States Consider Drug Testing Welfare Recipients

AZ Central, March 1, 2012

Getting welfare and food stamps may become tougher as 23 states around the USA seek to adopt stricter laws that would require public aid recipients to take drug tests.

Florida law now requires all aid applicants to be drug tested while Arizona and Missouri require testing for anyone they “reasonably” suspect of illegal drug use.

For many, the proposed changes in states such as Wyoming, Illinois and Maryland will mean taking extra steps before receiving aid, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Resistance is likely to be heated, and the American Civil Liberties Union has already filed a challenge in Florida.


Across the nation, lawmakers have proposed legislation to implement asset limits for food-stamp recipients, longer waiting periods for welfare benefits and mandatory substance abuse counseling for people receiving housing assistance.

Other ways welfare rules may change:

-At least 10 states are considering bills that would require photo identification for food stamps or electronic benefit cards.

-At least two states—Ohio and Tennessee—are considering restricting or eliminating eligibility for those convicted of drug felonies.


Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • You cant get a decent job without passing a drug test so you shouldnt be able to sit around and get my tax $$ without one either.

  • Southern__Hoosier

    “But isn’t requiring photo IDs for voters racist?”

    It is only a matter of time before a judge rules drug testing is racist.

    • Oil Can Harry

      And the judge will quote two words: disparate impact.

      • blight14

         Indeed, somewhat like the rrrracist prison systems…..

  • 1Forced_Registration

    All this means is that people need to be clean when they apply. It will end up costing the state money to enforce it. With all of the second, third, and fourth confirmatory tests, administrative hearings, and paperwork involved it will just end up as another tool of abuse by FSD employees.

    FSD employees already do things like send extra challenges to whites receiving benefits, and do things like mail out hearing/evaluation appointments on the day OF the appointment now to try to kick people off of the rolls for racial & other reasons. This is not the type of law that will strike fear into drug abusers (who will simply buy clean pee). However, it is the type of law that will strike fear into the disabled, pain patients, and anyone who ever has a cold or allergies. (For those who do not know: Dextromethorphan is the D-isomer of Levorphanol – which will show up as an opiate/methadone on many cheap drug tests. Most of your common allergy medicines will show up as amphetamines, and some of them will show up as benzos on enzyme type tests. Then you get the legit pain patients who will test positive for opioids because they are prescribed them, barbiturates because several of the common muscle relaxers also show up as barbiturates on enzyme assays, the legal benzodiazapines they are prescribes, the NMDA antagonist they are sometimes prescribed, and 78 other sources of false positives. The $12 enzyme assay drug test is cheap, the confirmatory test is not, and there will tons of them. Then you’ll get the borderline THC results that will be positive on the day of, but wont be when they retest [4 sets of tests involved for that, plus an administrative hearing].)

    Its a well intentioned law that will ultimately backfire in a great number of the states it is tried in. Not only will it cost more than it saves in benefits paid out; the benefits it does deny will also be taken out of the mouths of children due to no fault of their own.

    I have no problem with testing for cause, but this mandatory stuff really doesn’t catch a lot of people unless you are willing to pay workers to go out to the home of recipients, and test them right then & there without any time to prepare. If the states had the money to do that they would have the money to do regular home visits, and that would help a lot more to cut down on the bull that goes out in the world.


  • I do not understand why requiring people to provide a valid state ID to vote is considered racist.You need ID to cash a check, buy alcohol, buy cigarettes etc. As long as you have the correct documents, it should not be a problem. My 90 year old mother has a valid California ID card.

    • Those that cry “racism” over voter identification are trying to protect the
      voting “rights” of illegal aliens and blacks with a propensity to
      vote early and often. Of course, those screaming the loudest are the ones
      benefitting from the voting choices of this specific population.

      They understand they have no legitimate argument against asking someone for
      identification in order to protect the integrity of the voting process, so they
      rely on hysterics and the race card in order to stifle debate.

    • Detroit_WASP

      It is racist because it requires half-wits, to DO SOMETHING (get an ID).  And welfare, Democrats who breed out of control cannot be expected to do anything except make babies and cash welfare checks.

  • End all welfare, period. I am a firm believer in that. 

  • Anan7

    Drug testing is pretty mild compared to what I would do.  If you want welfare for more than 6 months, you WILL be permanently sterilized.  If you want welfare for more than 9 months, you and your children are deported to your home country.  Pretty simple, right?

    About eliminating eligibility, how about we just give them a free ticket to Mexico or Africa?  And their name on a list saying they can never return.

    These proposals would solve an ENORMOUS number of problems in this country.

    • You’re exactly right Anan7, but then as we know, the democrat party would never willingly deport half of their constituents; and the GOP would never agree to lose their cheap
      illegal invading labor, their wealthy business donors prefer to exploit.

      Any elected official who supports illegal invaders is corrupted and a danger to White Americans. When will this country wake up and begin to see it this way.

  • Lou

     So mainstream that Florida ( my state ) has adopted it.. Can you believe the ACLU
    actually WANTS people to be able to take drugs at their leisure and also receive hand outs ? What’s next ,putting an actual drug care package to be picked up at the local walmart in with benefits ?

    • The_Bobster

      Well, there are needle exchange programs. All “da gubmint” has to do is include the smack.

      • blight14

         Bobster, you’re EVERYWHERE!!!!  Bobster for president, 2012!

  • ageofknowledge

    All of this is unnecessary. Simply E-Verify the whole system and require a sterilization certificate before issuing social welfare. Problem solved.

  • The slight problem with your theory is that you’re assuming all cheap immigrant labor is unskilled or low-skilled grunt work.  In reality, there are a lot of people associated with both parties that want a lot of highly skilled low wage educated labor with legal immigrant H-xB visas.  The Big Six, er Five, er Four accounting-auditing-consulting firms are quickly becoming “No Native Born White Americans” need apply, they’re practically suburbs of Bangalore and Manila.

  • blight14

    Good point….

  • blight14

     Dr Duke was right then and he’s right today…….

  • blight14

    Our dental office has been seeing a large increase in the number of Muslims from various countries of late…….ALL on government assistance…..I don’t have one that isn’t on the dole….we also have many folks from India, none are on welfare but they do have a unique trait-they make it clear from the start that they will not submit to ANY treatment that requires a penny out of pocket….whatever their (traditional) insurance pays 100%, fine, but nothing beyond that…..

  • Afrikanerhart1

    Let me guess….you’re a user who wants to legitimize his own criminal habit, right?

  • Bush spent the last two years of his presidency essentially campaigning for amnesty on behalf of illegal invaders. He tried to brow beat Americans into relenting and succumbing to his demands for amnesty on behalf of invading criminals.

    There have been many more Republicans waving the amnesty banner as well and we do not have to go back to circa “80’s” to find examples. But I suspect you are aware of this.

    Whether it is for cheap labor, or otherwise, too many within the Republican Party have sold out on this

    That is undeniable!

  • Your numbers do n0thing to address the central issue, which is those on “public assistance” being required to submit to drug testing. I could care less if you want to take a “warm relaxing bong hit after a productive day at work.” The operative word used was “after work”, which means you would likely not be on public assistance.

    I have no objections to you getting high, just do it on your own dime!

  • In order to get federal financial aid for college, a student must not have a drug felony.