Benefits of Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients Essay

There is no doubt that those Americans in need of assistance have been subjected to unconstitutional treatment by the welfare program. As a result of the criminal actions of a few, all of the needy are being unfairly scrutinized. The implementation of unfounded drug testing in addition to the already criminalizing application process will only serve to further stigmatize the needy—and all in the name of the mighty dollar. Some believe that it is not the quest to save money that is the driving force behind the push for this legislation. Rather, it is a desire to make millions for the pharmaceutical companies that lawmakers are seeking to achieve.

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

Furthermore, the concern is directed to the wellbeing of the children of the recipients who do not fulfill program requirements. Thankfully, the NCSL also explains that those who are deemed ineligible for not completely the programs can “designate a protective payee to receive benefits on behalf of the child(ren)”(National Conference of State Legislatures, 2014). In summary, drug testing welfare recipients will enable families to do two things: feed their children and get help for the parent or guardian who is abusing substances.

To test or not to test has been has been the question at hand for many states that are dealing with whether or not to pass the law that welfare recipients should or should not be drug tested in order to receive assistance from the government. Florida was the first state to mandate the law in 2011 and thereafter twenty four other states in the last year have also passed this law with our own state of Oklahoma being one of them. Although alcohol is legal it is abused far more than marijuana or hard core drugs, According to the 1996 study by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism the differences between the proportion of welfare and non-welfare recipients using illegal drugs are statistically insignificant. Although some states have decided to pass the law for welfare recipients in order receive government assistance, I believe it’s ineffective to drug test these welfare recipients in order to receive their benefits. Welfare in the United States commonly refers to the federal government welfare programs that have been put in place to assist the unemployed or underemployed. Help is extended to the poor through a variety of government welfare programs that include the Women, Infants, and Children Program which is referred to as WIC, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families commonly known as TANF and Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

The United States has many welfare programs, such a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) that provide social welfare payments to those in need. Often, these benefits are abused by drug users those who lack the ability or motivation to find employment and become self-sufficient. As a result, several states have attempted to implement drug testing as a requirement to receive benefits. Proponents of drug testing believe that incorporating drug testing into the welfare systems allows the government to provide those with drug addictions the needed treatment and suspend the benefits from those who continue to use drugs and test positive after treatment. They also claim that in the long

In 2010, 17.5% of unemployed adults collecting some sort of welfare failed drug tests. In 2011, 23.8% of welfare recipients admitted to using illegal drugs, including marijuana. The problem the United States if facing is that welfare recipients are using the cash they are given to purchase illegal drugs. Many of these people purchasing illegal drugs had prior illegal drug abuse problems and some of these people believe that since they are given this “free” money, they can continue on with these addictions instead of finding the help they need to get back onto their own two feet. Many employers ask all of their job applicants for a drug test to even be considered for the job, so why shouldn’t the government ask the same for people looking

Over the years welfare has been provided to several people who cannot support themselves. This system was originally invented to help those who lost jobs or were not making the minimal salary required to support them. Recently, several American citizens have begun to raise questions about drug users and welfare. Debate soon broke out in 1996 causing several states to take drug testing into consideration. Welfare drug testing can only take place in certain situations: the state must have a law for drug testing, only when there is suspicion of drug use, and if the supreme court passes a law requiring it.

a.i) Government assistance, or welfare, is a very broad term. There are many different welfare programs available in the United States e.g., food stamps, cash assistance, and government housing. Currently there is mass debate, in courtrooms across the U.S., regarding the legality and morality of pre-assistance drug testing. This report is intended to familiarize the reader with the history of welfare reform; the histories of drug testing in regards to assistance eligibility; and persuade the audience to vote yes for mandatory pre-assistance drug testing.

Another clause in this bill states that if the applicant participates in a substance abuse program and does not test positive for at least half a year, they may continue to receive entitlements (Kelly, 2013). While the general opinion is that drug testing applicants will lower the number of recipients defrauding the government, most of the analysis that have been conducted for a one to two year timeframe show little improvements on the number of personnel receiving welfare benefits. In fact, most have shown that only a small percentage (2%) of recipients are failing the drug screening (Grovum, 2014). In other studies, such as the one conducted in Utah, documented that well over $30,000 was spent administering drug test to applicants (Grovum, 2014). The results showed that only 2.6% tested positive for illegal substance use (Grovum, 2014).

The process of drug testing individuals who are applying or receiving welfare benefits has recently become the focus of a widely spread controversy. Florida, the first state to pass the law, now requires all individuals applying for public assistance to undergo drug testing. The state of Kentucky, among others, have considered following this trend. State lawmakers hope to prevent the squandering of taxpayer dollars on drugs by proposing similar guidelines. Alabama’s states representative Kerry Rich clearly affirmed his state’s position on the matter, “I don’t think the taxpayers should have to help fund somebody’s drug habit” (qtd. in Time).

The numbers do not lie—little evidence exists that supports the claim that drug testing recipients will save money. Striving to prove that the main source of the drug problem in the United States lies in the recipients of the welfare program, policymakers continue to work fervently. The overgeneralization of the poor as drug users has become common practice in Washington. Lawmakers seem to feel that because recipients receive government funding, they in turn give up their constitutional rights as U.S. citizens. The practice of criminalizing the poor has become commonplace in the creation of U.S. governmental policy.

Considerable research has previously been conducted to analyze the effects welfare reform has had on its intended purposes such as employment, caseloads, or familial cohesion. And while there have been a few studies that examined the correlation between women receiving welfare and drug use, the effects of reform in regards to illicit drug use, specifically women, had not been previously evaluated. As legislation passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996, the intended objective was to place restrictions on welfare recipients by applying a 5 year life-time limit, felony drug conviction disqualifications, and move people off the welfare rolls and into the workforce. States were given more

Drug testing has become a very big issue for many companies. Approximately eighty-one percent of companies in the United States administer drug testing to their employees. Of these, seventy-seven percent of companies test employees prior to employment. Even with the commonality of drug testing, it is still a practice that is generally limited to larger corporations which have the financial stability, as well as the human resources to effectively carry out a drug testing program. In the United States, it is suggested that as many as 70 percent of drug users are employed. Now this is a huge chunk, but as a result of drug testing, these big corporations have a significantly lower percentage of the employed drug users on their

The issue of drug testing in the workplace has sparked an ongoing debate among management. There are many who feel that it is essential to prevent risks to the greater public caused by substance abuse while on the job. However, others believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits and that it is an invasion of privacy. Putting all ethical issues aside, evidence presented in this paper supports the latter. The costs of drug testing are excessive and only a small percentage of employees are actually found to be substance users. Drug testing in the work place has a negative effect on productivity; contrary to what was originally intended. It actually decreases productivity instead of improving it. Drug testing causes a feeling

While this may seem to some like it is an unrightfully needed search, the money being given to those is a privilege not a right. The drug tests would be done before the money is given to those receiving benefits. Those unwilling to comply with the mandates can face the consequence of not receiving welfare. The privilege of receiving government aid is one that should be able to be controlled by the government. If those receiving the benefits would like to argue about their rights being infringed upon, they can refuse the aid being offered to them as it is not a right