Poll Detail
|
Should people who apply for public assistance be tested for drugs?
Yes
91%
No
9%
|
Member Comments
View Comments: | 1-25 |26-49 | Post a comment
| farbehind | |
|---|---|
|
09-29-08 11:05 AM
|
critter:are you a drug dealer?or just an avid user. you seem to be as bright as a two watt light bulb.I know I want to see my tax dollars go to the needy not some scum bag drug addict who doesnt have enough morals to support themselves.what you seem to be telling us is that drugs are a great thing and its okay to be on public assistance and use the money to buy drugs. you should lay off the crack pipe!!!
|
| vilibro | |
|
09-06-08 9:34 PM
|
cigarettes!!!!! villid
|
| OldJoe | |
|
09-06-08 7:39 PM
|
Well, let me crank up the old time machine and we can go back and fix that mistake. Wait, the time machine is broken. Guess we will have to live with the laws we have. You can’t just say we won’t do something because it’s a mistake. How long before someone says your birth was a mistake and no one pays attention to you anymore? Or has that happened already?
|
| Critter | |
|
09-06-08 8:59 AM
|
OLDJOE The criminalization of substance abuse was a huge mistake that has cost our state and our nation billions of dollars and millions of hours of law enforcement time for no practical purpose. Like all prohibitions, it has resulted in widesrpead corruption and criminal activity. The last thing we need to do is to add more dollars and manpower to this ill-conceived campaign by testing public assistance clients for drug use. Willy Nelson's got it right.
|
| OldJoe | |
|
09-05-08 9:57 PM
|
Illegal drugs are… ILLEGAL. Why don’t you claim that radar guns are a violation of your civil rights too, or cameras, or eyeballs. I find it hard to believe how many of you are supporting illegal drug use. Next you will be supporting illegal immigration. If one low cost drug test prevents thousands of tax dollars being wasted, that sounds good to me. Just a statement at the door that there is a drug test before qualification will save countless hours of work and money.
|
| salgovernale | |
|
09-05-08 7:55 PM
|
If welfare recipients are tested for drugs, they should be tested for alcohol and cigaretes too. I feel its their decision if they want to do drugs or not. but if you are not going to let them collect if they use drugs, then they shouldnt be allowed to collect if they, have cable tv, the internet, smoke cigarettes, or drink alcohol ect..
|
| Critter | |
|
09-05-08 1:28 PM
|
It is clear that subjecting the clients of public assistance programs to a drug test doesn't make any fiscal sense, nor will it be of any benefit to the public or the clients since it doesn't lead to any rehabilitaion programs or remove abusers from public safety occupations (police, firemen, bus drivers), so why is a drug-test program being proposed? Who does stand to benefit? Would it pay to follow the money for such a costly boondoggle?
|
| pattyob | |
|
09-05-08 10:49 AM
|
I'm 70 years young,with a disability. I don't do drugs,smoke,or use alcohol,and should I ever need assistance,drug testing is a violation of my civil rights!!
|
| raiderxz | |
|
09-05-08 10:31 AM
|
What next to waste more state money, start drug testing prisoners before they go to prison?
|
| raiderxz | |
|
09-05-08 10:26 AM
|
BIG WASTE OF MORE STATE MONEY. How dumb are people in the Gloversville area to think a drug tests for any reason would work (poll over 90%, you got to be kidding me)? ANY (urine, hair, skin swipe) drug test can easily be beaten in multiple ways. And drug users know how to beat the test because they most likely have had tests in the past for work, probation, etc. I know the probation drug test does not work, I knew people that beat the test every time they went into probation and were drug tested, it is a big joke to call it a drug test because a urine test is not very accurate and can even show a false positive for someone who does not even use drugs.
|
| bubbasdad | |
|
09-05-08 6:54 AM
|
They ned to put a limit on how long they can recieve theese benefits.
|
| OldJoe | |
|
09-05-08 6:18 AM
|
Is that the text that also says -let every man be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger?
