Contractor drug testing and underaged drinking: Where's the link?

This past Monday the Missouri Senate passed Senate Bill 402, a bill identified on the official Senate Web site as: "SB 402 -- Creates and modifies provisions relating to underage drinking."

It sounds like a good idea, but it is much more. And in it are many troublesome surprises.

In one of these surprises, President Pro Tem Michael Gibbons, R-Kirkwood, stealthily has taken direct aim at the construction industry throughout Missouri. The specific section that should chill construction contractors and property owners near any school is Section 160.782.

The official Senate Web site states: "SECTION 160.782 -- REQUIRES DRUG TESTING FOR CONTRACTOR AND EMPLOYEES WORKING AT OR NEAR A SCHOOL 1. Any person who provides construction services under contract within two thousand feet of a public or private elementary or secondary school, public vocational school, or public or private junior college, college, or university or any land grant university shall submit to a chemical test for the purpose of determining the drug content of that person's blood prior to working in such area. The provision of this subsection shall not apply to any person who has submitted to a chemical test for the employer within six months of commencement of the construction and the results of such test were negative."

What does all this have to do with underage drinking? Absolutely nothing.

This section goes on to say who can give what type of test, what is considered a positive or negative test and even what an employer must do if an employee fails a test;.

But what it does not say is extraordinary. SB 402 does not say who to submit to for the test, who is responsible for ordering or enforcing the results of these tests or regulating the test costs or who pays for all these tests.

Just exactly how are contractors going to know if a project is 1,997 or 2,001 feet from a school?

Will bold red circles be drawn on the ground at the 2,000-foot mark? Will the 2,000-foot distance be measured by a string-straight line or over the surface of the bumpy ground?

Will a property owner be responsible for drug testing every plumber, builder, painter, roofer, gutter man, city water department employee, telephone lineman, gas company pipe layer and cable TV man works on his property?

Does a self-contractor/property owner have to have a drug test performed on himself before construction begins?

If a building contractor is responsible for all these drug tests, every construction project's costs are going to increase significantly because of lost man-hours and test prices.

How many construction delays will be caused by missed or expired tests?

Why are construction workers being assumed guilty of drug usage until they pay to prove themselves innocent?

What about the subcontractors for all these contractors? What if the subcontractors lie about employee test results?

What a complete red-tape boondoggle this section will become if passed.

Contractors and property owners have a way to stop this. SB 402 and Section 160.782 still has to get through the Crime Prevention and Public Safety Committee and to pass the full House of Representatives. Every property owner within one-third mile of a school and every construction contractor should contact their state representatives about the removal of this section. They should contact the governor's office to urge the outright defeat of this bill if it passes the House as it is now.

Should Section 160.782 become law, yet another expensive bureaucratic red-tape machine will be imbedded in our businesses. The best opportunity to kill this red-tape monster is to stop it before it starts.

To view all the specifics on this bill go to: http://www.senate.mo.gov/05info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=18446

John Mitchell of Jackson is a the owner of a painting business.