posted on October 18, 2011 07:02:41 AM new
Hooray for Florida! !
I-95 North will be jammed for the next month or so........
Druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida..
Florida is the first state - Hooray for Florida!!!!
Florida is the first state requiring drug testing to receive welfare! In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.
Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving funds for three years!
Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.
How is this unconstitutional ?
It's completely legal that every other worker must pass drug tests in order to get a J-O-B which supports those on welfare!
Forward if you agree!!
Let's get Welfare back to the ones who NEED it, not those who WON'T get a JOB.....
I AGREE!!!! 100%. "
posted on October 18, 2011 09:17:37 AM new
Add to that, the Florida Drug Registery is FINALLY on line so traffic on 95 and 75 South (Oxy hwys) will be greatly reduced.
With the Registry in place, the drug dealers from the northern states will no longer want to go to south FL for their pill mill adventures.
Of course the down side is all the lost revenue. Local businesses such as liquor stores, strip clubs, waffle houses and flea bag motels will suffer greatly from this loss of "tourism".
The homeless and illegal immigrant population will suffer as well since they will no longer have their out of town visitors offer to chauffer them around for $20 a script to sit in 10 different pain clinics a day.
posted on October 18, 2011 11:04:31 AM new
I live in Florida and love all these new laws. Now I would love to see them arrest all the Doctors that wrote all those prescriptions. They were the ones getting all these people hooked on drugs and writing anyone with the cash for an office call a prescription to get them.
Those pills that they use to get for a couple of dollars each are now $35.00 and up apiece so everyone living here needs to be ready to protect themselves and their property. A lot of these drug addicts will need money to buy drugs or to leave here and will do whatever it takes to get it.
posted on October 18, 2011 01:16:26 PM new
Next thing I'd like to see: No using food stamps for junk food. People eat poorly then get free medical care at emergency rooms and taxpayers ultimately pay for the care.
posted on October 18, 2011 02:56:16 PM new
No junk food? How about no red meat and no dairy or products with sugar? Also no pork hell why let those poor people eat anything at all???????? Then all you will have to do is bury them.
What a world we live in. There is a big diference between drug addicts and people that just need help with food to eat. Just because we help them I don't think we should tell them what to eat this is still the United States not China.
posted on October 18, 2011 03:18:46 PM new
I've seen women lined up to pay with food stamps in Walmart. They have tattoos all over them along with rings in every available space in their ears, nose, tongue, etc.
If they can afford such a "luxury" why can't they buy their own food?
posted on October 20, 2011 06:31:33 PM new
I'm not sold that this will do much to curb illicit welfare abuse. In fact, I have a feeling this program won't last more than a few years. Why? Costs. I don't believe there are enough people doing drugs who are also on government assistance. This leaves Florida with the burden of paying the bill to cover drug testing if they pass. I may be wrong, but I foresee some serious problems this will create. There have been plenty of cases of false positives as well. Is someone who ate a poppyseed bagel, muffin, or salad dressing going to be disqualified? Do they get to dispute the results and retest at the states cost? Not to mention the legal costs involved in defending this new law.
All of these things are going to increase costs... and as we know, there is nothing more a Republican hates than having costs get in the way of doing things.
[ edited by shagmidmod on Oct 20, 2011 06:32 PM ]
posted on October 21, 2011 02:50:58 AM new
Now if they could just come up with a lazy meter and quit giving out money to people that are to lazy to work. I have noticed in my neighborhood all the people that ran out of unemployment have found jobs. None could find jobs when they were recieving unemployment checks for 2 years.
"there is nothing more a Republican hates than having costs get in the way of doing things."
Thats funny my thoughts were nothing more a liberal loves than giving away our tax dollars to drug addicts and people to lazy to work.
posted on October 21, 2011 09:40:24 AM new
Every single time we see a program fail, it is because the funding is reduced which is the tactic used by Republicans. They will remove the funds, and then blame the program for not succeeding.
Case in point: The Post Office. The only reason why the Post Office is in distress is because of the $5 billion dollars they have to pay each year to compensate for the pension plan 75 years in the future. Why is this??? Because the Republicans under GW passed a bill to remove funding for the Post Office and direct that money towards such an asinine tactic to kill off the Post Office.
If you are a seller on eBay or Amazon, you know exactly how that will affect your ability to sell. Fed Ex & UPS will increase prices, they won't serve many rural customers, and your whole business will be turned upside down. Do you think Fed Ex or UPS is going to mail a letter for less than 50 cents??? Exactly.
This is the Republican tactic to shift money from a great public service that has benefited EVERYONE away to supporting corporate businesses.
Another example: No Child Left Behind. An unfunded mandate by George Bush. Create a program, but provide no funding to implement it so that the public school system is burdened by added expenses without any added revenue. Then the Republicans can blame the Department of Education for failing our kids.
I am all for keeping deadbeats off the nipple of government programs. I am from Florida, a Florida State University graduate, and my family lives just outside of Jacksonville.