|
| Critter | |
|
09-04-08 7:21 PM
|
JPL I don't know what text lists our God-given rights, but there is a text that lists our God-given duties. As I recall, it encourages us to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, visit those in prison, and bury the dead. It also suggests we don't be so judgemental of our neighbors. Good advice, hard to follow.
|
| LoyalSocialist | |
|
09-04-08 2:00 PM
|
The things that you just spoke about jpl, are already in place, other than the testing. Most unemployed P.A. recipients have to work 20-30 hours a week in different "work sites". This is called the "work for welfare" program started a few years ago. They also have 5 years to be considered TANF and then after they are considered a "safety net family", which means the children will be the only ones who can receive certain benefits. Suprisingly enough, Fulton County has really high participation rates in WTW compared to other counties in the state.
|
| jpl319us | |
|
09-04-08 1:54 PM
|
Yes they should be tested. Most job applicants have to be drug tested and many jobs require random testing. I also believe that people on public assistance should be required to due mandatory community service or work at some county job for a minimum of 30 hours. If they do't do that, then the amount they get should be reduced accordingly. I don't work, I don't get paid. So it should apply to them. Public assistance is NOT a god-given right. Nor was it intended to be passed from one generation to another, as it is done here in Fulton County. It should have a time limit on it, and once it 's over, it's over. All those of you complaining about how unfair this would be stop and think: so many of them collecting are makes our taxes go higher. And right now they give no return whatsoever on the investment the rest of us have made in them.
|
| Garydellabate | |
|
09-04-08 11:33 AM
|
I work 70 hrs a week. I pay taxes, and if someone wants to collect assistance and buy drugs with my money then good for them. They are only allowed a certin amount of noney. Per week/month, so let them use it for what they want. If they choose drugs over food so be it. They are not given endless funds to splurge. Mind your own buisness yes votes.
|
| Critter | |
|
09-04-08 8:44 AM
|
From some of the comments posted here, it looks like the agencies that provide public assistance need to do a better job educating the public at large about their assistance programs and the people they serve.
|
| leather | |
|
09-04-08 1:31 AM
|
oldjoe you are one sick puppy
|
| OldJoe | |
|
09-03-08 7:11 PM
|
I’m hoping instead for sterilization before public Assistance. If someone needs assistance to eat, it’s a good bet that any children would have will need help too. Better yet, removal of the reproductive organs. Bet it would cut down on violent crimes too. On the male side, less testosterone is less problems. On the female side, well, they would probably loose their major source of income. But on the bright side, they would then get public assistance to compensate. Who would want to party and do drugs with someone with no reproductive organs?
|
| Stardust | |
|
09-03-08 3:22 PM
|
oops "...receiving assistance went towards implementing..."
|
| Stardust | |
|
09-03-08 3:20 PM
|
Maybe the reason the rate of drug use is higher amongst the poor is because people who are addicted to drugs lose everything BECAUSE of the drug. What if the money spent on drug testing every person receiving assistance and implement a rehabilitation program for those that WANT to make a change. Because they can't just stop using and get a job.
|
| LoyalSocialist | |
|
09-03-08 1:11 PM
|
Even though I believe in social programs, I also agree with adhearance to certain standards when involved in the programs. After seeing this first hand, I can see that the issue of drug abuse is high in the impoverish due to multiple factors (lack of education etc.) Most non-professional and some professional jobs test for substance abuse, and why should it be different for someone who is going to be on the system? It not only ensures that they will comply with the system, but it would show this government that something needs to be done with the lack of treatment available for people addicted to hard drugs.
|
| Stardust | |
|
09-03-08 10:50 AM
|
i voted "no" and i don't receive assistance, nor do i do drugs ..... I just don't think its right.
|
| gertie12 | |
|
09-03-08 10:38 AM
|
The only one's who would vote NO would be the ones collecting the free money. They should all be tested for drugs and alcohol. There are folks out there that get their free benefits and trade them out for cash and then go buy their habits. That is not right.
|
| Stardust | |
|
09-03-08 10:25 AM
|
It's a chore to decipher what you all are saying here. Has anyone ever heard of spell check, or how about 3rd grade grammar for that matter ...... ?
|