I see that HB16 has been introduced. HB16 proposes the creation of a drug testing program to uncover whether adult recipients of public assistance are abusing alcohol or illegal drugs.
Maybe it is time a bill was introduced that required legislators and lobbyists to pass random drug tests and breathalyzers before working in the Capitol Building? After all, any given legislator or lobbyist has much more influence over the day to day lives of Alaskans than someone on public assistance.
I am sure that a simple tests like these would be welcome by the legislators and lobbyists as HB16’s sponsor, Rep. Wes Keller so ably states: “We comply (with drug testing) because it is part of ensuring that we are qualified to work and because it is part of the package that returns a paycheck.”
Rob Roys
Juneau
(Re: http://housemajority.org/spon.php?id=28HB16 <http://housemajority.org/spon.php?id=28HB16>).
Comments (10)
Add commentExcellent suggestion Rob!
What's good for the goose! I happen to know of legislators that are intoxicated on the floor of the house and senate. I wonder if our legislators would comply or feel outraged that we would question their integrity?
It's a well known fact that drug testing will save the state far less than the will program cost. Is that OK with you?
Now why would they want to spend more on testing than they save denying welfare to a needy person? Because it benefits big Pharma and the insurance industry. And if you look real close you will find some legislators in other states that have introduced this legislation have investments in the drug testing industry.
Add the fact that drug testing exposes the marijuana smoker but not persons doing the most dangerous drugs or chronic alcohol users....both of which are draining the welfare system. Makes no sense unless the marijuana smoker is the intended target.
Drug testing
I have news for you Mama, drug testing does expose other drug use, coke, opiates, speed, etc. I am in a profession
that requires random testing, hell even Home depot has a
drug testing program for its employees. You want free
money, pee in the jar.
As one quote I have seen says, "if you can afford beer,
drugs, tattoo's, you don't need welfare."
Mr Dan....
You are right the drug testing exposes other drugs...better to say if one abstains from more dangerous drugs for a couple days...no problem they pass the test while the person that has smoked some marijuana will test positive for three weeks to a month. So what you are saying is that no matter the cost...a pot smoker ticks you off so why not spend three to four times what the state will save to catch them. That make no sense to me and is a huge waste of public funds.
The test doesn't measure current intoxication. And I agree that welfare recipients wanting their check shouldn't do drugs. I say ...legislators are also paid from public funds and should prove they are sober before taking the floor and conducting the business of the state.
drug test
drug test rush limbaugh, and george w bush; did you ever wonder why out of the blue he would laugh at press conferences all by himself...glad that's over.
given the number
of "lawmakers" who break with the public trust, in one form or another, selling our interests out to the highest bidder while pretending to do the "people's business," I believe many if not most of them should be wearing ankle bracelets, have lie detectors attached every time they speak, be drug tested every time they walk into their workplaces, and have breathalizers applied when they approach their vehicles---It'd make me feel a tiny bit better about voting, paying my taxes, etc.
Anyone who votes repeatedly to subject our citizens to a surveillance society should themselves be the first to be subject to that surveillance.
Gee wiz Jamison...
I can see your point, but we need to have our politicians at work. At least I think we do.
Perhaps a moderate random drug testing idea would be a good idea, they can lead by example! We could add on a drug test for anti-depressants and anti-psychotic drugs as well. We certainly don't want any wacko's making any creative laws based on better living thru chemistry. How good could laws be if they were dreamed up with rose colored glasses? Or more to the point, a bad reaction to medication. We gotta think of public safety here.
Cost
I'd like to know how Rep. Keller proposes to pay for this program. Florida, in the four months that they were allowed to drug test welfare recipients before stopped by the courts, had a net expense of $45,000 to catch 108 people out of 4086 tested (mostly marijuana users). And how much more will it cost when it has to be litigated in our courts? Sounds like a frivolous use of our money...
More Afraid of Negative Results!
After some of the decisions they've made, votes they've taken, and bills they've introduced, I'd be more concerned if it was found out that they WEREN'T on drugs or drunk!!!
Kohring's replacement
What else would you expect from a guy from Wasilla- the Meth lab capital of Alaska. The town that gave us Kohring and Palin has done it again.
Let's make it happen!!
How can we make this happen? What happens if they refuse? I for one agree. Make it happen The Capital of Alaska.