I can very easily point to six Floridians who are fully capable of working, but are too lazy, and/or take money under the table without paying taxes. The most amusing thing... THEY ARE ALL REPUBLICANS WHO HATE OBAMA.
Of the 6 people I know who are on government subsidies, 1 is a drug addict. So, the citizens of Florida are going to pay for drug testing for 5 people who are clean in order to kick off 1. That isn't a solution. It means the program is only 17% effective because ALL of them should be kicked off.
The reality is that this is a smoke and mirrors program by Republicans to give the illusion of doing something to kick people off government assistance.
The REAL solution is to add more funding to these programs to cover the cost of enforcement. Actual REAL inspectors going out and enforcing the law. Investigating people for fraud. This costs money and Republicans won't pay it.
[ edited by shagmidmod on Oct 21, 2011 09:46 AM ]
posted on October 21, 2011 01:56:33 PM new
"The REAL solution is to add more funding to these programs to cover the cost of enforcement."
So the answer is hire more Goverment workers with money we don't have? I believe that is what we have been doing for the last 3 years. IT DOES NOT WORK.
In my opinion a 17% cut is not a bad place to start but I think in my area of Florida it is more like 40%.
posted on October 21, 2011 02:26:48 PM new
"with money we don't have"
Exactly my point. It isn't about a solution, it is about the illusion and is exactly why this program will fail. Republicans want to pretend they are doing things, but don't want to cough up the money to do it. They get people like toolshed who complain about taxes when taxes are the lowest in decades. They want money to be sprinkled like fairy dust from the sky and everything will be perfect.
Get it straight folks... you can't expect the government to enforce regulations without money. Border patrol = spending money. Enforcing abuse = spending money. Building roads = spending money.
I often wonder if the same people who complain here about not being able to afford to pay for enforcement tell their ebay customers that they can't afford to buy packing peanuts to ship their item in.
posted on October 22, 2011 02:06:22 AM new
My fault, should have put this on RT. Too bad there is always someone who has to ruin a good discussion with negativity. Hang in there toolhound.
posted on October 22, 2011 08:55:50 AM new
neil- i didn't realize this was a one sided conversation among like minded people who high five and pat each other on the back.
i'm not sure where the "negativity" is in this. since when is having a different opinion negative? i didn't realize we lived in the USSR.
btw... i am the only one who even referred to ebay in this thread, so yes, it probably belongs in the RT. I suppose that is negative as well considering it came from me too.
[ edited by shagmidmod on Oct 22, 2011 08:57 AM ]
posted on October 22, 2011 11:04:55 AM new
“You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy into poverty. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." Dr. Adrian Rogers
posted on October 22, 2011 12:12:07 PM new
Well this used to be a great board but this thread has finally convinced me that this is not the place for me. This is my last post. Good bye! -----o----o----o----o----o----o----o----o
“The illiterate of the future will be the person ignorant of the use of the camera as well as of the pen.”
Maholy-Nagy, Vision in Motion, 1947
posted on October 22, 2011 03:44:26 PM new
"I believe slavery is a much maligned institution; if we had slavery today, we would not have this welfare mess."
Dr Adrian Rogers
ggardenour - Is your point that you agree with the words of this guy??? Seriously?
posted on October 22, 2011 04:18:34 PM new
SHAGEDMIND WROTE-"They get people like toolshed who complain about taxes when taxes are the lowest in decades."
Where or when did I ever complain about taxes??
Socialism works fine as long as there is Capitalism to pay for it, but sooner or later, Socialism runs out of other people's money.
posted on October 22, 2011 05:47:15 PM new
toolhound - Where did I mention socialism, support socialism or any other economic philosophy in this topic? Where does socialism even come into the picture here?
If anything, I took a much more conservative stance on this issue than anyone here. I don't think the bill that was passed by Republicans will be effective, and I don't see Republicans sticking with it beyond a year or two once it costs the state of Florida real money. There are plenty of ways to be effective and creating a new Republican way to spend MORE money isn't one of them. It is nothing but smoke and mirrors to pretend in the public eye that something is being done. Both parties do this OFTEN.
There are laws already on the books to prevent fraud. Start putting the money into enforcement instead of creating another way to spend more money. It is as simple as that.
Democrats often push for these programs and often allocate most of the funding to provide direct support. They create a structure, but the funding falls short to enforce it once it is in place. Republicans just remove funding for programs and then point fingers at it and say the program fails in order to kill it. Neither are serving the public interest.
I am unsure why socialism here is under attack when nobody has even mentioned or eluded to socialism. Its as if the moment someone disagrees with you there is a little button that is pushed that makes you attack socialism.
The US military is a socialistic program and nobody seems to care about that. What is capitalistic about the US military? It most definitely isn't politically democratic either. Free healthcare, free housing, a pay structure that allocates more money to people who have dependents even if they have the same rank, free higher education, VA loans, etc. Would it be effective otherwise? Absolutely not. So, why are people bashing socialism when it works just fine in the US military?
posted on October 23, 2011 04:52:25 AM new
Want a check? Here’s a cup, filler’ up!
Slavery...? Really Shaggy?
