TPM: Nikki Haley 'So Wants' To Drug Test People Applying For Jobless Benefits

[BeyondGeography]

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/nikki_haley_so_wants_to_drug_test_people_applying.php?ref=fpb

Meantime:

<snip>South Carolina's unemployment agency has said that drugs are a minuscule factor in jobless claims. A 2009 estimate put the rate at 0.3 percent.<sniip>

That would be a profitable venture...for some entity...

[Denninmi]

1. From what I've heard of her

She sounds like she's on something herself.

[raccoon]

8. I can't stand her. Be assured I didn't vote for her. nt

[GoCubsGo]

31. That makes two of us.

She's even worse than Sanford.

[newfie11]

2. and I bet she wants them to pay for it also.

So food or drug test??

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Republicans are mean and stupid. It is a dangerous combination.

[rsmith6621]

4. Let Drug Test All Elected Officials Weekly...

Using both URINE and HAIR.....cause I thin most of them are smoking/snorting something.

[Zorra]

6. Yeh, drug test everyone that wants drug testing for others.

Catch a lot of hypocrites that way.

[daa]

12. +1

[SammyWinstonJack]

24. Whatever they're smoking, I don't want any. Mean spirited assholes!

x(

[RedCappedBandit]

5. These types can't help but to expose their hypocrisy

Friend posted a status on Facebook regarding Florida's recent legislation regarding drug testing welfare recipients. Bunch of idiots posted their support. All of them are guilty of smoking pot / using other illegal substances.

[Overseas]

7. Maybe she owns part of a drug testing company like Rick Scott does, so she is just following

Republican ideals and profiteering to the best of her ability. She's just trying to keep up.

And now the shocking results are coming in from Rick Scott's drug testing in Florida--

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1911298&mesg_id=1911298

[BeyondGeography]

11. Yup...GOP is Griftopia's Official Party

[Overseas]

17. Griftopia's Obnoxious Profiteers just will not suppress their entrepreneurial spirit, eh?

http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/03/rick-scotts-new-gift-to-solantic-drug-testing-state-employees/

and they can get a double bonus by following those who test positive for a chance to throw them into privatized prisons, following the lead of another modern Republican governor--

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/02/jan-brewer-arizona-govern_2_n_703251.html

[akvo]

9. Drug test them, if you take the money you pay the price.

If you accept welfare or unemployment, its the same as being employed by the state. State employees and private employees can be drug tested. Join the club. I have no sympathy for those complaining.

[Bjorn Against]

10. So are Social Security recipients employed by the state?

What about people who use public schools? Public roads? Everyone in this nation takes advantage of public money in one way or other, why should poor people who use public resources be treated differently than others who use public resources?

[akvo]

19. SS is not free, you pay for it in advance

People on welfare or unemployment are essentially being paid by the govt for nothing in return.

And not all poor people are on welfare or unemployment.

[Bjorn Against]

26. You take government aid as well.

Unless you stay off our public roads, rejected public education and federal grants, stayed out of our public parks and stayed away from all public resources you have benefitted from government dollars as well. If you have no problem with people like yourself benefitting from government resources then you have no standing to attack the poor for doing the same.

[akvo]

32. wrong

I didn't write that people on welfare or unemployment should be denied any govt resources. I wrote that people on welfare/unemployment are being paid by the state and are effectively employees of the state, and are subject to the same demands that can be made of other employees of the state. Such as drug testing.

[Bjorn Against]

38. A friend of mine gave me $10 last night, does that mean she employs me?

Do you honestly believe that anyone who gets money from a particular source is automatically an employ of the person who paid them?

[akvo]

42. No

It was voluntary.
It was your friends money to use as she saw fit.
You didn't ask for it.
She doesn't expect repayment of any kind.
The amount was trivial.

With govt unemployment/welfare, the govt is the steward of the money and has a responsibilty to ensure the money is used as it was intended (as in not for drugs but to support a person/family while they find work or resolve their difficulty).
The recipient asks for the money and teh govt is requied to provide the money.
It is a significant amount.

