National Conference of State Legislatures - Essay Example

? National Conference of Legislatures reported that in 23 s drug tests will become mandatoryfor the recipients of government welfare program. The efficient use of taxpayer money is perhaps the concern that has drawn good deal of attention towards this growing issue. Tax money should not be wasted in illegal activities like drug abuse. The driving force, however, for this issue is considered to be perception towards the less fortunate people who are welfare recipients that they are drug abusers. This essay sheds light on the both sides of argument and how those in favor and those against the legislation of drug testing welfare recipients have put forward their respective points. Tight state budgets of the current year have drawn attention towards the efficient and effective use of taxpayer money instead of wasting it in, otherwise activities that are deemed to be used for illicit drug abuse. According to those in favor the money that is being used to help the welfare program can be saved for other public welfare expenditures where it is more needed. A Republican speaker of the Wyoming house, Edward Buchanan, said, “The idea from Joe Taxpayer is, ‘I don’t mind helping you out, but you need to show that you’re looking for work, or better yet that you’re employed, and that you’re drug and alcohol free.’ ” (The New York Times). He has simply tried to put forward the motive for drug testing. To be able to be qualified to receive the welfare aid, one must be subjected to drug tests first to ensure that the taxpayer money will not be used in illegal drug activities. To support the point, Garth Everett, a Lycoming County Republican who is in support of drug testing legislation said that the workers are often tested for drug abuse by their prospective employers before their employment, however the recipients of welfare aid are never subject to such tests which may reduce the effectiveness of this program. Such drug tests will enable the government (that can be seen as an employer in this case) to ensure that the money expenditure on welfare program is being spent responsibly and in the best interest of the beneficiary. Since government can be seen as an employer of welfare recipients in this case, this shouldn’t be contrary to the law and constitution. (Hall). As opposed to those in favor of the new legislation, those against it have tried to make their point on the basis of statistical evidences and past data relating to substance abuse. The main point of their argument is that, the new legislation makes an unnecessary and unreasonable assumption about the recipients of welfare aid program that they are necessarily involved in some kind drug activity. This is strictly against the US constitution which prohibits any unnecessary search of people. Therefore testing these unfortunate citizens for drug abuse would amount to an unconstitutional search of people who sought help. Eventually this will also lead to withdrawal of public confidence in the welfare program and attract unnecessary expenses in future. Courts in US have dropped such issues in the past on the similar grounds. A Democrat state representative against the legislation, W. Patrick Goggles, said, “This legislation assumes suspicion on this group of people, it assumes that they’re drug abusers.” (The New York Times). Democrats are also of the view that the actual costs to conduct these drug tests and all other overheads preponderate the potential benefits and savings expected to be derived from it. In Idaho, such a budget analysis was conducted last year which showed that the costs of this program are likely to be more than the saving. This caused the proponents of the program to drop this idea. There are also various statistics available to support this theory, for example, one such study says that the recipients of government aid are not more likely than the general US population to abuse drugs which is 8% of the population. Maria Kayanan said, "What the states are doing by imposing these schemes is creating a subclass of citizens based on their economic status that is not entitled to Fourth Amendment protection." (Hall). In the past, about 36 states have tried to seek solution to this issue, but recently it has attracted more attention in the inflated economy and tight state budgets. Over the last 12 months, 23 states are moving forward with this legislation and propose for the screenings of nicotine among the recipients of the government aid. According to the Florida law, it was necessary for all the recipients of compensation to get themselves drug tested to apply for the aid. This was however blocked on a wider scale by the federal judges. As a result, authorities in Pennsylvania have come up with a new and perhaps an enforceable approach which requires drug tests of only those applicants who have been convicted with the felony of drug abuse in the past. This sounds better as it would cut down all the unnecessary expenditure related to testing of clean applicants which constitutes about 90% of the population. Officials believe that this program could clear the way for statewide application if it proves cost effective (FoxNews.com). The debate continues nationwide as those supporting the rule elucidate that the main objective of the rule is to ensure that the taxpayer money is being spent responsibly by its recipients and the jobless people continue to look for the jobs and try to get one. "We're not trying to punish anybody or say that welfare recipients are bad people," said Everett (Hall). Applicants with a drug history in the last 5 years will be required to submit a urine sample for drug tests as a result of this legislation. Additionally, a 20% random sample of all welfare aid recipients will also be subjected to drug test. The results will result in banning the cash assistance of the recipient as follows: First drug offence for controlled substances – the subject will be required to undergo drug treatment facility; or a 6 month ban. Second drug abuse offence – ban for 1 year on receiving government aid. Third drug abuse offence – permanent ban. According to an article at The Morning Call, people in Schuylkill County are in support of the new legislation. The pilot program is intended to answer how much of taxpayer money can be saved by eliminating drug abusers from the government welfare program. While the main question remains whether the implementation of this new rule will be in accordance with the Fourth Amendment discouraging unreasonable searches (Sulzberger), those in support are looking for all possible answers to handle the issue. On the other hand, those against the rule continue to claim that it is unfair cost-ineffective program; and instead of saving the taxpayer money, it will waste it in unnecessary and costly drug tests (each test costs around $35-45) as “Feb. 3 brief by the Center for Law and Social Policy, a low-income advocacy nonprofit, cited a 1996 study that found the proportion of welfare recipients with a substance abuse problem is consistent with the proportion of non-welfare recipients with the same.” (FoxNews.com) Works Cited FoxNews.com. (4, Feb 2012). Pennsylvania officials roll out drug tests for welfare recipients read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/04/pennsylvania-officials-roll-out-drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients/ Hall, P. (27, Jan 2012). Welfare drug testing tried in Pennsylvania. Retrieved from http://articles.mcall.com/2012-01-27/news/mc-pa-welfare-drug-testing-20120127_1_welfare-applicants-drug-testing-welfare-recipients Sulzberger, A. . G. (2011, Oct 10). States adding drug test as hurdle for welfare. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/us/states-adding-drug-test-as-hurdle-for-welfare.html?adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1353710963-sAon 2GL98NWTdUPyEFjuA THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, N. T. (25, Feb 2012). Growing support for drug testing of welfare recipients. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/us/support-grows-for-idea-of-drug-tests-for-welfare-recipients.html?_r=0 The Morning Call. (1, Feb 2012). Testing seeks to remove drug users from welfare rolls. Retrieved from http://articles.mcall.com/2012-02-01/opinion/mc-welfare-drug-tests-argall-yv-0202-20120201_1_welfare-benefits-drug-users-general-assistance Read More