For all of the stupid f***s who want to drug-test food stamp recipients:

[riqster]

http://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/for-all-of-the-stupid-fs-who-want-to-drug-test-food-stamp-recipients/
Snip:

" One of the Congresscritters who voted for that measure just got busted on a cocaine charge. Really:

WASHINGTON — In September, Rep. Trey Radel voted for Republican legislation that would allow states to make food stamp recipients pee in cups to prove they’re not on drugs. In October, police busted the Florida Republican on a charge of cocaine possession."

More at the link.

[pipi_k]

1. Well, to be fair...

some of my Conservative friends on Facebook who post about that sort of thing also post in very strong support of drug testing for all members of Congress as well.

[msanthrope]

2. I'm betting the citizens of Toronto are warming to that idea as well. nt

[badtoworse]

3. I would support drug testing all government employees - top to bottom

Initial screen for everyone and random tests after that unless there is reasonable cause.

[riqster]

4. I work for a government agency, and that is the rule here.

Not for the distinguished legislators themselves, of course.

[JohnnyRingo]

7. I'm against all random workplace drug testing.

Think of all the great minds and dedicated workers who would be disqualified by such a sweeping policy that punishes people for what they did on their day off. From the fast food drive-thru window to the highest public office, I prefer IQ testing to drug testing.

It's better to have someone capable of handling the job than some dork too stupid to light the right end of a joint without burning their fingers.

(I know there's really no wrong end, it's part of the intelligence test)

[badtoworse]

9. Reading your post, I have this mental image of Alfred E Neuman on an airplane.

[CrispyQ]

5. I would add

that all C-level executives & BOD members, of any company that has a government contract, also get drug tested, to retain their eligibility to gorge at the trough.

This country is so fucking warped.

[JohnnyRingo]

6. I love to argue this point with people.

Most who voice the opinion that we have to drug test people who get food subsidies are about my age... drug saavy male Baby Boomers turned TeaBag.

I first ask if they're just doing it to be mean to poor people they don't like. When they invariably answer that their only concern is that they're "spending money on drugs", I then ask if, in all their decades of experience, they've ever seen a girl pay for a line of cocaine. Then, while they're still wearing their stunned face, I ask if they've ever smoked pot with friends while someone stood there charging them a dollar a hit.

Not everyone who gets high spends their (or our) money on it, and proponents should prove they did. Otherwise, it's just another example of racist nastiness, and I love to expose those people for their real intent.

[Whiskeytide]

12. I like to also point out...

... that it actually costs the government MORE money to implement the testing than it saves in terminated benefits. Any logic supporting the "we shouldn't be spending our money on drugs for these people" position evaporates immediately.

[bluedeathray]

8. How about we legalize drugs? nt

[bvar22]

10. Costs more than it saves.

Florida didn't save money by drug testing welfare recipients, data shows
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/florida-didnt-save-money-by-drug-testing-welfare-recipients-data-shows/1225721

Utah Spent More Than $30,000 To Catch 12 Drug Users On Welfare

"Other states have turned up similar results. In Florida, just 2 percent of welfare recipients failed drug tests in 2011, compared to 8 percent of the state’s population who use illegal drugs. And while Gov. Rick Scott (R) had promised that the law would bring out savings, those will be almost negligible after administrative costs and reimbursing those who took the $30 tests. A federal appeals court rejected Florida’s law in February. In Virginia, a similar proposal failed when lawmakers determined that it would cost $1.5 million to administer and save just $229,000."

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/08/27/2532851/utah-spent-30000-catch-12-drug-users-welfare/

[riqster]

11. To say nothing of that pesky old " presumption of innocence"

That is central to the larger issue, although the waste of taxpayer funds sucks as well.