Archived Story

A compelling argument

Published 10:27am Wednesday, February 6, 2013

On Monday in the General Assembly, a Republican-backed Senate bill was defeated that would have allowed for the drug screening of welfare recipients.

The bill was defeated by one vote when Sen. Harry Blevins, R Chesapeake, did not vote on the piece of legislation.

The Senate passed the bill last year when Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling cast the tiebreaking vote, but it was ultimately defeated in the House of Delegates.

Opponents of the legislation have stated that it would unfairly single out poor people for testing. While we don’t believe that was the intent, technically it would, since most people who receive welfare benefits tend to be poor.

Supporters of the bill, however, claim it was designed to screen people going on welfare to ensure that the state was not supporting a drug user’s habit.

The argument being that if someone who works for a living can be drug tested, why can’t someone who’s income is paid by the taxpayers of the state?

Both sides have a compelling argument.

  • justthinking

    It seems that instead they choose to single out “working people” to be tested.

    Well, now I’M offended. I guess I’ll just have to get over it, put on (or pull down – as the case may be) my grown-up panties, and keep peein’!

    Suggest Removal

  • curious

    Those that would more than likely fail the drug test are the same ones that know how to manipulate the system as it is, and would more than likely figure out a way around the testing. Just saying.

    Suggest Removal

  • employee2

    Of course it “singles out” poor people and using drugs will keep them poor. Did you ever hear a poor person state that drugs got them out of poverty?

    Suggest Removal

  • Liberty With Responsibility

    Our fighting military personnel have been drug tested since at least the 1980s, so how come we treat welfare clients better than our military? Why is their “dignity” as welfare recipients more important to protect than the “dignity” of those who offer their very lives for us? This is backwards isn’t it?

    Suggest Removal

  • boomercitizen

    I agree with momto2Js. It is a shame this did not pass. It would go a long way towards welfare reform. NO FUNDS IF YOU ARE USING DRUGS….because you are getting that money from somewhere!

    Suggest Removal

  • momto2Js

    If I can be randomly tested at work anytime, so should they since I’m paying them with my taxes.

    Suggest Removal

Editor's Picks