Florida Gov Rick Scott Signs Welfare Drug Testing Law

Posted By: JWSmythe
http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=30441Floridians must submit urine, blood or hair samples for drug testing before receiving cash benefits from the state under a bill Gov. Rick Scott signed into law Tuesday.

"The goal of this is to make sure we don’t waste taxpayers’ money," Scott said. "And hopefully more people will focus on not using illegal drugs."

The new law fulfills a campaign pledge from Scott, but has raised legal questions. The ACLU of Florida has signaled it might sue over the law.

"Once again, this governor has demonstrated his dismissal of both the law and the right of Floridians to personal privacy by signing into law a bill that treats those who have lost their jobs like suspected criminals," said ACLU of Florida director Howard Simon.


The law, which goes into effect on July 1, will mean about 4,400 drug tests per month, according to the Department of Children & Families. Taxpayers will reimburse welfare applicants for negative drug tests, which can cost between $10 and $25.

Positive tests will carry an immediate six-month ban on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. A second positive test will result in a three-year ban on state assistance.



Editor: Mr. Scott, I have to ask, on behalf of the people of Florida, and those who continue to be abused by the state, what were you thinking?

  Have you looked around?  Talked to people other than lobbyists?  Your constituents are broke and desperate, and you're taking their life lines one by one.

  Florida, your state, Is still one of the top 3 states for housing foreclosures.  Many of whom the little bit they were getting helped them from losing their homes.

  Your state has a severe unemployment problem.  According to the official numbers, Florida still has almost 1 million people that are unemployed.  But we have seen your recent moves to resolve that issue.  The official unemployment rolls only count those who are drawing unemployment.  Termination of their benefits is a very unfair method of reducing the numbers.  There are people who have worked for 20+ years, having unemployment insurance drawn from their paychecks, and they find that they have a year, or maybe a year and a half of payments that barely put them over the poverty line, if at all.  If the individual has any outstanding debts, such as child support, that can be deducted up to 50% of their unemployment.  While we weren't happy about having a percentage of our paychecks taken, we're even less happy that the insurance that was forced upon us results in maybe a year of assistance.

  There has been little to nothing done to help your constituents find work.  Virtually anyone with professional experience has been finding themselves being declined interviews because the only real jobs in this market are entry level work.  Discrimination issues are being blatantly ignored by employers.  For those who worked professional office jobs very happily for years, they are being declined even cashier positions if they cannot stand for 8 hours per day, or cannot lift 200 pounds without assistance.  If they are graced with an interview, they are refused the entry level work when the employer sees that they are over 25 years old. 

  For our readers, I have not only personally experienced this, but I know many people who are unemployed.  I've been given opportunities to read email correspondence with potential employers, and have listened in on phone calls.   The sad fact is, yes, everything I stated above is absolutely true.

  So, who does a law like this benefit?  You don't have millions of drug abusing constituents who are defrauding the system.  You have millions of desperate people who need all the help they can get, until they can find any sort of work. 

  All it takes is doing a very little bit of research to see the truth.  You have been very helpful to your campaign contributors, and especially to lobbyists.  

On September 3rd, 2010 at 3:30pm, you were the guest of honor at a $10,000 a person fundraiser at the offices of health care lobbyists Jon Johnson and Travis Blanton.  Lets take a peek at their client list.

  Now this becomes very clear.

  Your constituents are not getting hired, and they are not getting pre-employment drug screenings.  They can't afford medical care, and therefore are not having any lab tests done.  This hurts the health care industry.  To help out their bottom line, you are now forcing the poorest citizens in your state to undergo hair and blood drug testing.   Some people will refuse this blatant disregard for their privacy, regardless of the fact that they do not use illegal drugs.  Some will receive false positive tests, which I'm sure will result in retests.  Others will fail because they may take drugs that are perfectly legal in other states, which you refuse to legalize in Florida based on your twisted moral grounds.  Well, that and Pfizer is a client of the same lobbyists.  It's worth far more to the drug manufacturers to use pharmaceutical drugs than for them to use natural alternatives.  Finally, those who refuse or fail will be dropped from the welfare rolls, which will reduce the official statistics on the jobless in the state.

  You sir, are not working in the interest of your constituents.  You are cutting off those who need your help the most, in favor of the corporations that bought you.

  As the Florida unemployed numbers grow out of control, I would not be surprised to see a rebellion in your state.  If you are lucky, it will simply mean losing the next election.  When people are desperate and hungry, they will do anything necessary to survive.

  There is a side note here, which may be pure conjecture, as we have not been able to gather enough facts on it.  It has been submitted as news to us many times already, but since we cannot confirm it, it's not a news story. 

  Hair and blood samples are to be taken from a vast percentage of the population.  From that, you have provided the labs with more than enough to take a DNA sample.  With sufficient DNA samples, other family members can be matched up through loose associations.  I do not believe cataloging the population is in anyone's best interest.  Such information can be damning for generations.