Defending the Constitution?

zappasguitar

Well-known member
So much for their vaunted claim of "defending the constitution."

It's just great how hypocritical Tightie Righties get to pick and choose which amendments they think are important.

GOP Bill Seeks To Force Welfare Applicants To Waive Fourth Amendment Rights

Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-TN) introduced a bill in the House Friday that would require states that want to receive full funding for welfare assistance to force its citizens to waive their Fourth Amendment rights and submit to random drug testing. In a press release, Fincher describes the Welfare Integrity Act of 2013:

The bill requires each state participating in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to certify that applicants and current recipients are being randomly test for illegal drug use. In order to pass constitutional muster, the bill requires states to provide a consent and waiver form, where applicants are given the choice to waive their Fourth Amendment Rights and submit to a random drug test. If welfare beneficiaries fail a drug test or are arrested on a drug related offense, they will be unable to receive the benefit and cannot reapply for one year. Further, the legislation requires states that receive funding from the TANF program to certify that there is a program in place to test 20% of applicants and recipients for illegal drugs. States that do not comply would forfeit 10% of their TANF funding.

A federal appeals court has already blocked Florida’s mandatory drug-testing law, making it clear a blanket testing of public assistance applicants is likely unconstitutional. “The simple fact of seeking public assistance does not deprive a TANF applicant of the same constitutional protection from unreasonable searches that all other citizens enjoy,” the court held.

In a remarkable acknowledgment of the constitutional problems with the bill, the text of Fincher’s legislation actually calls for states to require citizens to “sign a waiver of constitutional rights with respect to testing.” Fincher suggests in his press release that the waiver is not forced because applicants can opt not to apply for benefits, but the federal appeals court made clear in its recent decision that a coerced waiver violates “the well settled doctrine of ‘unconstitutional conditions,’ the government may not require a person to give up a constitutional right . . . in exchange for a discretionary benefit conferred by the government where the benefit sought has little or no relationship to [the right].” The bill, then, would seek to require every state that wants to maintain its current level of funding to pass its own unconstitutional law.

As the Huffington Post points out, the bill is unlikely to succeed. Similar legislation introduced in 2011 “garned just seven cosponsors and failed to clear a committee.” But state bills that impose drug testing on applicants and beneficiaries are seeing increasing success, and at least seven states have already passed legislation requiring some form of drug testing for public assistance applicants or recipients. Mitt Romney even endorsed the idea during his presidential campaign.


http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...-applicants-to-waive-fourth-amendment-rights/
 
Except I've never claimed I wanted the 2nd amendment repealed, have I?
no, you simply say that nobody should be able to carry a gun except military and police, which is essentially the same thing as repealing it.

Once again we see you can't discuss the topic honestly...why do I even try?
once again we see you trying to wordsmith your way out of your hypocrisy and failing miserably.
 
Except I've never claimed I wanted the 2nd amendment repealed, have I?

Once again we see you can't discuss the topic honestly...why do I even try?

I have to take a drug test annually (and be available for random testing) in order to keep my job. Am I forfeiting my 4th Amendment rights?
 
no, you simply say that nobody should be able to carry a gun except military and police, which is essentially the same thing as repealing it.

once again we see you trying to wordsmith your way out of your hypocrisy and failing miserably.


I have NEVER SAID only the police and military should be allowed to carry a gun...that is another bullshit lie!

Once again wee see you resorting to outright LIES in order to make up what you think I believe.
 
I have to take a drug test annually (and be available for random testing) in order to keep my job. Am I forfeiting my 4th Amendment rights?


There is a difference between agreeing with the rules of employment required by a private employer and the Federal Government forcing welfare applicants to surrender their 4th amendment rights.
 
I have to take a drug test annually (and be available for random testing) in order to keep my job. Am I forfeiting my 4th Amendment rights?

I believe drug testing is an invasion of your right to privacy, even if you agree to it to keep your job. I think it is coercion, you either take the test or lose your job, even though you are not a drug user.
 
I believe drug testing is an invasion of your right to privacy, even if you agree to it to keep your job. I think it is coercion, you either take the test or lose your job, even though you are not a drug user.


So much for your presumption of innocence...
 
I have NEVER SAID only the police and military should be allowed to carry a gun...that is another bullshit lie!

Once again wee see you resorting to outright LIES in order to make up what you think I believe.
you lie, plain and simple. you know it, we know it. you should just surrender now, your hypocrisy is showing badly.
 
There is a difference between agreeing with the rules of employment required by a private employer and the Federal Government forcing welfare applicants to surrender their 4th amendment rights.
Welfare scum are employed by the government to live a life of ease, they too should be subject to drug tests, just like soldiers, FBI agents, cops etc.
Drug test one, drug test all.
That's it.
That old EQUALITY thing that YOU totalitarians DESPISE.
 
you lie, plain and simple. you know it, we know it. you should just surrender now, your hypocrisy is showing badly.


Well if I lie, then you should have no problem providing evidence to back up your allegation.

Go...find a single comment from me stating I want ONLY the police and military to carry a gun.
 
Well if I lie, then you should have no problem providing evidence to back up your allegation.

Go...find a single comment from me stating I want ONLY the police and military to carry a gun.

stop wordsmithing. it makes you look dumber than you already are. by stating that you don't believe anyone should be allowed to carry a gun, you make your intentions and desires very clear.
 
Welfare scum are employed by the government to live a life of ease, they too should be subject to drug tests, just like soldiers, FBI agents, cops etc.
Drug test one, drug test all.
That's it.
That old EQUALITY thing that YOU totalitarians DESPISE.

If welfare recipients must be drug tested to receive funds, then ALL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES must be tested to receive a check, from the Governor on down.
 
There is a difference between agreeing with the rules of employment required by a private employer and the Federal Government forcing welfare applicants to surrender their 4th amendment rights.

I surrender my rights in order to get, and keep, a job.

They can do the same thing to get gov't benefits.
 
stop wordsmithing. it makes you look dumber than you already are. by stating that you don't believe anyone should be allowed to carry a gun, you make your intentions and desires very clear.


If I made such a claim then post it...prove your allegation.

I have never stated that I don't believe anyone should carry a gun...and you can't prove otherwise.
 
There is a difference between agreeing with the rules of employment required by a private employer and the Federal Government forcing welfare applicants to surrender their 4th amendment rights.

They don't have to accept welfare. Don't we have a right to assure our tax dollars aren't being used for drugs?

Actually I oppose this, but not for the reasons you think.

Just make it so nobody in welfare makes more money than somebody who works.
 
I surrender my rights in order to get, and keep, a job.

They can do the same thing to get gov't benefits.

Private employers are allowed to set whatever rules they like for prospective employees.

The Government is not allowed to favor one segment of the population over another, or require one group to conform to rules others don't have to follow.
 
If welfare recipients must be drug tested to receive funds, then ALL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES must be tested to receive a check, from the Governor on down.
Yes, government employees, with morals, soldiers for example, are subject to drug tests, so should all the fucking rest, especially those employed by the government to live in luxuary at the expense of those who suffer to provide that luxuary.
 
Back
Top