The Pee Test
 

I wish I could take credit for the following, but I can't. Author unknown:

Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In order to get that paycheck.. I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their ass. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

Right on. So damn obvious, why has this not been implemented anywhere? It sounds like a perfectly reasonable requirement to me.

Amen!

Although it seems like a good idea, the cost would be enormous. Can you imagine all the records to keep, samples to process, yikes!

Man, that is spot on. It may offend or even demean some people who are required to take a piss test to recieve the govt. check. We can't have that. I know that I'm deeply offended by having to submit a sample.
In the above paragraph sentence one is serious, two is sarcasm and three is the truth.

It would pay for itself in days.

It would violate their civil rights though, or that is what would be argued

Think of all the postage saved!

It can be the first step in qualifying for health care coverage / financial aid, don't pass the pee test, don't get any financial support. Gotta do something to qualify.

Screw the civil rights issue, that's just a smoke screen.

Not at all, the dropout rate would skyrocket and they would leave the program.

Thats the good news. Bad news is that they would then probably turn to crime to support themselves, so our taxes would get even higher due to paying to keep these deadbeats in prison.

If on Welfare these restrictions should be added:

- Cannot relieve lottery winnings
- Alcohol testing
- Cannot purchase tobacco with funds (A stretch)

It shouldn't be a civil rights issue. In terms of search and seizure, conducting a search of an entire group's urine is generally considered legal, in the same way that conducting a search of an entire line of people at the airport's bags is generally considered legal.

Does anyone have actual numbers for how expensive urinalysis is? I instinctively agree with the speculation that a whiz-quiz would save money overall, but I'd be curious to see real numbers.

When I worked at a tiny convenience store in college, I regularly saw losers come in with food stamps and buy a piece of Bazooka bubble gum or a pretzel or whatever with food stamps to get change to buy smokes or booze. One time a bum with a big carry out bag from McD's, steam still coming out of it, came up and bought a bunch of such little things and total came out to something like $3.05. He handed me a $5 food stamp. So I took a nickel out of the penny dish and handed him two $1 food stamps back. He got really bent out of shape, started yelling, and cursing. I said, "What's the problem? I'm giving you a nickel?" He said, "I don't take freebies from no one." I said, "What do you call these?" as I held up his food stamps. Then he demanded to speak to my boss. I gave him my boss's name and number, said "tell him Richard sent you" and "get the f&ck out of my store already". A few other customers broke into applause and I never heard from the bum again.

I'd be willing to set up a lab and take over the work for a percentage of the money the state saves.

Jesus, I can't believe this isn't done already. If someone on here won't seriously push for legislation on this, I'll do it myself. Hell, I might even run for City Council on that platform plus requiring proof of legal right to work in the U.S. before someone can get a job or apartment. . . Shoot. I may seriously consider this.

Civil rights issues would be sticky...and I agree with Joe, if the aid is essential and they can't get it, they'll find a way.

I would.

I just peed in a bottle this morning as part of the Navy's random program.

Frankly, as a pilot, I'm glad to know that there is a method to help catch those working on my aircraft that are using illegal drugs.

I think like Joe, there is a law of unintended consequences we are ignoring.

Any bill suggesting this would die in committee in the Oregon legislature. Hey, how about pee testing the politicians?

This might be a little radical for you all, but how about this:

We remove all the nonsensical draconian drug laws, make it so no one has to prove they weren't smoking a little weed over the weekend, and save money on the ridiculous "war on drugs."

That way, the author wouldn't have to pass a piss test, those in need of welfare could keep getting it, and the money saved rounding up 14-year-olds with dime bags might just save you money on your taxes!! Win win win!

Not a bad idea at all.

And yet it is acceptable to foist those very costs off onto the private sector by making it a requirement for employment?

I think most of these guys are right. It would pay for itself overnight. Yes, we may see an increase in crime because many welfare recipients can't think of another way to make a living. I would rather deal with that than this current situation.

We simply get tougher on that as well. "Three strikes you're out" turns into "three strikes you're dead". We free up prison space by eliminating our draconian drug laws. We build prisons with the money saved on the welfare programs. We continue to liberalize CCW and self-defense laws so the good people of this country can shoot the bad ones. It would be great.

U can't save everyone. The No Child Left Behind is such a crock. Not everyone is college material.

This country is so fked up trying not to offend anyone, being PC. and giving everyone their rights. ..If U try to save all you wind up saving NONE.