Conservatives in Michigan gave drug tests to welfare recipients. None of them failed.

[Mainecat]

Lets test the politicians......

 

6/22/16 5:31 PM

Conservatives in Michigan gave drug tests to welfare recipients. None of them failed.

By Rob Wile

 

Getty Images

 

 

Zero.

That’s how many people in the Michigan’s Family Independence welfare program—out of 303 total test recipients—tested positive for drugs, as part of a pilot program to test subsidies recipients for substance abuse, the Guardian reports.

The Family Independence Program is Michigan’s state welfare program. It provides temporary cash assistance to families with children and pregnant women to help them pay for living expenses like food, rent and utilities. As of 2013 it was providing assistance to 122,495 state residents, including more than 87,000 children.

 

But Republicans in the state legislature felt that these benefits should only be given to drug-free residents. So in December 2014, the state passed (and Governor Rick Snyder signed) a bill authorizing a pilot program to screen welfare applicants for evidence of drug use.

The results from Michigan’s test mirror similar results in states that have tried to drug test state welfare recipients, like Tennessee, Missouri, and Mississippi, each of which found extremely low levels of drug use.

Drug testing for welfare recipients has proven ineffective again and again. And yet, the practice is getting more popular. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), as of March 28, 2016, at least 17 states had proposals in 2016 to address substance abuse and drug testing in welfare programs.

The latest state to screen welfare recipients for drugs was West Virginia, which in March created a three-year pilot program. If a caseworker has reason to believe the applicant is abusing drugs, a drug test will be ordered, according to an NCSL summary of the program. Applicants who test positive and attend substance abuse treatment, counseling, a job skills program can continue to receive benefits, although if they’re a parent they will be investigated by child protective services. Applicants who refuse the drug screen or test are ineligible automatically become ineligible to receive subsidies.

 

One Congresswoman, Wisconsin’s Gwen Moore, has taken a stand against drug testing welfare recipients, a practice her spokesperson called “blatantly unacceptable” and “offensive.” She recently introduced the “Top 1 percent Accountability Act,” which would require drug testing for all U.S. tax filers claiming itemized deductions of over $150,000 in a given year. In other words, if poor people should have to be drug tested before receiving government benefits, so should rich people who receive tax subsidies.

“Republicans across the country continue to implement discriminatory policies that criminalize the less fortunate and perpetuate false narratives about the most vulnerable among us,” Moore said in a statement.

Michigan’s pilot program ends on September 30. Governor Snyder is refusing to comment on its results until then.

 

http://fusion.net/story/317695/michigan-drug-testing-welfare-recipients/

[Capt.Storm]

well maybe its working.

[Mainecat]

1 hour ago, Capt.Storm said:

well maybe its working.

well maybe I am a black woman

[Capt.Storm]

Just now, Mainecat said:

well maybe I am a black woman

Watch out for the cops then

[Capt.Storm]

Hey MC,

Are you pissed that people on food stamps can buy lobster?

[racer254]

How many times do we need to explain to mc why this happens.

FFS the liberals on this board are dense.

The ones using drugs DON'T SHOW UP FOR THE TEST.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/10/north-carolina-drug-testing-welfare-applicants/

Edited June 24, 2016 by racer254

[Capt.Storm]

8 minutes ago, racer254 said:

How many times do we need to explain to mc why this happens.

FFS the liberals on this board are dense.

The ones using drugs DON'T SHOW UP FOR THE TEST.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/10/north-carolina-drug-testing-welfare-applicants/

It's all about how you report things eh?

Good post btw.

[SnowRider]

11 minutes ago, racer254 said:

How many times do we need to explain to mc why this happens.

FFS the liberals on this board are dense.

The ones using drugs DON'T SHOW UP FOR THE TEST.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/10/north-carolina-drug-testing-welfare-applicants/

 Then why are we wasting money and resources on drug testing them?  

Another example of the R's demonizing those who have very little while being big pussies and afraid to speak truth to power.  R's are pussies  

[racer254]

^^^SMH^^^ 

State officials report that of the 89 applicants given the drug test, 21 of them tested positive. An additional 70 applicants who were told to take the test never showed up for their appointment and consequently never got benefits.

Read the article and enlighten yourself.

Edited June 24, 2016 by racer254

[Mainecat]

1 hour ago, Capt.Storm said:

Hey MC,

Are you pissed that people on food stamps can buy lobster?

No. I really dont care what they buy. If they want to spend it all on lobster thats fine with me.

[Rod]

Was it mandatory?

[Rod]

1 minute ago, racer254 said:

^^^SMH^^^ 

State officials report that of the 89 applicants given the drug test, 21 of them tested positive. An additional 70 applicants who were told to take the test never showed up for their appointment and consequently never got benefits.

Read the article and enlighten yourself.

Lmao jarred

[Mainecat]

1 hour ago, racer254 said:

How many times do we need to explain to mc why this happens.

FFS the liberals on this board are dense.

The ones using drugs DON'T SHOW UP FOR THE TEST.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/10/north-carolina-drug-testing-welfare-applicants/

How about the other states Einstein? It does not work in MANY states. A total waste of tax payer money

[snopro31]

they do it here and there will 100% be guaranteed failures. 

[SnowRider]

7 minutes ago, racer254 said:

^^^SMH^^^ 

State officials report that of the 89 applicants given the drug test, 21 of them tested positive. An additional 70 applicants who were told to take the test never showed up for their appointment and consequently never got benefits.

Read the article and enlighten yourself.

Breitbart is not a news source.  It's propaganda for the uninformed.  

