NWAnews.com :: Northwest Arkansas’ News Source
Two legislative committees authorized on Monday a study prior to the 2009 legislative session of a proposal to require recipients of certain public assistance to undergo random drug testing in order to continue receiving assistance.Those who failed a drug test would have to successfully complete a one-year drug treatment program approved by the state Department of Human Services and remain drug-free during the program.
The proposal was submitted by Rep. Frank Glidewell and Sen. Denny Altes, both Republicans from Fort Smith.
The public assistance “shall be discontinued” if the person fails to complete the drug treatment program or fails to remain drug-free in the program.
The House and Senate Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committees OK’d the study with no discussion, debate or questions.
Glidewell said he believes that alcohol and / or drug problems are “pretty widespread” among recipients of public assistance. It may not be their largest problem, but “it’s a problem” that is a sickness like tuberculosis and cancer, he said.
“If we can help people out by sending [them ] to rehab, I think we are making better citizens out of them,” he said.
Beware when your government wants to “make” something out of you.
You know, as a I write these news stories about state legislation, I often wonder if they have ever thought through the natural consequences of their legislation. Because it seems to me that only a person motivated by the desire to look “tough on drugs” in order to win votes would support such a heinous measure.
Think about it, Rep. Glidewell. You’re a drug-addicted mother of three, working a part-time job, going back to school, and attempting to get clean. You’re caught with a dirty drug screen on a random test. Now you’re forced into one year of rehab – how does that fit in with your work and daycare and school schedule? Then within the one year, you relapse – which happens – and, what, your housing assistance and family aid money is cut off? You’re forced to quit school, maybe even lose your home… yeah, out of school and homeless with three kids, that ought to help your rehab.
See, this kind of thinking comes from the paternalism of prejudice. It’s the idea that since they receive welfare, they are childlike failures whose lives must be controlled by the state. It’s the idea that we can’t be “subsidizing” somebody’s drug problem. Maybe I’m just sensitive to this, as I grew up the poor child of a drug addict and food stamps and WIC and state aid were the only thing that kept me fed, and if those had been taken away if my dad failed a drug screen, then why would you want to see child Russ starve because his dad was an addict?
This drug testing for welfare is counterproductive. Michigan already tried this and got shot down in the courts. It doesn’t reflect any sort of drug problem among welfare recipients, as welfare recipients use drugs at a rate at or below that of everyone else. It doesn’t help get welfare recipients off drugs; six states have already discovered mandatory random drug testing for welfare recipients to be less effective than questionnaire, job retraining, and other methods in detecting and preventing drug abuse. Drug testing, as I described in the vignette previously, distracts from actually solving the problems of low education, low skills, and psychological issues that keep people in poverty and on welfare.
And, in my mind, worst of all, as usual random drug testing is more discriminating to the marijuana user, who may test positive for weeks, than it is to the cocaine, meth, heroin, or alcohol user, who can clean up in a couple of days. Thus, a policy like this would force people away from the safest, least life-impacting drug, marijuana, and toward the harder, more life-impacting drugs. Furthermore, as we know, there are many medical uses for marijuana, and even though it is not recognized in Arkansas, it’s not hard to imagine there must be many people in that state using cannabis for medical purposes.
Loading ...
sadly there isnt a good solution to this. for every hard working parents who smokes a little pot u have a parent who smokes a little crack. the only person who loses out are the children. you drug test a parent who just cant seem to stay sober and you end up with a child who goes hungry or ends up in the system. either way its hell for them. it would be great to think that drug testing recipients of welfare would be effective-but i doubt it. i live in rural arkansas and there our many people who trade food stamps for cash to get drugs or straight across for drugs. these are not people who are struggling to get thru school raise their children work and on occasion smoke some pot. they are not concerned with the welfare of their babies-so losing their food stamps or whatever isnt going to stop them. drug testing welfare recipients will only result in a harder life for the children stuck in this situation.
forgot to Check the “Notify me of followup comments via e-mail ” box sorry!
This person will not reply, this is just the kind of ingnorance we are fighting.
With that said what do you think it would take to change Keiths mind? What tacticts might start his mind churning? These are the kinds of questions we need answered. We do well to reach those sympathetic to our cause, but to reach those who oppose us we must completly change the way we think.
We need a good place to have these conversations,
I encourage NORML to look into the idea. I appreciate this comment area, but it is hard to have a real exchange of ideas. Does anyone else have any ideas?
Awesome reply Russ, I completely agree with each rebuttal.
So your position is that people who use cannabis are immature and irresponsible, per se? You are wrong. Perhaps YOU were an immature and irresponsible person who liked to blame that on cannabis, but me and millions like me use cannabis responsibly and are quite mature.
