| Author | Message | ||
     No_rice |
really not trying to turn this into some big political kind of debate or something. i just think it is way beyond time that this happens IN EVERY STATE. and i say this knowing that this will affect people very close to me, as in the fact that they will have to be tested and im completely fine with that idea. http://www.mpp.org/states/west-virginia/news/wva-d rug-testing-bill-is.html W.Va. Drug Testing Bill is Preceded by Hype March 2, 2009 The Times West Virginian (Fairmont, WV) CHARLESTON — It's on talk radio, the Internet and the Republican Party's priority list: so far, a GOP delegate's attention-grabbing drug testing bill is everywhere but before the Legislature. Berkeley County lawmaker Craig Blair has been promising for over a week to introduce a bill requiring drug testing for people who receive food stamps, unemployment or "welfare,'' which could refer to several federal programs. With a rollout that includes his own dedicated Web site, mentions in the press and the rare step of an endorsement from the state party's executive committee, the proposal has become like the Mothman of legislation -- everyone's talking about it, but not many people have actually seen it. Blair, who hoped the bill would be ready by last Wednesday, put the draft language on his Web site, www.notwithmytaxdollars.com, to answer some of the questions about specifics. "I was hoping it would be ready this week, to be honest,'' Blair said, adding that the proposal has been sent to the legislative bill drafting room -- the step before it can be offered to co-sponsors. "I'm not sure what's taking so long.'' In a session devoted largely to fiscal policy, with little in the way of major initiatives or new proposals, Blair's idea is stealing the spotlight. "I'm having people walk up to me and and give me a hug and say thank you,'' Blair said. "It doesn't matter if it's Republicans, Democrats. People have wanted something like this for a long time.'' Last weekend, the Republican Party's executive committee took the unusual step of endorsing Blair's idea. "I think there's one phrase we've heard from people more often than any other, and that's it's about time,'' said Gary Abernathy, the party's executive director. On the other hand, Abernathy said, it doesn't hurt that the idea is coming up now, when the Legislature seems likely to spend the session watching the budget and discussing federal stimulus aid. "It's a session where people are looking for something to talk about,'' Abernathy said. Once the bill does come before House committees, though, its status as belle of the ball may be tarnished by the realities of the legislative process. The draft language on Blair's Web site doesn't address cost, which will be one of the factors lawmakers weigh in looking at the proposal. The bill calls for random drug tests to be undertaken by the Division of Human Services. If a person fails, they'll be given a second test in 30 to 60 days. If they fail again, they'll lose their public assistance. It's intended for anyone receiving benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, unemployment compensation or "welfare,'' which could refer to the Temporary Aid to Needy Families program, the Women, Infants and Children program, or both. Regardless, that's a substantial slice of the state's population, with roughly 288,000 West Virginians receiving food stamps alone, according to the latest federal figures. With estimates cited by Blair that drug tests cost from $50 to $150 a pop, the bill could be pricey, depending how many random tests are administered each month. There's also the fact that the stiffest criticism of the idea so far has come from one of Blair's fellow Republicans: Randolph County Sen. Clark Barnes. Barnes once collected unemployment compensation and food stamps after losing a job in the 1970s, and said, "I can't imagine having to suffer the insult of taking a drug test in addition to that.'' He says Blair's proposal is contrary to the party's stance on Constitutional rights and civil liberties. "As Republicans, we always complain about regulation, regulation, regulation,'' Barnes said. "But some of our leading Republicans, when it's politically profitable, want to create more regulations and more government.'' Blair, who got the idea for the bill after hearing that five children were recently born in an Eastern Panhandle hospital with drug addictions, disagrees. He's confident his bill won't meet the same fate as a similar Michigan law, which was struck down by a court in 2003. "We're not trying to hurt people, we're trying to help them get off drugs and get back to work,'' Blair said. "There are people who go out and sell their blood for money, do all kinds of things for money. Who out there wouldn't be happy to pee in a cup for a $300-a-week check?'' | ||
| Limitedx1 |
as much as i would love to see that happen.......it wont....workign class citizens have to test all the time, personally i just took a test and passed in order to start a job. Hence JOB is a 4 letter word to those who abuse it. cause the majority of them will fail, then wont get free stuff given to them anymore, then the crime rate goes up as well as prison populations...... | ||
| Dynasport |
I have to get tested as a condition of my employment as a government employee. If they can test me, why not other getting government money. It will have to be some sort of random deal, as it would be too expensive otherwise me thinks. Also, results couldn't be used for criminal prosecution. Still, I would support this. Of course there are those that would like to legalize pot. Anyone want to speak for that? | ||
| Greenlantern |
Looks as if it will cost more than it saves. Morally , I am surprised that I really don't have a opinion either way. I would however expand the bill to include any person who makes a full time living off of government tax dollars. I think they are all on drugs. | ||
| Smokescreen |
Of course there are those that would like to legalize pot. Anyone want to speak for that? What if they legalize it in California and Oregon? Are those states going to be exempt? What if more states decide to legalize it? There are going to be those that will do what they please. Isn't that why we love our country? Or are you suggesting mandating what people can and cannot do in their private lives? Seems like an awfully slippery slope. Smokescreen | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
I'm all for that... BUT If they made pot legal and taxed the snot out of it, we could have health care like the big dogs in DC and free gas for my car... they could pay my mortgage.... | ||
| Bill0351 |
