Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients Essay

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.

The welfare system is designed to support those that are in need. The welfare system should not be abused or misused and failure to comply will be grounds for termination. Drug testing welfare recipients, is it an infringement of rights and should it be mandatory for everyone that receiving or will receive assistance? This subject is up for debate as to whether or not it violates welfare recipient’s constitutional rights. If it should be implemented, would it help saving tax dollars and government spending and stop welfare

The United States has many welfare programs, such a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), that provide social welfare payments to those in need. Welfare recipients statistically have a higher potential to use illicit drugs, making it more difficult to secure a job. Often, these benefits are abused by drug users those who lack the ability or motivation to find employment and become self-sufficient. 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 drug and test positive after treatment. In the long run, there will be a costs savings

Pretend you are in kindergarten again and you have just won your favorite bag of candy for behaving yourself in class all week, and right when the teacher presents you with your glorious prize a fellow classmate, which had already been to the principals twice that week, comes up and asks for a piece. You do not want to give him a piece because you worked hard for it and he broke the rules so he does not deserve it, but then he goes to complain to the teacher and she says you have to share with him. Would you be upset if you worked hard to obey the rules to win a bag of candy, and then you find out that you could have gotten a piece anyways? This is exactly how many taxpayers feel about welfare recipients that refuse to take drug test prior to receiving their welfare checks. Since 1996 there has been a call for welfare reform to drug test recipients prior to admission, but any attempts have been unsuccessful because they are viewed as a violation of the fourth amendment, more harmful for children, and an unnecessary expense. These common fallacies have been the main arguments leading the anti-drug testing campaign, but in the past few years many taxpayers have grown increasingly tired of their money being given to undeserving individuals, although there has not been a clear solution to please all parties.

Over the past few years, there has been a lot of controversy over whether or not those who test positive for drugs should be able to receive welfare. It was an argument that flooded social media, arguments filling comments with opinions. It is a subject that continues to be discussed within our peer groups, our communities, and our states. This paper will discuss the opinions of individual’s within the country, the beneficial factors of drug testing welfare recipients as well as the unbeneficial factors, as well as who decides if drug testing welfare recipients goes into effect or not.

Since its conception welfare has been a source of continuous controversy. The main negative throughout the years has been that people on welfare will never attempt to find a job and just live off the government, but recently there has been a lot of attention brought specifically to the recipients that are drug abusers. Therefore, some taxpayers are calling for a system in which recipients are drug tested prior to receiving aid, but these systems are strongly opposed by those who are current members of welfare.

Living day to day throughout our country, many people receive government assistance in order to meet the basic necessities needed in life. These people are provided with benefits because of the many assistance programs that have been created to help the citizens of the United States. However, people are beginning to notice that there are many recipients that use the money for things other than living essentials. This is a big problem in the eyes of the tax payers because they see people who are on welfare take their money and buy drugs with it. This has raised the question, should the government drug test welfare recipients? Due to the increase of government assistance programs being abused, welfare recipients should be drug tested because

Drug abuse is a huge epidemic in America, and we need to come for all angles to try and stop it. One of which can be from the welfare side. Drug testing is thought to decrease drug abuse with people on welfare. If people know that they have to pass a drug test to be able to get money for their necessities, it may encourage them to never use in the first place. It also might help them realize they have a problem and help give them a reason to get clean. This is important because an addict needs something to drive them to want to get clean, and knowing they will not receive government assistance if using can be a huge reason to be clean. Also drug testing will make the state aware and available to help the welfare recipients. The Mayor of New York Rudolph W. Giuliani says, “ Welfare recipients who test positive for drugs would be required to enroll in a drug treatment program or join a waiting list for treatment to keep getting benefits.” In Rhode Island a law bans recipients who fail a drug test from getting welfare for a year, unless they complete a substance abuse treatment successfully. Once they do complete treatment they can reapply after six months. Both of these states are giving people that fail a second chance, and maybe their only chance.

United States lawmakers face one of the most pressing issues of our time-welfare reform. New screening processes, often considered a direct violation of constitutional rights, have already been enacted in many states. Strong evidence exists, asserting that the practice of administering drug testing to welfare recipients will cost the U.S. taxpayers more money in the long run, stigmatize applicants and participants, and serve only the purpose of making the pharmaceutical companies more powerful. In order to protect the constitutional rights of potential welfare recipients, United States lawmakers should avoid further criminalizing the poor by submitting them to drug testing and/or a nationwide welfare registry.

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.

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.

Price, Michelle L. "Utah's Welfare Drug Testing Saved More than $350,000 in First Year, Officials Say." Deseret News. Ed. Michelle L. Price. Associated Press, 8 Sept. 2013. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

“If you have enough money to be able to buy drugs, then you don't need public assistance.” Said by Jerry Sonnenberg. For years now many people have wonder why the government doesn't do drug testing when applying for welfare. Many say it's not worth spending government money on, however if the government did do drug testing it could save the government money. I believe that drug testing welfare recipients would benefit our state in different ways. I feel that if the state was to make drug testing mandatory then it would help to prevent welfare fraud. Also it could possibly save the state money in paying out welfare payments. It could possibly weed out the people that

The article, “States Adding Drug Test as Hurdle for Welfare” stated that in three dozen sates proposed drug testing for the people that are on welfare. However, people say that the tax dollars given to them are not being misused and that it’s promoting stereotypes about the poor. the article says that in Florida, people that receive welfare have to pay for their own drug tests. Also, it says that people argued that it was unreasonable to drug test those on welfare and that it was an act of search and seizure. It’s noted that drug tests are getting more and more required for getting jobs. Ellen Brandom, a state representative in Missouri said, “Working people today work very hard to make ends meet, and it just doesn’t seem fair to them that

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).