Editorial

Welfare and drugs

Friday, February 5, 2010

Many taxpaying Missourians will applaud current legislative efforts to restrict or cut off welfare payments to recipients who use illegal drugs. Why, they ask, should taxpayers foot the bill for addictions?

The simple answer: They shouldn't.

But the issue is more complex than requiring drug tests for the more than 40,000 Missouri families who receive payments from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.

For example, what about the children or other dependents of a welfare-recipient head of the household who tests positive for illegal drug use? Should everyone be cut off?

Should those who test positive for drugs be cut off permanently, or just for a limited amount of time?

Who would monitor the testing and enforce whatever regulations the Missouri Legislature might impose? And are legislators who favor drug testing for welfare recipients willing to fund the cost of enforcement when cuts are being made throughout state government?

These questions need not put a halt to the effort to regulate welfare recipients and drug use, but they will need to be addressed before any meaningful piece of legislation is passed and sent to the governor for a signature.

This proposal needs careful deliberation.

Comments

View 8 comments or respond

Community discussion is important, and we encourage you to participate as a reader and commenter. Click here to see our Guidelines. We also encourage registered users to let us know if they see something inappropriate on our site. You can do that by clicking "Report Comment" below. Our goal is to create a place for robust and civil discourse about our community, state and nation.

I believe that if a parent tests positive for illegal drug use that social services could step up to the plate and protect the children. These children need to be removed from this environment anyway.

-- Posted by ithenana on Fri, Feb 5, 2010, at 6:04 AM
This proposal is one of those we see every election year, a gimmick for electioneering. It won't pass, and those proposing it know it. First of all, lawmakers should be tested before anyone else, if history is any lesson.

-- Posted by Wilbur Right on Fri, Feb 5, 2010, at 9:19 AM
Other taxpayer funded projects that should require drug tests:

*Getting a Pell Grant.

*Using a public park.

*Using public roads and stoplights.

*Using the public library.

*Taking a Cape Air subsidized flight.

*Being protected by the U.S. military.

*Getting Medicaid or Medicare.

*Attending Public School.

*Having access to the police or fire departments.

Taxpayer money is taxpayer money, right?

Legislation like this may give people the warm and fuzzies, but I seriously doubt most have really thought it through to its logical conclusion.

-- Posted by SteveM on Fri, Feb 5, 2010, at 9:22 AM
Very well stated, one4kids.

-- Posted by SteveM on Fri, Feb 5, 2010, at 10:50 AM
Then people will just complain about how much drug testing costs.

-- Posted by FriendO on Fri, Feb 5, 2010, at 11:14 AM
one4,

There is no such thing as a "fiscal conservative".

-- Posted by Lumpy on Sat, Feb 6, 2010, at 7:13 AM
I have to take a drug test in order to earn the paycheck they tax. The recipients of my tax dollars ought to ALSO have to pass a drug test to be on the receiving end of my tax dollars.

That includes congressmen and senators, teachers, as well as ALL other government employees with salaries paid by taxpayers. If you can't pass a drug test you shouldn't be collecting any money from the government.

-- Posted by dixietrucker on Sat, Feb 6, 2010, at 8:49 AM
There are so many other ways to reduce government waste and fraud. This is just another thing that will be underfunded and the lack of manpower will be blamed for the COMPLETE FAILURE.

-- Posted by Turnip on Sun, Feb 7, 2010, at 10:37 AM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires a subscription.

More to explore