Florida welfare drug testing

[BlueBike]

Next time they go to drug test me at my job, I'll make sure to tell them its against my 4th Amendment. We'll see how well that turns out.

Your 4th Amendment rights don't apply as against a private employer. They protect you against the government. If you work for the government, the Court has ruled on specific types of government jobs at which you can be tested (they typically involve law enforcement or other potentially dangerous tasks).

In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment's protections do not apply when the searched party lacks a "reasonable expectation of privacy".

So in regular person speak... You have no expectation of privacy if you are applying for help

You've got the correct quote from Katz, but I think you're a little confused on its application. A key aspect of the analysis (is there a reasonable expectation of privacy in the given setting) refers to the physical settings of the search (where you are, what the government is searching, and what you're up to). The analysis doesn't consider your status as a recipient of various benefits, it considers what is being searched and under what circumstances.

If you honestly think that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy if you've requested welfare benefits, you can justify literally any search. How far do you think it should go? Polygraph tests, searches of your home, cavity searches?

Looking the other way when the government oversteps the limits of the constitution is a very slippery slope.​

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
Your 4th Amendment rights don't apply as against a private employer. They protect you against the government. If you work for the government, the Court has ruled on specific types of government jobs at which you can be tested (they typically involve law enforcement or other potentially dangerous tasks).

In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment's protections do not apply when the searched party lacks a "reasonable expectation of privacy".

So in regular person speak... You have no expectation of privacy if you are applying for help

You've got the correct quote from Katz, but I think you're a little confused on its application. A key aspect of the analysis (is there a reasonable expectation of privacy in the given setting) refers to the physical settings of the search (where you are, what the government is searching, and what you're up to). The analysis doesn't consider your status as a recipient of various benefits, it considers what is being searched and under what circumstances.

If you honestly think that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy if you've requested welfare benefits, you can justify literally any search. How far do you think it should go? Polygraph tests, searches of your home, cavity searches?

Looking the other way when the government oversteps the limits of the constitution is a very slippery slope.​

Obviously you don't know so I won't belabor the point.

My mother retired from the county.. my stepmother retired from DHS.. welfare recipients are already subject to home inspections and since their opinion is unquestioned (DHS or county) no polygraph is needed. Takes an act of god to reverse their decision. If my step mom wanted to go out to a welfare recipients house, then she got a couple of co-workers to go with her. Safety in numbers. If the folks didn't want to let her in, their food stamps, cash assistance, daycare etc could be yanked at her discretion.

So.......................................... A 20$ test that you pee in a cup.. how much worse is it when they ALREADY have the power to do much much more? By the way... when my mom was doing those inspections, she had CPS on the hotline and if she saw anything shady, the kids could and would be taken...... So like I said.... they already have waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more power and can already compel a drug test at whim.....

I think this whittles down the process IMO

 

[Beekissed]

Quote:
Excellent point!

 

[BlueBike]

welfare recipients are already subject to home inspections

This is a valid point, but the DHS and county home inspections you're referring to generally relate to child welfare (as in treatment, not government payments), not receipt of government assistance.

That brings up another interesting constitutional debate re: balancing an individual's constitutional rights and the government's authority to prevent mistreatment of minors. But that is a separate issue.

In this case, the law in question would simply make receipt of welfare benefits probable cause for a government search.​

 

[Beekissed]

Quote:

This gets into a really gray area for me. You're fat, *perhaps* because you overeat or don't exercise, so why should you get benefits? But now we could really run with it. You have cancer because you smoked, or chose to work in a factory, you're in a wheelchair because you weren't wearing your seatbelt in that car accident, etc, etc. Is the point whether someone is at fault for being disabled, or whether they, regardless of cause, are still in fact disabled?

Again, I agree. Everyone has anecdotal evidence of why something should happen to this or that program or recipient but the bottom line is, where do you draw the bottom line? Who decides who should or should not have, should or should not be tested, do or don't deserve this or that assistance? You? Me? Because I know someone who knows someone who abuses this program or that one and therefore I feel they should all be punished for using that program?

Knee jerk responses to your personal outrage but still not compelling evidence that all people who partake of these programs should be mandatory drug tested. There are many things my taxes are paying for that I do not agree with....but it happens anyway. Get over it, suck it up, go to work, come home and get on with life.

 

[Boyd]

...

 

[HenPenny]

Quote:
Really? I wonder why I am required to take drug test to get and keep my JOB? If I have to take a drug test then they should too.

 

[cackydoodledoo]

Some folks don't agree with this and are afraid of false tests.

It is not any different than drug testing at your employer's. My husband got called for a random and came back positive because of his migraine medicine. He had to go straight home and could not go back to work until we faxed proof of the prescription to corporate. Somehow they lost it and he was out of work for a week right before Christmas too. He only got reimbursed for three of the days.

I don't think that you can have a false test if you are doing meth or crack or something along that lines. I think if if shows up as a possible prescription then maybe they should let them keep their benefits and give them a small window of time to provide documentation of it and if not then take their benefits away.

I have dealt with this first hand. My brother and his ex wife whom he still lives with has been on welfare for 17 years. Neither of them has had a job in that length of time. For about 5-6 years of that time they both were doing meth. They both spend a lot of time at the bar as well. She is still hooked on something because she has spent many a day in jail lately for failing court mandated drug tests. Yet they can't afford to feed, clothe and house their kids??? It absolutely disgusts me and I am embarrased sometimes to admit that we are related.

My husband and I work hard for everything we have. My husband most generally starts his day at 4 am and doesn't come home until usually 4 or 5 but sometimes it's 8 or 9. He is on call 24/7 as well. When he gets home he doesn't sit on the couch and watch tv. He goes out to his shop and works on cars on the side. Sometimes for money and sometimes as a favor for a friend. He is constantly building stuff for me and helping me with stuff. Even with all this he still finds time to help around the house. He also does maintenance work on 20 rentals that I manage and we still live paycheck to paycheck most of the time.

We don't have new vehicles or fancy things and it really angers me to watch people drive up to the local welfare office in their $50,000 vehicles and step out wearing name brand clothes like Abercrombie and Fitch. They manage to pay their cell and cable bills as well. I don't know about your state but here in Colorado they are allowed to use their welfare cards at convenience stores to buy things like energy drinks and candy.

If I were to reform welfare I would make it so they could only buy the staples like rice, beans, flour and hamburger. Things like that. They shouldn't be allowed to use my hard earned money to buy ribeyes when I can't even afford them!!!

Ok stepping off my soapbox now. This is an issue that I could rant on and on about for days. My friends and family know not to mention welfare around me or they will get an earful!!!

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

I hate the idea of drug testing by the government of anyone that has not been convicted of a crime no matter what the reasoning behind it.

Statements like this care the hell out of me.
Quote:

That is my point exactly. If one has nothing to hide, why fight it?

This is a slippery slope. Both the "If you have nothing to hide" thing an the government drug test thing.


A boss drug testing is one thing. The government doing it is another.

It does not matter what government assistance program you are talking about, most people payed in to it for years before ever needing it. The idea that you would be required to go threw the same testing as a convict on parole just to get your money back when you are down on your luck is sad.

 

[Matthew3590]

Quote:

That is my point exactly. If one has nothing to hide, why fight it?

This is a slippery slope. Both the "If you have nothing to hide" thing an the government drug test thing.


A boss drug testing is one thing. The government doing it is another.

It does not matter what government assistance program you are talking about, most people payed in to it for years before ever needing it. The idea that you would be required to go threw the same testing as a convict on parole just to get your money back when you are down on your luck is sad.

If I am down on my luck and I go get a job and they drug test me then whats the difference?