Drug Test the Unemployed

[ClydeR]

One thing we sure don't want to do is give unemployment benefits to drug users. That's why I agree with the Republican South Carolina candidate for governor who says that everybody who is unemployed should have to take a drug test.


Though employees fired for using drugs, alcohol or missing work can be disqualified from jobless benefits, Haley said testing the unemployed was one of several steps in ensuring the newly restructured Department of Employment and Workforce – now a cabinet agency – only pays benefits to those who have earned them.

“We will make sure, above all, that there will be no…benefits if they do not pass a drug test,” Haley said.

“I think the people of this state deserve that. I think personal responsibility matters.”

The idea was proposed last year during Legislative debate, but some argued denying benefits to those who fail a drug test is unconstitutional. State Sen. David Thomas, R-Greenville, proposed the department conduct a urine drug test on a random sample of 500 first-time benefit recipients, and report the findings to the General Assembly by Nov. 1.

If more than 10 percent of the random sample tested positive for drug use, then 3 percent of all new benefit recipients would have to be drug tested going forward as of Feb. 1, 2011. The legislation, which was withdrawn, would also have required lawmakers to be drug tested.

“You can’t take away the rights of individuals (just because they are unemployed), when those rights are guaranteed in the U.S. Bill of Rights,” said Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, and an opponent of the idea. “It’s sort of ludicrous. It’s like telling a bunch of seamstresses working at a local plant — churchgoing, law-abiding citizens — that all of a sudden, when the plant closes, they’ve become drug users.”

More... (http://www.thestate.com/2010/10/06/1499017/haley-drug-test-the-unemployed.html)

[Tordane]

Here here. Anyone receiving benefits from any social program should have to submit to drug testing. I'm actually repping Clyde, wtf.

[Fallen]

I honestly don't have a problem with something like that. Scream invasion of privacy all you want. If you want to collect unemployment, don't do drugs.

[Cephalopod]

Being a communist liberal socialist... I really don't have a problem with this. I wouldn't oppose the same being applied to SNAP benefits, either.

EDIT: That said, people who are addicted to various drugs do need support. If they fail a drug test, I would hope that it would get them ushered into some sort of state-supported drug counseling or other help.

[Fallen]

That said, people who are addicted to various drugs do need support. If they fail a drug test, I would hope that it would get them ushered into some sort of state-supported drug counseling or other help.

I was going to add something like this to my response. I don't think the offender should be fined or arrested. Instead, they should have free drug counciling offered to them. If they wish to collect benefits they must enroll and actively participate.

[Back]

How about all elected officials get tested?

[CrystalTears]

That said, people who are addicted to various drugs do need support. If they fail a drug test, I would hope that it would get them ushered into some sort of state-supported drug counseling or other help.
^This.

[Fallen]

How about all elected officials get tested?

Sounds good to me. All government employees and contractors should be drug tested. No exceptions.

[Tordane]

Sounds good to me. All government employees and contractors should be drug tested. No exceptions.

This.

[Liagala]

Wait wait wait. There's unanimous agreement in a politics thread on the PC? And it was started by ClydeR??

http://scienceblogs.com/developingintelligence/pig1.gif

[AnticorRifling]

No. Back is against it.

[Liagala]

No. Back is against it.
I read that as a comment on this from the OP, "The legislation, which was withdrawn, would also have required lawmakers to be drug tested."

[Back]

I missed that actually. I don't have a problem with drug testing as long as it applies to everyone.

Except me of course.

[ClydeR]

In addition to testing the beneficiaries of unemployment insurance, we can apply the same drug tests to lots of other insurance policies to reduce the costs for everybody else. When it comes time to pay under an insurance policy, then we should test the beneficiaries of life insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, homeowner's insurance, disability insurance and all the others to see who we can weed out.

[Warriorbird]

Fantastic idea. Trolling failed.

[Sean]

Eh if I was unemployed I'd smoke the occasional joint to escape the crappiness that is unemployment.

[Liagala]

In addition to testing the beneficiaries of unemployment insurance, we can apply the same drug tests to lots of other insurance policies to reduce the costs for everybody else. When it comes time to pay under an insurance policy, then we should test the beneficiaries of life insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, homeowner's insurance, disability insurance and all the others to see who we can weed out.
Thank you. Now you're back into the realm of ClydeR posts. I was concerned for a while.

[Back]

Eh if I was unemployed I'd smoke the occasional joint to escape the crappiness that is unemployment.

Thats a whole nother animal with drug testing. I don't think weed should be illegal.