The point is that use of cannabis does not prevent someone from being a good parent, and why does a person’s poverty give YOU the right to decide they are a bad parent simply because they may be using cannabis for medicinal purposes (saving the state some Medicaid money) or just choose to use cannabis instead of alcohol? Do you advocate we give random breathalyzers to welfare recipients, too?
And which drug is that? Look, if mommy has an addiction problem, by all means let’s get her some help. But when you drug test people who use drugs, they either cheat or avoid the test. How long before mommy figures out she could avoid the welfare and the drug testing altogether if she just started selling those drugs?
Don’t think you’re going to tug my heartstring with the “poor child” argument: I was that poor child, not understanding why daddy couldn’t just quit if he really loved me. I have a much greater understanding of the dynamics of addiction than you think.
You shouldn’t be drug tested to get your job, either. Since when is it our employer’s duty to enforce state and federal laws? What probable cause does an employer have to suspect me of committing a crime simply by showing up to work?
As for the “FREE money” comment, you really are exhibiting your disdain for the poor, aren’t you? I’m sure you’ll do great in helping to alleviate poverty.
Great, you’re going to duplicate the efforts of drug warriors have used to eliminate the scourge of drugs for over the past seventy years – “tough love” and “pray it away”. Because that has worked so well. What “tougher love” is there than mandatorily sentencing people to disproportionately long prison terms away from their families?
Right after their goodnight shot of whiskey and before their book report on the Satanic Bible. Then, if they are really good, when they arise we shoot some heroin and look for some hobos to murder.
What kind of stupid question is that? I don’t have kids, but of course I wouldn’t let kids smoke, anything! I’m more uptight than that; if I had kids, they wouldn’t get caffeinated or sugary beverages nor any processed or fast food – those are more harmful to the kids than secondhand, or even firsthand, marijuana smoke.
You have a very interesting perspective on MJ. I did mj in the early 80″s but have grown out of it and or become responsible. You know I think its funny that your argument is that drug testing is a bad thing because people get caught. Dah! that’s the point. If the user cannot clean up and their children are not important enough to inspire them to quit, then yes the kids should be removed. I am personally helping a child who has fallen victim to that situation. It’s difficult to help the child understand why “mommy” doesn’t love them enough to quit. I would be interested to hear your view point on drug testing to go to work somewhere. I have to pass a drug test to pay taxes, so I feel that it’s fair to have someone else who needs assistance to have to pass the test to receive FREE money that they have not worked for.
I am working on a project to clean up the Little Rock area, called Second Opportunity Shelter. The basic idea is to provide the single mom, 3 kids, or a homeless person, a safe comfortable temporary place to help her get on her feet. Daycare, job assistant, auto help, job training, susbstance abuse counseling and TESTING! We are going to have classes in everything from financial to budgeting to savings, from parenting to marraige and family. This will be a religious based program, YES WE WILL HAVE CHURCH, I AM BRINGING GOD BACK TO THE FRONT, not hiding him. I am going to provide tough love, the OLD SCHOOL method. We will help one another. I personally think they should legalize it and tax the Shit out of it like cigarettes. It won’t matter how much it cost people will still buy it, just like gas. If you would like more information on my project you can eamil me at pilot7461@yahoo.com
Thanks Keith
p.s. if you have kids, do you let them smoke?
This is a stupid idea you cant save people from there selves. this would make a bad situation worse. It all has to come to pass.
I am glad they are finally doing something about this, but the mother can stay clean while she gives the money to her junkie boyfriends so that part is not fixed. If she does relapse and lose welfare that is fine with me, the kids can be taken from her if she can not find a place to live. There are so many people in this country that want to adopt kids that the kids will find a home, and it will hopefully be better than the one they are in right now. In Arkansas where I live we have parents making meth in their house with kids in it, the kids get burnt from mother’s pipe and breathe the chemicals and the police here will not do anything about it (Pulaski County, I reported it). This is just another way to crack down on the drug use that is wide spread in this state. I do not know where the NIH got their fudged facts but I live here and go to the welfare department, over half the people going in there have the meth scars all over their face and arms (nasty). If the system was perfect and the Police would do their jobs here then this bill would not be needed, but they are not so they need to get the powers to another agency to help out. I have no problem with pot, shrooms, or other natural drugs but this state has blown up with crackheads that need to be dealt with so the rest of the people can go back to normal lives. If you are going to comment on something like this, push away from the computer and go to Arkansas and see for yourself instead of believing the governments conspiracies!
FUCK THIS SHIT! WORDS CANNOT EXPRESS MY HATRED FOR THIS COUNTRYS GOVERNMENT. WE SPEND FUCKING SEVERAL BILLION A YEAR ON THE MACY’S PARADE FLOATS BUT STILL CANT EVEN MANAGE OUR OWN POOR.. I DON’T EVEN WANT TO BE CALLED AN AMERICAN!!