Should we have urine testing for Welfare applicants

Like a lot of folks in the United States, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with. And the main reason I have no problem with a drug test is because I have nothing to hide.

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who are doing drugs and never have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their butt. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? A 1999 Michigan law called for a pilot program of random substance abuse testing in at least three counties.

Drug testing started at the beginning of October in Alpena, Presque Isle, and Berrien counties and a designated area of Western Wayne County, including some of Detroit's west side neighborhoods. All the new applicants for that area had to provide a urine sample to officials or give up their right to any government aid. In addition, any applicants already in the system had to submit to random testing. A class action lawsuit was filed by the Michigan chapter of the ACLU two days prior to schedule testing. The suit charges that the program violates the constitutional rights of welfare recipients.

Two Michigan mothers and a Detroit organization (The Westside Mothers) were named in the suit. The organization focuses on representing hundreds of welfare recipients and their families. Kary Moss, executive director of the ACLU in Michigan says, "The Fourth Amendment guarantees that no individual in this country can be subjected to a search by the government unless there is reasonable suspicion that they have committed some crime, welfare recipients may be poor, but that's not a crime not yet, anyway." I have spoken to a number of people in person and on forums about their thoughts and the ones that oppose this have the same stance, that it is unconstitutional. In my opinion, it seems that I am not pushing random drug test onto any random citizen.

The welfare recipient chooses to get help from the government. So just like submitting paperwork, you must submit a urine sample. Another stance people talk about is false positives. Well if they claim false positive, then do a hair follicle test. If urine test are unconstitutional, then scrap the whole welfare program.

Let your voice be heard on Political Majority.com.

James Freedman is a political leader with Political Majority. They represent close to 30,000 cities in the United States to date. Political Majority allows users to post and vote on issues within their city, state, and nation. These issues are then taken to the government as a petition. This article references the following issue: Urine test for welfare applicants

Iraq War

Whats the Fuss About - A few days ago I watched an interesting debate on CSPAN on the US-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation programme.

China Rises Think Again - Multi-polaristic lateralists are tripping over each other like Inspector Clouseau and salivating at the mouth Cujo style in the hope that China will challenge American hegemony.

American Morality A Glimmer of Hope on the Horizon - Has the United States lost it?s basic principle of morality? Has the United States moved away from the guiding principles that this country was founded on? A single paragraph describes these basic principles and it is the meaning of this paragra.

He Will Confirm A Covenant With the Many The US Israel Strategic Alliance Part II - DRIVING THE U.

Since When is It Okay to Lie to the United States Congress - Since when is it okay to purport and misrepresent truth to the United States Congress? Recently the Federal Trade Commissions Consumer Protection Division's Anti-SPAM Group put forth a report claiming SPAM was on the decline by 9%.