A popular subject with some here on EO a while back, when Florida Governor Rick Scott signed the legislation. Those welfare bums are all on drugs. Why give them welfare when all they're going to do is spent money on drugs (and flat screen TVs and shiny wheels and whatnot)? The idea was to save Florida taxpayers' money by forcing drug users to withdraw from the public-assistance system. Well, the results are in!
A whopping 2 percent of applicants tested positive, and Florida lost money when it was forced to reimburse everyone else for the cost of the drug test, plus pay for staff and administrative costs for the program. Making matters worse, the courts have now rejected the law as blatantly unconstitutional, forcing its demise.
Naturally, after seeing Rick Scott's experiment fail, other Cracker Jack Republican officials elsewhere were eager to follow Florida's example of intrusive, big-government conservatism. Take Utah, for example.
I can certainly understand the reason for all of these efforts. For some, there's an insatiable desire to punish and shame the poor, working from the assumption that if someone is struggling during weak economic times, it's their own fault. But the idea is nevertheless ridiculous. Especially in light of the facts. And yet, at least 29 other states this year have considered similar proposals.
A whopping 2 percent of applicants tested positive, and Florida lost money when it was forced to reimburse everyone else for the cost of the drug test, plus pay for staff and administrative costs for the program. Making matters worse, the courts have now rejected the law as blatantly unconstitutional, forcing its demise.
Naturally, after seeing Rick Scott's experiment fail, other Cracker Jack Republican officials elsewhere were eager to follow Florida's example of intrusive, big-government conservatism. Take Utah, for example.
Utah has spent more than $30,000 to screen welfare applicants for drug use since a new law went into effect a year ago, but only 12 people have tested positive, state figures show.
The preliminary data from August 2012 through July 2013 indicates the state spent almost $6,000 to give 4,730 applicants a written test. After 466 showed a likelihood of drug use, they were given drug tests at a total cost of more than $25,000, according to the Utah Department of Workforce Services, which administers welfare benefits and the tests.
I can certainly understand the reason for all of these efforts. For some, there's an insatiable desire to punish and shame the poor, working from the assumption that if someone is struggling during weak economic times, it's their own fault. But the idea is nevertheless ridiculous. Especially in light of the facts. And yet, at least 29 other states this year have considered similar proposals.