[Bjorn Against]

44. So you run away from your original premise and hope I won't notice

Now you are not saying that the government is the employer, now you are making a new argument that it is the responsibility of the government to see how welfare recepients spend their money. It is not the responsibility of an employer to keep tabs on how their employees spend their money. And for your information a failed drug test does not prove someone spent their welfare money on drugs.

[akvo]

47. you are wrong again - the govt is still the employer

An employee and employer have a contract. The employee performs the agreed upon task, and performs it to the proper standard, and the in return the employer provides benefits to the employee. Furthermore, the employer has a responsibility to spend the company's money responsibily.

In the case of the private employer, the employer is concerned about the ability of the employee to perform his job. Employee activites outside the workplace absolutely come into play. Does the employee use drugs (yes? You won't be hired by a pharmacy and probably not get your security clearance for govt or contractor defense work)? Does the employee smoke or drink too much or weigh too much (and put his health care burden unnecessarily on the company and coworkers)? Does the employee have the desired vaccinations (in the case of health care workers)? And in the case of many govt and private sector people working in the defense and intelligence areas, both govt and private, does the employee spend his money wisely and is less susceptible to bribery?

Welfare/unemployement is a contract between citizens and the government. If a citizen finds himself in a difficult situation, he can call upon the govt for assistance (i.e., be hired by the govt) with the understanding that the citizen will use the benefit to improve his situation to the point where he can stand on his own. Drug use does not help a person/family resolve their problem.

[Bjorn Against]

51. There is no employment contract

Call your state welfare office and ask them what percentage of their clients are employed by the state, I bet they do not consider them employees. Find me a law that says welfare recepients are considered employees of the state, if you can't cite a law then quit making crap up to justify the unjustifiable.

I am really glad you are not my employer because any employer who wants to pry into my private life the way you suggest employers should pry has absolutely no respect for their employees.

[akvo]

54. Don't be obtuse

There is no literal legal paper contract regarding welfare/unemployment, but there is a social contract. Reread my first post. Accepting welfare/unemployment is LIKE being employed by the govt.

Many people are required by their employers (including the govt) to submit to drug tests, polygraph tests, credit checks, and background checks of varying degree. Many of these checks are required by law.

In fact, if you work in some areas of law enforcement, military, or intelligence/terrorism, you will likely have to submit to an extensive background investigation which includes investigating your spouse, children, close relatives, close friends, contacts who are foreign nationals, and more. Checking your finances is the least invasive aspect of these background checks.

And if you think people don't pry into your life, you are sadly misinformed. Marketing agencies know far more about you than you would believe. Credit card use, anything you do on the internet, many non-internet computer activities, those discount store cards, cell phone use, warranty cards, facebook, forum membership, is tracked and stored. Even photos and files you upload to the internet have information that leads to you. Not even your medical info is safe. A private company can learn all about you without any cooperation from you. When the govt gets involved, there is nothing you can hide.

[Bjorn Against]

56. So you finally admit that they are not employees

You then go on to make the point that because we are constantly having our privacy violated we should have no problem submitting to even more invasive searches. Sorry, you may be fine with fascism but I am not.

[akvo]

57. wrong again

I will reiterate - if a person accepts welfare or unemployment benefits from the govt, then they are de-facto employees of the govt and subject to the same demands made of formal govt employees.

[Bjorn Against]

62. No they are not subject to the same demands

I asked you to cite me a law and you backtracked, now you go back to the same baseless argument again. If they are subject to the same demands as an employee of the state show me the law that places those demands on them, if you can't cite a law then walk away because I don't have time for your baseless right-wing bullshit.

[akvo]

64. Then walk away, I win

[EOTE]

66. So that's what this is about? Not providing a cogent argument, but winning?

You may consider annoying a person until they refuse to respond anymore "winning", but most level-headed people don't. This has been struck down as unconstitutional before, now is no different.

