Famous Death Row Last Meals
A Look Back On The Year In Food
Photo: qmnonic, Flickr
Should recipients of food stamps be required to pass a drug test in order to receive their benefits?
Some Republican legislators in New Hampshire think so, and they've proposed a new law that would subject food-stamp recipients to random drug tests. A number of other states, such as Oregon, Kentucky, Missouri and Nebraska, are considering similar laws.
No doubt, when taken at face value, these laws sound eminently reasonable. After all, thousands of U.S. workers are required to pass drug tests in order to apply for or keep their jobs.
But as a number of civil liberties and public health organizations point out, such testing relies on unproven stereotypes about people who receive public assistance and the testing can cost taxpayers more money than it saves.
Take Michigan, for example. The state passed such a law in the late 1990s. Before the law was struck down as an unconstitutional, statistics compiled from its enforcement found that only 10 percent of food-stamp recipients tested positive for illegal drugs, and only 3 percent tested positive for hard drugs like heroin. According to the ACLU, that's about the same as the rest of the population.
Then there's the cost. New Hampshire estimates that its proposed program would run between $3.3 million and $7 million a year, but there wouldn't actually be any savings to the state budget, because federal funds pay for all food-stamp benefits, according to the Nashua Telegraph.
Still, sponsors of the bill maintain the cost is worth it.
"I believe there is a benefit," Rep. James Summers told the Telegraph. "It wouldn't actually save or create revenue for the state but encourages [recipients] to be ready and able to go to work once they are off assistance."
LOOK: Bank Vault Saves 22 Lives During Tornado
Live from Microsoft's New Generation Xbox event!
PHOTO: Dog Guards Dead Victim's Body After Oklahoma Tornado Disaster
Xbox Reveal liveblog on Joystiq
Dozens Killed in Oklahoma Tornado; Death Toll to Rise
Demi Looks FANTASTIC In A Bikini
Watch: Kansas Meteorologist Seeks Shelter From Tornado
Xbox One architecture panel liveblog!
Man Reportedly Beheaded In Brutal Assault In London Neighborhood
Justin Bieber Booed, Gets Standing Ovation at Billboard Music Awards
H&M's Plus-Size Model Jennie Runk Says She Chose To Gain Weight
The World's Most Powerful Women
Okla. Sheriff's Deputy Finds Dog Guarding Body Buried Under Destroyed Home
Wolf Blitzer's Embarrassing Moment With Tornado Survivor
Two Pilots Fired After Brazilian Pop Star Takes Captain's Seat Mid-Flight
Mother Dies With Infant During Oklahoma Tornado
U.S. Acknowledges Four American Citizens Killed In Drone Strikes
Help For Heroes Killing
NY Times Eviscerates Obama White House
Mum-Of-Two Faces Down Woolwich Attack Suspects
PHOTOS: Christie Brinkley Gets Back Into A Swimsuit At 59 Years Old
60 Minutes Makes All The Difference For $360 Million Jackpot
Who Won 'DWTS'?
PHOTOS: Tornado Aftermath Leaves Trail Of Destruction
PHOTOS: This Is The Best Response To Abercrombie CEO Mike Jeffries We've Seen Yet
Singer Sues McDonald's, Claims Chicken Sandwich Incident Ruined Her Voice
White Father Allegedly Suspected Of Kidnapping Biracial Daughters
CBS Reporter's Grave Allegations
Tornadoes Strike Oklahoma
Tara Ellison: Why I Gave A Toast At My Ex-Husband's Wedding
Police END Search For Susan Powell
2-23-2011 @7:59PM Melissa A. said... WTF? Because drug addicts don't deserve food? They're still human.
Reply
2-23-2011 @8:21PM Margot said... If anything, people on certain drugs need EVEN MORE food than their sober counterparts. What's a pothead supposed to do if they can't get their food stamps and they get a surrious 3 AM craving for some Doritos? That's cruel and unusual punishment if I've ever heard it!
Reply
2-23-2011 @8:34PM Noadi said... So drug addicts deserve to starve and so do their children (most recipients of food stamps have children)?
These benefits are based on income and need, whether or not the person uses drugs doesn't change their need for food. Considering the fact that the same lawmakers proposing this law are also opposed to funding treatment programs for addicts it's clear the only purpose is to further marginalize and punish drug users and make it more difficult for them to stop using or to get/keep a job. There's also an assumption in this that food stamp recipient are all unemployed when the fact is many ARE employed, just in jobs that pay so little that they can't support their families.
Reply
2-24-2011 @11:42AM Royal Chocolate said... Amen to that!!
2-23-2011 @10:09PM Milehimama said... I think this is a horrible idea. I posted all about my reasons why in a post I wrote about Kentucky's push for it.
http://www.milehimama.com/2011/01/27/drug-tests-for-food-stamps/
I think people forget that we are protected from search and seizure without evidence of a crime, and ALSO that foodstamps are also given to families, with children qualifying. Should we take away a kid's foodstamps because his mom is an addict?
Reply
2-24-2011 @8:27AM Joe from NC said... You are not protected from illegal searches and seizures when a state privelege is being doled out. Truckers can be tested for drugs while they hold a CDL license, so can pilots and train engineers. The food stamp program is voluntary, therefore if you do not like the rules...don't get into the program! Very simple....
2-23-2011 @10:26PM dingle ling said... Alcoholics should be able to eat though?
What about privacy?
What about the overhead involved with testing people and keeping track of them?
The War On Drugs keeps getting more expensive.
Reply
2-24-2011 @5:14AM kim berly said... The post is very informative. It is a pleasure reading it. I have also bookmarked you for checking out new posts.
Easter revision courses
Reply