Should all Congress members and Senators undergo mandatory drug testing?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

Shouldn't people receiving six-figures of tax payer money -- not to mention perqs -- be required to show that they aren't simply blowing all the money on illegal drugs?

[RKP5637]

1. Definitely!!! n/t

[hobbit709]

2. I'd settle for psychiatric evaluation.

[1StrongBlackMan]

3. Yes ...

so long as they advocate for drug testing of public assistance recipients/applicants.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

6. This is what I'm saying

..especially since testing food stamp recipients has been shown to be a monumental waste of money.


Can we also test winners of defense contracts? That's a form of corporate welfare where I know we could be saving some money.

[notrightatall]

4. Only the ones who insist on testing others for no good reason.

[City Lights]

5. Absolutely!

How do we make it happen?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

8. We make outraged calls to our elected leaders, of course!

[hifiguy]

7. No,

but a sanity evaluation and a corruption evaluation should be absolutely mandatory.

[SolutionisSolidarity]

9. It's unconstitutional.

For some reason the constitution matters when it comes to screwing over the elite. It's optional for us plebs.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

10. Hmmm... maybe an outraged electorate should amend?

I'd dare any statehouse to vote it down -- especially in red states.

[Angleae]

43. Really? Which part of the Constitution is violated?

It has been upheld by the courts that certain occupations can be required to undergo random drug/alcohol tests due for safety or security reasons. Lawmaking under the influence is a safety & security matter for 300+ million people.

[SolutionisSolidarity]

46. The 4th amendment.

So said SCOTUS in 1997.

http://www.infoplease.com/cig/supreme-court/testing-politicians-for-drugs.html

[Rybak187]

11. Yes they are receiving and spending government money

[JRLeft]

12. They should have to advertise their big donors.

[Comrade Grumpy]

13. IQ testing, perhaps. But a drug test is a search, and you need a warrant.

If the government wants to do it. There are some limited exceptions.

Unfortunately, we don't have the same protections against our employers as we do against our government.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

17. But they don't get warrants in states in which food stamp recepients are tested

It's a condition of the program (in states that test). Shouldn't it be a condition of accepting that high (and highly paid) office.

Also, shouldn't any member of Congress who isn't transparent enough to submit to testing without a warrant essentially admitting usage, and inviting recall?

[global1]

14. Sure - But They'll Never Vote For It To Test Themselves....nt

[Boom Sound 416]

15. Why not?

[phylny]

16. Let's add random tests for alcohol.

(Boehner, I'm looking right at YOU!)

[Algernon Moncrieff]

18. Random breathalyzer

...as they enter for the SOTU...with the media looking on...live.

[sharp_stick]

19. An ignition block

connected to lock on the doors. If these drunken fucks can't come to work sober they can't get into the fucking building.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

20. That should make it interesting after going to lunch with the lobbyists.

I like your thinking.

[True Blue Door]

21. No. I think taking drugs should be a Constitutional prerequisite for public office.

You must affirm under oath that you at least experimented with drugs in your youth.

If you don't have the balls to enjoy yourself despite some stupid, arbitrary rule imposed by some useless busybody with no moral compass, you have no business leading others.

[BlueJazz]

33. So you think past drug experimenters would make good leaders. ? So do I.

At least some of the dumb fucks would have some clue as to what's really going on.

[True Blue Door]

34. People who experimented could be good or bad.

But people too cowardly or authoritarian to have experimented in this day and age would definitely make bad leaders.

[GoCubsGo]

22. Yes. Every time they step foot in the Capitol building. n/t

[trueblue2007]

23. YES YES YES

YES!!!! And if they get positive YES taking on drug test, they get kicked out of office with NO possibility of returning. You break the law, you go to jail.

[QC]

24. I would rather give them IQ tests. n/t

[sorefeet]

25. They said the halls of congress

reeked of alcohol during the Republican government shutdown. Just making a mockery of the Obama administration. Anyone who flunks a breatherizer should be fired on the spot. They just prove that they don't take their job or the American people serious. Boner is a cigarette smoking drunk and proud of it. But there against marijuana.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

26. Preach it!

They want to ensure recipients of government money are clean? Cleanliness begins with them!

[Lithos]

27. Yes

Anything they ask of their constituents for anything, they need to do themselves...

...

[doc03]

28. They sure should, I did on my job and Republicons want to test all the "takers" n/t

[LuvNewcastle]

29. Absolutely!

I have to take a damn drug test every time I turn around. If it's good enough for us proles, it's good enough for our 'role models.'

[oldandhappy]

30. I sugggest mental health testing

and I think they should have to pass a test on the Constitution. So many of them say things that are not in the Constitution. They should have to pass a test and show they really do know what is in the Constitution.

Seriously.

[mindem]

31. Yes

It's the goose - gander thing.

[bigwillq]

32. Obama

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002997600

[bluedigger]

35. I'd be more for mandatory drug intake.

A few puff puffs might wake those wankers the fuck up.

[sabrina 1]

36. So long as they support everyone else being tested, then they too ought be. Even more important

that they be tested considering the job they have.

[99Forever]

37. Do as they say, not asthey do.

NOW...

... shut up and eat your gruel and never question your betters.

[treestar]

38. I think we should push it

the media wouldn't help.

And it would be politically impossible for them to argue against it because they would look elitist.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

39. A clever Facebook graphic is often a solid start.

I agree -- it should be pushed

[Half-Century Man]

40. I'd rather see them take current SATs/PSATs and have the results publically posted.

And then where they fit compared to 10th graders

[Fumesucker]

41. A big percentage of them couldn't even pass a Turing test

Listen to them in a town hall sometimes, the answer rarely has much to do with the question from the audience, often it's just a canned speech.

[Cha]

42. How about Govs too?

[davidpdx]

44. It would be a waste of money

We already know a significant amount would pop positive. Then what?

It's like saying well my brother hit me, so it's ok to hit him back. What we need to do is take the higher moral ground and prove how wrong they are about drug testing welfare recipients.

I actually saw a post on my Facebook feed by one of my friends about this. He also disagreed that it was wrong and he is a Libertarian. It makes me realize that only the fetish assholes who want to control people's lives really support this.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

45. Then we expose the hypocrisy of people like Scott Walker

...who feel that recepients of food aid should have to prove they are drug free.

Then what? Censure, recall, and possibly prosecution. make them return their salaries. Disqualify them from their pensions. After all, drug users should starve -- that's what I keep reading.

[Andy823]

47. Works for me.

And that should include alcohol in their system during working hours. Test Boehner first.