Drug Free to get Welfare benefits (illegal, health care, solutions, speech)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Preventing a birth takes planning. People who have more kids than they can afford to feed don't show a talent for planning. Still, those kids shouldn't go hungry. They didn't ask to be conceived by parents who didn't have money. Or maybe their parents' circumstances changed after they were born.
The problem with fining people who can't afford to feed their children is that they already can't afford to feed their children. If you're going to take whatever money they do have, they will have even less. What are we going to do? Send them to jail to work off the fines they can't pay, while putting their kids into the already overburdened foster care system? Or take the kids if they can't afford them, and sell them to the wealthy who can't have kids? Maybe we should just sterilize everyone who doesn't have a college education, figuring they won't be able to support their kids, or implement a one-child rule like China (which has people aborting their daughters because if they can only have one kid, they want a son. They're going to have a generation where a lot of men can't find a woman to marry). What you're suggesting is the beginning of a very slippery slope.
I bet you've given money to feed children in some other country...my church takes up a collection once a month for that, I think a lot do...and you probably felt good about giving to them. Why does it feel so good to feed kids in a third-world country, and so bad to do it here?
For starters, I don't donate money to any charity nor attend any church (I'm irreligious).
I find it hard to believe that in the 21st century, with all of today's technology and with the internet (the biggest information library in history) at one's disposal, some people are carelessly allowing themselves to bring unplanned children into the world. Those kids are THEIR responsibility, THEIR burden to carry, and THEIR problem to deal with. Not mine!
Why don't they prevent themselves from even conceiving these children in the first place? Oh that's right, why even bother when they can just let taxpayers pick up the tab afterwards. I've reached middle age, and yet I have no children. I must be doing SOMETHING right. If I can do it, anyone else can do the same.
Then why isn't your "x" paying for the kids needs? Having "his rights terminated" does not excuse him from paying......unless there is more to your story.
His rights and child support payments were terminated by a judge. I assume that they both go hand in hand.
Just read this news article and wanted to know what people thought. Also wonder what the effects will be on surrounding states.
Here is the article...
Only 49 more states to go! Hooray for Florida !
I-95 and I-75 will be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida , because this is the first state in the union to require drug testing to receive welfare!
Hooray for Florida ! In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free."
Applicants must pay for the drug test, but are reimbursed if they test drug-free. Applicants who test positive for illicit substances, won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment. Those who fail a second time will be banned from receiving funds for three years!
Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.
How is this unconstitutional? It's a legal requirement that every person applying for a job has to pass drug tests in order to get the job, why not those who receive welfare?
Let's get welfare back to the ones who need it, not to those who won't get a job
Florida's experience is hardly anything to celebrate. Studies have shown that the costs of drug testing have far exceeded any savings in welfare payments. Basically, this is just a way of funneling tax money to companies that do the testing. Florida taxpayers have been the big losers.
This was already struck down in Michigan. It violates the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure. The Courts have ruled that you cannot search an entire class of citizens without individual suspicion. (Actually, DUI checkpoints violate this principle, too, and perhaps some employers where safety operating machinery or vehicles isn't an issue in the workplace.) If an INDIVIDUAL welfare recipient is suspected of drug use, that's a different story.
My understanding from following this issue for some time is that so far it has cost Florida an enormous amount of money and detected very few users, so it hasn't saved the welfare system a dime - in fact, just the opposite, though that may not be the motivation for testing in the first place. I've also read that Scott has financial ties to the company that provides the testing kits.
Also, to the poster several posts prior to me, there ARE lifetime and other limits on welfare. Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act in 1996.
I'm not expressing a personal opinion about these issues, just stating the facts as I've read them. There are a lot of misinformed opinions about them.
The loop hole for that is that a family member can collect your welfare for you as long as they test drug free, at least for thenchildrens portion. So don't all go jumping for joy just yet....this only effected something like 2 % of Florida population and they considered it more or less a failure.
I'm not expressing a personal opinion about these issues, just stating the facts as I've read them. There are a lot of misinformed opinions about them.
For whatever reason, your post reminded me of something else:
Assuming they are using urine tests, unless those being tested are going to be required to pee in front of someone, there are so many ways around this it's pointless anyway. Generally the only time someone is watched during a pee test is for military situations or probation/parolee testing. Even then there are ways around it for someone determined enough.
I don't do drugs, but I can put myself mentally in the position of someone who smoked a joint a couple weeks back and needed to get food stamps to feed their kids.. you can be certain I'd figure out a way to "pass" the test if that was on the line!
You have issues with stalking that the mods need to address.
How is simply showing what you stated on an online forum stalking? You are the one that wrote this stuff for everyone to see, not me. I do not see anywhere in the TOS that I cannot quote your statements.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
