G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Guess what business pRick Scott is in?
http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/03/rick-scott’s-new-gift-to-solantic-drug-testing-state-employees/
pRick Scott’s campaign promise of mass job creation is at least coming true for professional urine samplers.
However, in addition to being sued over drug-testing welfare parents, Scott also faces a court fight for ordering random substance screening on thousands of state workers.
Interestingly, the governor’s pee-in-the-cup mandate doesn’t apply to the one bunch that whizzes away more tax dollars than anyone else – the legislators who pass such useless laws.
The biggest beneficiaries are the testing companies that collect $10 to $25 for urine, blood or hair screening, a fee being paid by the state (you and me) whenever the applicant tests clean — currently about 97 percent of the cases.
The law, which easily passed the Legislature this year, was based on the misinformed and condescending premise that welfare recipients are more prone to use illegal drugs than people who are fortunate enough to have jobs.
Statistically, the opposite is true, despite the claims of Scott and Republican legislators who cheered this unnecessary and intrusive law.
The Department of Children and Families reports that since July, when the drug-testing program started, only 2.5 percent of welfare applicants have failed.
By contrast, about 8.9 percent of the general population illegally uses some kind of drug, according to the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
This substantial disparity in favor of the unemployed is not an anomaly.
Thirteen years ago, the Florida Legislature funded a pilot drug-testing project targeting poor residents who were receiving temporary cash assistance from the state.
Of the nearly 8,800 applicants who got screened for drugs, fewer than 4 percent tested positive.
That little exercise in class-bashing cost taxpayers about $2.7 million.
Either the governor didn’t know about the earlier study, couldn’t handle the math or just didn’t want to be bothered with the facts.
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/30/3168331/commentary-drug-testing-welfare.html#ixzz1ZSe1YIi4
http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/03/rick-scott’s-new-gift-to-solantic-drug-testing-state-employees/
pRick Scott’s campaign promise of mass job creation is at least coming true for professional urine samplers.
However, in addition to being sued over drug-testing welfare parents, Scott also faces a court fight for ordering random substance screening on thousands of state workers.
Interestingly, the governor’s pee-in-the-cup mandate doesn’t apply to the one bunch that whizzes away more tax dollars than anyone else – the legislators who pass such useless laws.
The biggest beneficiaries are the testing companies that collect $10 to $25 for urine, blood or hair screening, a fee being paid by the state (you and me) whenever the applicant tests clean — currently about 97 percent of the cases.
The law, which easily passed the Legislature this year, was based on the misinformed and condescending premise that welfare recipients are more prone to use illegal drugs than people who are fortunate enough to have jobs.
Statistically, the opposite is true, despite the claims of Scott and Republican legislators who cheered this unnecessary and intrusive law.
The Department of Children and Families reports that since July, when the drug-testing program started, only 2.5 percent of welfare applicants have failed.
By contrast, about 8.9 percent of the general population illegally uses some kind of drug, according to the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
This substantial disparity in favor of the unemployed is not an anomaly.
Thirteen years ago, the Florida Legislature funded a pilot drug-testing project targeting poor residents who were receiving temporary cash assistance from the state.
Of the nearly 8,800 applicants who got screened for drugs, fewer than 4 percent tested positive.
That little exercise in class-bashing cost taxpayers about $2.7 million.
Either the governor didn’t know about the earlier study, couldn’t handle the math or just didn’t want to be bothered with the facts.
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/30/3168331/commentary-drug-testing-welfare.html#ixzz1ZSe1YIi4