[Drew]

In addition to testing the beneficiaries of unemployment insurance, we can apply the same drug tests to lots of other insurance policies to reduce the costs for everybody else. When it comes time to pay under an insurance policy, then we should test the beneficiaries of life insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, homeowner's insurance, disability insurance and all the others to see who we can weed out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

[4a6c1]

In addition to testing the beneficiaries of unemployment insurance, we can apply the same drug tests to lots of other insurance policies to reduce the costs for everybody else. When it comes time to pay under an insurance policy, then we should test the beneficiaries of life insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, homeowner's insurance, disability insurance and all the others to see who we can weed out.

<3

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I think those who collect unemployment should be drug tested, yes. As well as all government employees and contractors.

I disagree that those who fail should get put into another support program though, unless that program is ONLY about solving the drug issue and has nothing to do with providing food, shelter, or what have you. No sense shuttling one problem to another program, is what I mean.

[BigWorm]

Since people who get fired for drug use already aren't eligible for unemployment benefits, this seems like it would only affect the people who don't have an actual problem. What purpose does this serve? What is the point of this other than to impose your morality on others?

Maybe some of you don't consider mandatory drug testing a violation of your right to privacy, but I definitely do. The "choice" between drug testing and not receiving unemployment benefits is no choice at all. Why doesn't anyone give a shit about personal privacy any more?

[Jarvan]

I don't see how one's choice to sit around getting high all day and having me pay for it is a Morality issue.

You want to get high, fine by me, I can't stop you and I don't care. Just do it with your own money. If your so screwed up with drugs that you can't hold a job. that's your problem, not societies.

[MrTastyHead]

Obviously the only reason somebody who uses drugs could lose their job is because of drugs! It's been a while, what was the sarcasm tag supposed to be again?

Here's a crazy thought for you all. Most people who like to use drugs have friends who like to use drugs. It's very easy to get high without spending a dime on it. Especially when you're down on your luck.

[CrystalTears]

Since people who get fired for drug use already aren't eligible for unemployment benefits, this seems like it would only affect the people who don't have an actual problem. What purpose does this serve? What is the point of this other than to impose your morality on others? Because the only people on unemployment are the people who were fired for drug use? Not every company conducts drug screenings and people who may have been using drugs have gotten fired for various other reasons. Chances are that if you're on drugs, you'll jeopardize your work performance, so you'll get fired and still have a drug problem.


Maybe some of you don't consider mandatory drug testing a violation of your right to privacy, but I definitely do. The "choice" between drug testing and not receiving unemployment benefits is no choice at all. Why doesn't anyone give a shit about personal privacy any more? I see unemployment and living off the government like going back to living with your mom. It's her house, her rules, and if she's going to be pay for you to be a slug, you kinda have to put up with her shit all over again. Amirite? And I'm sure she would be equally pissed off if she saw that no only were you not working but were spending time getting high, there's a good chance she could kick you out of her house, don't you think?

So if you're down on your luck with no job, shouldn't you make an effort to right yourself and look for work sober? I'm all for getting high once in a while, but at least be a responsible person and get on your own feet first.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I'd have no problem with this if pot were legalized/not being tested for.

[LMingrone]

I agree with this. But, you're missing one major point. Drug testing costs $. I realize stoners and crackheads are raping the system. The only thing is that testing them would rape our tax dollars even more. It's the only reason we aren't doing it already. Plus, there are so many ways to get around it. Most hard drugs don't show up a few days after taking them. Pot is pretty much the only one that sticks around.

ROI is negative. I guess that's my point.

[Sam]

Sounds good to me. All government employees and contractors should be drug tested. No exceptions.

I got tested a lot in the Army, but in 5+ years as a contractor I've only been tested once, when applying for a new position.

[Cephalopod]

I agree with this. But, you're missing one major point. Drug testing costs $. I realize stoners and crackheads are raping the system. The only thing is that testing them would rape our tax dollars even more. It's the only reason we aren't doing it already. Plus, there are so many ways to get around it. Most hard drugs don't show up a few days after taking them. Pot is pretty much the only one that sticks around.

ROI is negative. I guess that's my point.

I don't think your anecdotal mention of drug testing costing $ proves conclusively that ROI is negative...

[Fallen]

I got tested a lot in the Army, but in 5+ years as a contractor I've only been tested once, when applying for a new position.

Tested throughout my time in the service, and am supposedly being tested regularly here as well (contractor). It's only been twice in the last 5ish years. They might be doing random sample and i've been getting lucky.