Just because I agree with SOMETHING somebody says doesn't mean I agree with EVERYTHING they say. People say the smartest things, then turn around and say something really stupid, kind a like some of the posts in this thread, myself included lol.
"Free healthcare, free housing, a pay structure that allocates more money to people who have dependents, free higher education".. Shame on you Shag you make the military sound like some sort of welfare program. Folks in the military have to actually get up and go to WORK and perhaps DIE to earn these “Free” things AND they have to pass a drug test, so it's not too much to ask a deadbeat who contributes nothing to society, that’s on welfare, using food stamps, living in free housing with free healthcare to do the same.
I am a foster dad and the biggest reason kids are removed is because of drugs and 99.9% of the parents are on the dole. I was shocked to find out that being on welfare is a career choice. There is a subculture in this country that “works” to see how much money they can get from the government so they can stay home, party and have more kids that they can’t or won’t take care because more kids equals more money. All the while the rest of us go to work to pay for it all. Who’s the dummy now?
I’m all for giving a person a hand up as long as they don’t try to pull me down with them. There is a huge difference between a hand up and a hand out.
posted on October 23, 2011 06:17:08 AM new
Sounds good but will it work?
From CNN news,
Shortly after the bill was signed, five Democrats from the state's congressional delegation issued a joint statement attacking the legislation, one calling it "downright unconstitutional."
"Governor Scott's new drug testing law is not only an affront to families in need and detrimental to our nation's ongoing economic recovery, it is downright unconstitutional," said Rep. Alcee Hastings. "If Governor Scott wants to drug test recipients of TANF benefits, where does he draw the line? Are families receiving Medicaid, state emergency relief, or educational grants and loans next?"
Rep. Corrine Brown said the tests "represent an extreme and illegal invasion of personal privacy."
"Indeed, investigating people when there is probable cause to suspect they are abusing drugs is one thing," Brown said in the joint statement. "But these tests amount to strip searching our state's most vulnerable residents merely because they rely on the government for financial support during these difficult economic times."
Joining in the statement denouncing the measure were Democratic Reps. Kathy Castor, Ted Deutch and Frederica Wilson.
Controversy over the measure was heightened by Scott's past association with a company he co-founded that operates walk-in urgent care clinics in Florida and counts drug screening among the services it provides.
posted on October 23, 2011 07:32:51 AM new
Being on welfare is not mandatory so how can drug testing be unconstitional? Don't want to be tested then don't sign up for welfare simple enough.
posted on October 23, 2011 07:32:56 AM new "Controversy over the measure was heightened by Scott's past association with a company he co-founded that operates walk-in urgent care clinics in Florida and counts drug screening among the services it provides."
First, Scott tried to clear this obvious conflict of interest by claiming that his controlling shares were transferred to a trust in his wife's name.
Recently, Scott sold those Solantic shares with a value of $64 million.
posted on October 23, 2011 08:31:17 AM new
Suppose the client is just a hard working guy or gal like the rest of us. They were laid off from jobs they have had for many years. months maybe a few years of job searching have produced some minimum wage pt work, then nothing. Savings are gone, the house is in the rears,taxes are unpaid, light bill is way overdue, car is about to be repo'ed, they have sold most belonging that have value.
They go to ask for assistance to get food for themselves and their children and these hard working good people who may have had a few to many drinks on occasion and might taken a drag off a joint. Are asked to pee in a bottle before they can get money to eat.
Floridians should be ashamed..
posted on October 23, 2011 09:14:21 AM new
alldings/helen- thanks for posting that. i thought about the Solantic "conflict of interest" story i had read and wanted to post that, but i was away for the evening.
Florida Republicans pulled a fast one over many Floridians. This program is meant to look like enforcement, but this really isn't enforcement. It is a transfer of wealth- instead of a few hundred dollars going to an individual on welfare, it is several million dollars going to a corporation.
As I said before, it is a means for Republicans to spend money when people like toolhound says there isn't money to spend.
deur1 has it right about making illegal activity illegal. Just start enforcing the laws that are already on the books and quit creating new programs to spend money.
As for the Democrats argument on invasion of privacy, I suppose that argument will be decided in the courts. I don't agree with that argument however, Republicans may have opened a can of worms they didn't intend to do. You have plenty of people arguing in favor of this, referencing drug testing in the work force. The problem with this argument is that 1) drug testing isn't paid for by the applicant even if they fail. 2) companies are required to provide therapy if an employee is caught. Is the State going to provide such care? How much will that cost???
Ggardenour- You missed my point COMPLETELY about our military. I was defending the US military system, though it is a socialistic program. I clearly said that the military wouldn't work in any other way. I never said they were deadbeats, I never said they were on welfare, or anything else you claim. I merely stated that the US Military is operated as a Socialistic program. We the tax payers pay for the US Military and 99% of Americans have absolutely NO problem doing so. I personally think our military deserve more and that could easily be paid for by eliminating the independent contractors who get paid $100,000+ a year for doing the same work our military personnel does for a fraction of that.
[ edited by shagmidmod on Oct 23, 2011 09:18 AM ]
