SD Lawmakers encourage welfare drug tests

[OntarioVanMan]

Associated Press Rapid City Journal | Posted: Tuesday, February 1, 2011 11:54 am

PIERRE -- A South Dakota House panel has rejected a measure that would have required officials in three state agencies to give drug tests to people getting help from a wide range of welfare programs.

However, the Health and Human Services Committee approved a second measure that gives state officials the discretion to conduct random drug screening of people who get cash payments from the welfare program known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

Supporters of the measures say drug testing is needed because some people on welfare are using illegal drugs.

But state Social Services Secretary Kim Malsam-Rysdon says welfare recipients are no more likely to use drugs than anyone else in society. She says evidence of illegal drug use should be given to law officers, not welfare officials.

 

[Turtle]

This is becoming a popular trend among state legislators. At least 8 states that I know of have the same kinds of legislation under consideration. State budgets are certainly a major factor here, as more and more people are entering the welfare rolls, but taxpayers have long been against financing drugs with welfare money. Besides, if one of the goals of welfare is to get people off welfare and get them jobs, well, if you can't pass a drug test you can't get a job. Duh.

One silly comment came from the ever-popular Civil Liberties Union, where they said something along the lines of, "This is wrong. You don't cut costs at the expense of the the segment of the population who are the most vulnerable and the least able to defend themselves."

The comment that tops that one came just the other day from a Missouri legislator when commenting about one of their bills that would remove the welfare benefits from the parents who are on drugs, but not remove the benefits of their children, where the money would go to a third party who would administer it for the children. Representative Kiki Curls, D-Kansas City, said taking away parents’ welfare benefits would still hurt children because, "There would be less money available for general household expenses such as rent. Children will suffer even if only the parent’s benefits are eliminated.” I guess she figures that rent money would never, ever be spent on drugs. <snort>