[Rod]

3 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

How about the other states Einstein? It does not work in MANY states. A total waste of tax payer money

Looks like by your article the majority were potentially on drugs.

 

 

[racer254]

3 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

How about the other states Einstein? It does not work in MANY states. A total waste of tax payer money

The article you posted was disingenuous as usual.

 

[racer254]

1 minute ago, SnowRider said:

Breitbart is not a news source.  It's propaganda for the uninformed.  

Then it should be easy to prove that article wrong.   Do it.

[Rigid1]

I'd be interested to know the age of the people tested in the article.

[Rod]

3 minutes ago, racer254 said:

Then it should be easy to prove that article wrong.   Do it.

Prepare yourself for a big non answer.

[Cold War]

This shit again...........lol

13 minutes ago, racer254 said:

^^^SMH^^^ 

State officials report that of the 89 applicants given the drug test, 21 of them tested positive. An additional 70 applicants who were told to take the test never showed up for their appointment and consequently never got benefits.

Read the article and enlighten yourself.

Isn't the average of Americans who admit to using some drug in the last month like 20 some percent?

Only those employed use drugs..............

How funny that anyone would believe that 0% of welfare cases use drugs.

[SnowRider]

 Why do conservatives insist on bigger government and investing in programs that do not yield a return?  

Welfare drug-testing yields 2% positive results

CATHERINE WHITTENBURG  The Tampa Tribune

TALLAHASSEE - Since the state began testing welfare applicants for drugs in July, about 2 percent have tested positive, preliminary data shows. Ninety-six percent proved to be drug free -- leaving the state on the hook to reimburse the cost of their tests. The initiative may save the state a few dollars anyway, bearing out one of Gov. Rick Scott's arguments for implementing it. But the low test fail-rate undercuts another of his arguments: that people on welfare are more likely to use drugs. At Scott's urging, the Legislature implemented the new requirement earlier this year that applicants for temporary cash assistance pass a drug test before collecting any benefits. The law, which took effect July 1, requires applicants to pay for their own drug tests. Those who test drug-free are reimbursed by the state, and those who fail cannot receive benefits for a year.Having begun the drug testing in mid-July, the state Department of Children and Families is still tabulating the results. But at least 1,000 welfare applicants took the drug tests through mid-August, according to the department, which expects at least 1,500 applicants to take the tests monthly. So far, they say, about 2 percent of applicants are failing the test; another 2 percent are not completing the application process, for reasons unspecified. Cost of the tests averages about $30. Assuming that 1,000 to 1,500 applicants take the test every month, the state will owe about $28,800-$43,200 monthly in reimbursements to those who test drug-free. That compares with roughly $32,200-$48,200 the state may save on one month's worth of rejected applicants. The savings assume that 20 to 30 people -- 2 percent of 1,000 to 1,500 tested -- fail the drug test every month. On average, a welfare recipient costs the state $134 in monthly benefits, which the rejected applicants won't get, saving the state $2,680-$3,350 per month. But since one failed test disqualifies an applicant for a full year's worth of benefits, the state could save $32,200-$48,200 annually on the applicants rejected in a single month. Net savings to the state -- $3,400 to $8,200 annually on one month's worth of rejected applicants. Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800-$98,400 for the cash assistance program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year. Actual savings will vary, however, since not all of the applicants denied benefits might have actually collected them for the full year. Under certain circumstances, applicants who failed their drug test can reapply for benefits after six months. The as-yet uncalculated cost of staff hours and other resources that DCF has had to spend on implementing the program may wipe out most or all of the apparent savings, said Derek Newton, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. The program will grow costlier yet, he said, if it draws a legal challenge. The ACLU has been threatening for months that it may challenge the constitutionality of the program; Tuesday, Newton said his group is still weighing a lawsuit. DCF spokesman Joe Follick said that families and accountability are the main focuses of the program. "The taxpayers deserve to know that the money they are spending is being used for its intended purpose," he said. "In this case, with [temporary cash assistance], the purpose is to help families become independent and self-sufficient. If a family receiving [cash assistance] includes someone who has a substance abuse problem, the odds of that money being used for purposes other than helping that family increases." More than once, Scott has said publicly that people on welfare use drugs at a higher rate than the general population. The 2 percent test fail rate seen by DCF, however, does not bear that out. According to the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, performed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services, 8.7 percent of the population nationally over age 12 uses illicit drugs. The rate was 6.3 percent for those ages 26 and up. A 2008 study by the Office of National Drug Control Policy also showed that 8.13 percent of Floridians age 12 and up use illegal drugs. Newton said that's proof the drug-testing program is based on a stereotype, not hard facts. "This is just punishing people for being poor, which is one of our main points," he said. "We're not testing the population at-large that receives government money; we're not testing people on scholarships, or state contractors. So why these people? It's obvious-- because they're poor."Scott's office did not respond to a request for comment.

[Rigid1]

I would also like to see Nicotine be something tested for. If you can't buy food but have money for cig's well that's just fucked up. Also they probably won't have money to pay for their future health problems down the road caused by smoking. I guess we can pick up those costs too.

[Mainecat]

1 hour ago, racer254 said:

The article you posted was disingenuous as usual.

 

Shall I post the 5 others from different media sources and states?

[SnowRider]

 Looks,like the R's are getting a great return on their small government policies..  

 

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application.

Opponents of the new rules say that they single out poor people for drug testing over other recipients of federal benefits — such as veterans, college students getting low interest loans or farmers with crop subsidies.

“You are requiring more than 16,000 people to be screened for drug use based on the assumption that people who receive public assistance are more likely to use illegal drugs,” said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee. “There’s no evidence to indicate that’s true.