Drug testing for Govt support. I say OK as long as it includes testing for

[DonRedwood]

the CEO and managers of any company that gets Govt. funded financial breaks.

If it is fair to drug test someone who is applying for foodstamps or unemployment, then it is fair for the same testing to be required of any person who gets public money as support. That means, if Walmart gets to have a tax break to move into an area, then the CEO and managers of that Walmart should show have to be tested for drugs.

If Bank of America gets a tax break or A REFUND from public money, then the CEO and local managers can piss in a cup just like everyone else.

I might even go so far as to say, a govt. contract (isn't that what unemployment is?) is also the same...it is a payout from the govt. so let's go ahead and test the presidents of the arms companies, consulting firms and banking firms that get checks from public funds as well.

I don't know if you agree...but if they are gonna test one group of peeps, then I want them testing all the groups of peeps.

[Gore1FL]

1. I'd prefer to not test anyone

But I'm with you.

[badtoworse]

2. Why the CEO and managers? The beneficiaries would be the shareholders.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. If they are defense contractors that probably happens

If you have a clearance you get drug tested.

[JaneyVee]

4. I agree. We handed Wall St. $700Billion for a bailout and not a single CEO took a drug test.

[Comrade Grumpy]

5. Why does anyone have to prove their "innocence" without any reason?

Believe it or not, there once was a time when pissing in a cup to get a job at the local burger joint wasn't necessary. And it wasn't so long ago.

The government can't drug test you without a reason because the Fourth Amendment protects us from the government.

It doesn't protect us from the whims of employers. That's up to us. This is a contract negotiation issue.