Congress Sends Trump Drug Test Measure for Unemployed

YES!!!!! More winning!

I would like to see it go further and deny anybody welfare who smokes, drinks alcohol, and/or does drugs.

And another thing, why should I pay for anybody's healthcare if they spent their whole life drinking alcohol, smoking, doing drugs, not exercising, and not eating healthy?

https://www.usnews.com/news/politic...-sends-trump-drug-test-measure-for-unemployed

 

And based on the examples of state policies already implemented, this will cost billions more than it saves.

 

I see this brought up a lot but is saving money even the point?

I know its not my motivation for supporting drug testing for welfare.

The way I see it if somebody chooses to be on drugs then they shouldn't get welfare.

Most jobs do drug testing so right out of the gate these people are disqualifying themselves from a huge range of employment opportunities.

So if that's the case then they should also be disqualified from taking my tax dollars.

 

So then you don't really care about small government or cutting waste and are perfectly cool with the government wasting millions of dollars on projects that don't work.

 

Wonder if this drug testing measure will apply to corporate welfare queens/plutocratic socialists, ie Crooked Donnie, as well.

 

This is the problem with single payer.

It allows others to remove freedom of others.

Odd that you didnt say anything about denying paying for fat people. The true number one cost of escalated healthcare costs.

 

While we are at invading everyone's privacy, I think the least we should do is drug test politicians. And from everything I have heard about Congress and the Senate, they should have to take a sobriety test before being allowed on the floor. All cops, all the members of the military, and everyone else who use my tax money to live on.

 

Small government would be abolishing welfare.

Since the left would never let that happen, asking for appropriate oversight isnt adcocating big government.

Nice strawman though.

 

How is it oversight? Its an attempt to address a problem that evidence shows is non-existent. If there was a rampant problem with drug use among welfare recipients, it would save more than it costs. It doesn't.

 

They may have screwed the pooch on this one

From politico

For now, though, it looks as if repealing the rule might actually have the opposite effect. Under the 2012 law that directed the Labor Department to create the rule, it’s not clear that states will have the authority to drug-test workers (except those who lost jobs for drug-related reasons) from anyindustries until there’s a new rule or a new law in place.

 

Non-sense.

This is along the same lines as claiming there is no voter fraud because nobody has ever implemented measures to stop it.

I suppose if we stopped having police monitor traffic, we can make the claim nobody speeds or runs red lights because no tickets were issued.

 

Under the Congressional Review Act, some of The Department of Labor's regulations on the issue are being cut. This gives back to the states, who administer UI, control.

I don't have a problem with giving the states back the ability to regulate the program, UI, as they locally deem appropriate.

I think drug testing those eligible for unemployment benefits, broadly, is insane. However, some folks terminated for drug use are eligible, after treatment, for UI benefits. Those folks I might agree need to be tested, it's up to the states.

Cheers

 

Have you found a link to the regulation being sunset? I'm looking.

I'm also thinking that this isn't about testing more folks but removing a regulation that inadvertently mandated drug testing for some applicants.

Cheers

 

My understanding was the idea was to return that power to the states but instead they ended up taking it away completely.

 

This is why I laugh when conservatives tell me they are for limited governemnt. They are as totalitarian as the left could ever possibly be. Criminalize the contents of someone's blood rather than just ending the welfare system they claim to despise by hypocritically expand.

 

The goal is not to punish addicts. It's too help society. My shoool's town has roughly 50% on food stamps and other public assistance. Everyone knows who's parents are on drugs because the kids haven't eaten all weekend. If you keep sending checks this will never change.

 

Then abolish welfare altogether.

 

Corporate welfare? Are you referring to bailouts or tax cuts/credits which allows people/companies to KEEP more of their OWN money?

 

Well, not exercising and not eating healthy implies that.

 

Do we have a drug problem in this country? Yes.

I guarantee you that at least half of the welfare recipients do drugs.

 

I would love to abolish the welfare system instead.

 

Why are you defending unemployed drug users?

 

It's political, Ken. They're sheep, pushed around by every political wave that comes along. It's not politically expedient to get rid of the welfare state, but drugs are still under the ban so they have permission from their masters to call for invasion of the bodies of their political opponents, especially the vicious ones who are sinning, and the fact that that would be more expensive doesn't matter to them because they never really did care about the size or power of government, but then you already knew that.

 

I am OK with the welfare system, it's the application of how they employ it that bothers me. Some people need a helping hand to get up and going after tragedy or bad decisions. Others abuse it with impunity and screw everyone else that actually needs it.

 

This is why some have always preached against being dependent on the State. The State giveth, and the State taketh away.