Mississippi governor signs welfare drug-testing bill

Mississippi governor signs welfare drug-testing bill | Fox News

Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago to News

Hmmmm this is not what it sounds like and me thinks this will end up costing more in the end. Seriously, what's the point?

SOURCE URL: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/25/mississippi-governor-signs-welfare-drug-testing-bill/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

3

Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago

I agree with richrobinson, "if it works it would..." I don't want to pay for someone's drug habit, but I don't want to pay for someone's sloth either. If one is able bodied then let them do something useful for the money. Sweep the streets, pick up litter, etc. If they can't function on the job because of drug abuse then cut off their aid and send them to rehab. When they get out let them pay the bill or work it off. If they refuse, then they should be on their own. I would fire a drunkard. I don't need them to pee in a cup to demonstrate what any competent manager can witness. Why is this different?

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
- 2
  
  Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
  
  Gov't programs do not help people. They only keep people dependent upon gov't. At best (or worst depending on your perspective) any assistance should be block granted to the local community which would allocate any assistance. Your neighbors are more likely to know whether you really need help or not.
  And, I would insist on any child support only being provided upon DNA confirmed parentage. And that parentage would be subject to reimbursement from either parent that has the ability to pay. And each successive child receiving less aid, since hand-me-downs and economies of scale on food preparation should apply.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
    
    Hello Robbie53024,
    I agree. Local is always better. The best option is local charities. No gov't involved. Nowadays when so much is taken from one's paycheck, people have the misguided belief that the gov't will take care of everything as well as private charities would. When so much is taken why should they donate twice? Charities have lost much help because people are strapped by gov't. taxation for redistribution. The gov't is much more wasteful.
    Regards,
    O.A.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
  
  It's different because it's somebody elses money that's being spent on ALL of it. Keep coming up with lame and ideas and spend spend SPEND.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 2
    
    Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
    
    From the local town Supervisor to the POTUS it is always somebody else's money... too bad tarring and feathering went out of vogue...
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 2
      
      Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
      
      Too bad people don't realize it's THEIR MONEY and take a stand too.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
  
  Correction: their should be they're... darn fingers are faster than the brain :(
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

3

Posted by richrobinson 10 years ago

If it works it would be great. It is being run by government so it won't work. I support drug testing for anyone on public assistance. Providing rehab is fine as long as a second positive test would end or reduce benefits.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

2

Posted by khalling 10 years ago

I think it's adding another layer to an already flawed system. A good start would be to reactivate the welfare reforms passed under Clinton that the current president removed.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by tpatter4 10 years ago
  
  Yes, roll back to the work requirement. Also, I wonder if it would be far too easy to just figure out how to answer the questionnaire without being flagged.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
    
    exactly
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago

Looters attacking moochers? Most of us would like to see some restrictions placed on moochers to help wean them off of the government teat, but like LetsShrug thinks, it will likely cost more in the end.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
- 2
  
  Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
  
  I don't really give a rip whether they are on drugs or not. So long as they aren't taking from me, either directly or indirectly from government programs. The government programs are the issue, not the drug use.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago
    
    I have a very libertarian view on this. Like you, I don't care whether they are on drugs or not, just as long as they are allowed to feel the consequences of their self-abuse and as long as we are not condemned to pay for it. This is the really vile part of nObamacare. We are condemned to pay for it.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 2
      
      Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
      
      ...and SSI...and welfare...and any other number of stipends.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago
        
        The whole culture of looting and mooching is like a pimp and his prostitutes. Does that make the looter-in-chief .... Well, I better not finish that previous sentence that lest I get investigated by the NSA.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
        
        Too late
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago
        
        I have had a Au target on me for years. No big deal.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
        
        We all have. We think.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago
        
        I've been audited a couple of times, so I know.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by LetsShrug 10 years ago
  
  I think if someone wants to get off drugs it has to come from them...not you, not me, and certainly not the gov. Maybe removing the funds altogether, that might work. We shouldn't have to fund ANY of it. Actually most drug addicts are on SSI and fain mental illness to get a check to help support their habit. I heard this from an excellent source. A drug addict...who decided on her own to get clean. She lived among many of them for a decade and that was the game. Just sayin'.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by jbrenner 10 years ago
    
    Agreed. Make them feel the consequences by removing the funds altogether.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Mississippi governor signs welfare drug-testing bill | Fox News

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

Working...