"Of course there are those that would like to legalize pot. Anyone want to speak for that?" I'm all for it. To me it's pretty pointless to keep it illegal. As of right now, anybody who wants it can get it. I know more people who have tried it than haven't. From Time Magazine: The Netherlands, with its permissive marijuana laws, may be known as the cannabis capital of the world. But a survey published this month in PLoS Medicine, a journal of the Public Library of Science, suggests that the Dutch don't actually experiment with pot as much as one would expect. Despite tougher drug policies in the U.S., Americans were twice as likely to have tried marijuana than the Dutch, according to the survey. In fact, Americans were more likely to have tried marijuana or cocaine than people in any of the 16 other countries, including France, Spain, South Africa, Mexico and Colombia, that the survey covered. 42% of Americans have been in violation of the law and should have spent time in jail for it. As for testing people who receive public assistance? If the logic is that we don't want them spending out tax dollars on drugs, we should also not allow them to drink alcohol, eat junk food, go to movies that aren't of an educational nature, play video games, or travel more than 10 miles from home unless they are on foot or on business. I don't want my tax dollars used for those recreational pass times either. Perhaps instead of taking away their assistance, we could provide them all with seeds, a book on cultivation, and a trowel. Teach a man to fish? | ||
| Limitedx1 |
^^^^ the people they tought to "Fish" were outsourced to another country lol, now thats ironic lol | ||
| Brumbear |
Legalize drugs and tax the damn things I never ever knew a dope head counldn't get dope when they wanted it the only thing stops em is $$$$$$ Then make like 2 drugs legal anyone caught with illegal drugs 10 years for possesion life for sales | ||
| Slaughter |
Alcohol too. | ||
| Bads1 |
Why Alcohol ?? | ||
| Slaughter |
I'm just being a devil's advocate. We have serious alcohol problems at work - and our "standards" are probably higher than the average place to work. The welfare lines also have a large number of folks with alcohol issues. I believe that it's NOT the Gubbmint's business in EITHER case... drugs OR alcohol but then I'm against welfare in virtually EVERY form - corporate or individual. | ||
| Spiderman |
Why Alcohol ?? Because alcohol is not needed to live. If we are paying for these people to live they do not need to spend our money on non-essential. They want alcohol, drugs or 20 inch rims... GET A JOB!! | ||
| Bads1 |
Tony, Alcohol is not a illegal substance. I don't think you can tell someone to stop drinking a couple beers or cocktail's UNLESS it has caused unjury to another or OWI. Good luck with ever getting that through. Drug's though I can understand. | ||
| Slipknot |
Fat people should be taxed and tested for high cholesterol and triglycerides weekly to prevent overeating because this is the biggest contributer to high health care costs, to fuel imports being too high to move fat people around in their SUV, furniture breaking all over the country, they move too slowly, and they make stupid arguments on their radio shows. And motorcycles are too fast. | ||
| Brumbear |
we are I pay more for insurance than skinny people and I fin paid for all the food I ate | ||
| Danger_dave |
I do better on drug tests if they are multiple choice. | ||
| Smokescreen |
GET A JOB!! You hiring or something?  Smokescreen | ||
| Spiderman |
Tony, Alcohol is not a illegal substance. I don't think you can tell someone to stop drinking a couple beers or cocktail's UNLESS it has caused unjury to another or OWI. OK then, open up your bar to all welfare peeps and have free drink night... | ||
| Froggy |
Smokescreen, there is junk food tax in NY. They banned trans fats in my county. Next will be cheeseburger confiscations by the police. | ||
| Firebolt32 |
Pot has been known to help cancer patients, old folks with bad joints (no pun intended) and glucoma(?). I see nothing wrong with it. There are many other worse drugs out there than pot. I smoke on a regular basis. I have no problem saying that. I have never smoked before or during work. My time is my time. My boss knows I do and has no problem because he knows it doesn't affect my work. If the test does pass, there needs to be an alcohol test as well. Yes it is illegal to drive under the influence of anything, but how often do you here of a stone kid killing a family. You don't...that kid is creeping down the street. The drunk is bouncing off the gaurd rails...actually saw this this morning. My .02 | ||
| Brumbear |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPp5dXTFY4w | ||
| Bads1 |
Why would I open a the bar for a free drink night?? Lets get real here. What a free drink night got to do with testing??? Lots of people on welfare right now. Have you you been paying attention to our economy right now. Why not say you can't smoke either hell its the leading cause of Cancer. Then take this and this and this and this and oh yeah take this to. Next thing you know we are not a free nation anylonger. Like I said... I agree with the drug's but where does it end?? | ||
| Spiderman |
So letting your tax dollars pay for some possibly lazy A hole drink is OK but handing out free drinks to that same A hole is wrong? Sounds good to me! If you are getting hand outs and not hand ups and it is our money then you should be spending it on things you need; food, water, shelter. Not booze... They shouldn't be allowed to smoke cigs either... | ||
| Damnut |
 | ||
| Brumbear |
I could care less test me for anything anytime the only real issue might be if I drink at 8pm and get tested the next day I would pass if I smoke I will be as fine as the guy who drank if not better but I would fail a tset This is of course irrelevent cause drugs are presently illegal and alcohol is not I don't smoke pot but I don't care if you do its a choice so when they legalise refer and they should and tax it then they will have to figure a test to see if you are actaully under the influence or just smoked the night before | ||
| Damnut |
My little guy is sooooo screwed............  | ||
| Smokescreen |
Anyone remember this guy? (Hint: He's a DOCTOR!)  Smokescreen | ||
| Gowindward |
Sounds like a good way to literally piss away more of our tax dollars doing the testing. | ||
| B00stzx3 |
All for it. I was a bleeding heart liberal "help the poor" type until I moved into the city. They treated me like dirt while living off my tax dollars. Don't want to work? Then don't blaze up either, not yours. I busted my butt washing dishes, being a janitor, working on farms, they can do it to. |
