should be drug tested because they are given the money to live not get high. Want to party get a job.

On your other thought because you work for the money.

Quote: And all employees, public or private, deserve to be judged on their job performance and their job performance alone. It´s none of your employer´s business what you do in your time off.

That is a great idea and I agree.
But truth is it is so bad now,a company can fire you or refuse to hire you because you smoke, and that is legal.
  by: hellblazer     03/28/2011 10:08 AM     
  The Right has done a Great Job of Deamonizing  
The ACLU. And Acorn, and CNN, NPR. . .

The ACLU´s role is to take "The other side" no matter what the issue. This is necessary so that a powerful political system can´t pass laws that are unfair to people that aren´t part of that group.

This means they often take the unpopular position, it does not mean that they are actually in favor of that position.

It is too easy to find fault with anyone who fights for the rights of others. Until that starts to affect the rest of us.

I´ll agree with drug testing as long as they include all state and federal lawmakers, and include alcohol testing.

I´m sure they would be the first to call the ACLU to protect their rights.

  by: Jim8   03/28/2011 05:51 PM     
  So much for...  
smaller government.
  by: Kaleid   03/28/2011 06:12 PM     
  a man  
shouldn?t be hired/fired for the quality of his/her piss. It should be for the quality of his/her work. ?Nuff said. If they did this to scripters/coders, they?d all leave, 90% o scripters/coders smoke weed all the time, i mean sh*t, where do you think they come up with these awesome ideas? It isn?t sitting at starbucks with a cup of diarhea, that?s for sure. And just to make an edit. Don?t tell me that coders don?t smoke. I?ve worked for just about every company fathomable. I?ve worked for banks, chemical companies, internet start ups, you name it, i?ve probalby worked as a developer there, or at least an environment similar. All we talk about, is p0t jokes, pretty much all the time. If I actually listed out some of these companies that i worked for, y?all would probably have a heart attack, but let it be known, in the most extreme cases of p0t use, the only thing receiving a violent penalty is typically the fridge, or the mcdonalds drive through.

[ edited by meshuggahfan ]
  by: meshuggahfan   03/28/2011 06:34 PM     
  I think....  
all of you would be very surprised who smokes pot and who does not. you can not base you opinion on how they look or their age.

I know cops, firemen, and at 1 time a chicago alderman who smoked pot and did their jobs without issue, I know a few 80 year olds in nursing homes who smoke. want to demonize pot smoking? the most abused drugs are not ILLEGAL,prescription drugs are the most abused drugs today , oxycotin, rittlin, adderol.

  by: smgordon1259   03/29/2011 05:32 PM     
  @ testing  
It would be funny to see how many professionals would be out of a job if drug testing was mandatory for everyone. Think scientists, engineers, programmers, medical staff... .

@ Drug abuse: If you´re going to abuse them, stay away. If you´re going to use them - should be up to you.

@ God made Marijuana - Don´t believe in god(s).
  by: MouseJunkie     03/29/2011 06:48 PM     
  GUESS WHY ......  
seems Rick Scott Owns a drug testing company

There´s one stakeholder, though, that could benefit from the governor´s new drug-testing push. As I reported last week, Scott´s own company, Solantic, conducts drug-testing for employers and employees alike and stands to profit from this proposal—among many others.

[ edited by smgordon1259 ]
  by: smgordon1259   03/30/2011 12:42 AM     
  @ God  
"@ God made Marijuana - Don´t believe in god(s)."

@ God made people who made teh drugs.

@ people made (up) teh god

@ Religion is teh opium of teh masses

@ teh circle is complete

Therefore piss test the religious!
  by: richie65x   03/30/2011 01:42 AM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: