Bfgrn
New member
Fla. Gov. Scott signs welfare drug testing bill
Under the new measure, anyone seeking state welfare assistance would have to submit to and pay for a drug test, with the costs reimbursed if the applicant passes.
Championed by conservatives as some sort of fiscal responsibility measure, Scott sanctimoniously declared in signing the law: "While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction."
The insinuation, of course, is that being poor is somehow synonymous with lawlessness and moral weakness, as if people in need of financial assistance are inherently susceptible to drug use and addiction. They're poor; therefore, they must be out boozing and drugging, the prejudicial thinking seems to go.
The fact that Florida itself researched this very issue in 1998 and found no such connection between financial need and drug use doesn't seem to matter to the conservative lawmakers scurrying to curry political favor among their cheering right-wing base.
State officials estimate the costs of the initial screenings at $10, but one state Department of Children & Families official said they could cost as much as $40 — a hefty sum for an impoverished family already struggling just to put food on the table.
Now, in order to get the help they need, the poor — whose ranks are swelling in the bad economy — are being told that their financial status alone makes them suspect, and to prove themselves worthy of assistance, they must front some cash and show the world they're not on drugs.
It is an affront to human decency, especially in the absence of any sign of a true problem, and it raises obvious conflicts with past court rulings calling universal drug testing unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union wasted no time in filing a lawsuit seeking to overturn the measure.
But whether this ugly law passes legal muster — at a very real cost to taxpayers footing the bill to defend the measure in court — appears irrelevant to those who championed it. This is about scoring political points, not ensuring fiscal responsibility, or passing good laws.
In the end, we could all be paying more, and Florida will be the poorer for it.
BOTTOM LINE: An ugly day in Florida.
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Under the new measure, anyone seeking state welfare assistance would have to submit to and pay for a drug test, with the costs reimbursed if the applicant passes.
Championed by conservatives as some sort of fiscal responsibility measure, Scott sanctimoniously declared in signing the law: "While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction."
The insinuation, of course, is that being poor is somehow synonymous with lawlessness and moral weakness, as if people in need of financial assistance are inherently susceptible to drug use and addiction. They're poor; therefore, they must be out boozing and drugging, the prejudicial thinking seems to go.
The fact that Florida itself researched this very issue in 1998 and found no such connection between financial need and drug use doesn't seem to matter to the conservative lawmakers scurrying to curry political favor among their cheering right-wing base.
State officials estimate the costs of the initial screenings at $10, but one state Department of Children & Families official said they could cost as much as $40 — a hefty sum for an impoverished family already struggling just to put food on the table.
Now, in order to get the help they need, the poor — whose ranks are swelling in the bad economy — are being told that their financial status alone makes them suspect, and to prove themselves worthy of assistance, they must front some cash and show the world they're not on drugs.
It is an affront to human decency, especially in the absence of any sign of a true problem, and it raises obvious conflicts with past court rulings calling universal drug testing unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union wasted no time in filing a lawsuit seeking to overturn the measure.
But whether this ugly law passes legal muster — at a very real cost to taxpayers footing the bill to defend the measure in court — appears irrelevant to those who championed it. This is about scoring political points, not ensuring fiscal responsibility, or passing good laws.
In the end, we could all be paying more, and Florida will be the poorer for it.
BOTTOM LINE: An ugly day in Florida.
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