[akvo]

70. No that's not what its about, I did it just to annoy you

[Bjorn Against]

73. You clearly can not cite a law so you lose

[shraby]

52. Unemployment benefits are paid by the employer

to cover a downturn in their business. I'm not sure, but I think the employee contributes some too.
Welfare recipients who have had taxes taken out of their pay when working also contribute to their downturn on luck. It's a social safety net that all workers contribute to because they might be next to need it.

[KamaAina]

53. State employees are not tested in most states

Why? Because unlike most of the private-sector workforce (and certainly unlike benefit recipients), they have unions to stand up for them against that kind of fascist tripe.

[akvo]

61. It depends upon your job

If you work with children or in law enforecement, you probably do undergo background checks and drug testing.

[jmowreader]

34. Unemployment is an INSURANCE program, not a WELFARE program

I pay premiums out of my paycheck every two weeks.

[akvo]

40. Then it must be a state or private insurance contract

because federal unemployment insurance is paid by the employer, not the employee. The same for most states.

Your company may have a group unemployment insurance program through a private company. My company does, although my company (and I mean that literally) pays 100% of the insurance premium. I also pay 100% of the medical insurance premium for all employees.

[jmowreader]

45. I looked it up...call it an "indirect tax..."

It's like a renter paying property tax on the building he rents through higher rents than he would experience if the renter directly paid property tax, or a customer paying a store's income tax through higher prices on merchandise, I pay unemployment insurance tax through a wage that is reduced from what it could be were there no UI tax charged to the employer.

[akvo]

46. You only assume that is the case

You assume that the employer will increase your paycheck if the employer taxes are reduced. The employer could reduce the cost to customers instead of increasing your paycheck.

[Ezlivin]

13. "its the same as being employed by the state"

Are you serious?

You mean if I get welfare I get paid vacations, sick days, dental coverage, health coverage for my family and a pension at the end?

Wow!

I guess in your state the employment rate must be 100% since everyone that is on "welfare or unemployment" is, in fact, gainfully employed by the state.

You'd make a great politician. As far as being an empathic human being, not so much.

[akvo]

20. Yes

If your paycheck comes from the govt, you are employed by the govt.

No you don't get the usual benefits other than a "free" paycheck to help you out in a difficult time. Thats benefit enough.

Empathy has nothing to do with it. Most employers are permitted to perform drug testing.

[Occulus]

16. Blackly evil.

And inhuman.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gemini Cat]

23. It is evil and inhuman.

You'll discover that if you lose your job.

[akvo]

33. You assume because I disagree with you that I have never experienced it

You are wrong.

In 1994 my total income was less than $6,000. That was with 3 children, a wife, and a mortgage. I almost certainly know more about life in poverty than you.

[EOTE]

67. So you not only lack empathy, but the ability to learn from your own life issues.

That's not something to be proud of.

[JanMichael]

27. edited

I replied to the wrong person. I apologize if you saw this before I hit "edit."

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeyondGeography]

18. The state pays the price, genius

Because you'll get more negatives than a Tea Party referendum on same-sex marriage.

[akvo]

22. Sorry, I assumed people would read between the lines

but I was wrong. Maybe I should have written something like "the borrower is slave to the lender", but maybe that is too deep since it requires a little more knowledge. Or maybe just that the employer can make certain demands of the employee. Maybe you can figure it our now. Genius.

[JanMichael]

25. oh freaking spare me. Most of our friends are employed by the state

NONE of them are drug tested. Where did you get that stupid shit from?

[Rex]

35. Then you don't get the point of the message very well.

No problem, I will make is simple. You yourself claim that state employees can be drug tested, but why not include them in the mandatory testing you so want for the unemployed? Do you think the governor should be drug tested as well as all the staff and every member of state legislators? If so, then I apologize and you 'get it' but forgot that part.

[krabigirl]

36. Uh, one pays into unemployment insurance. You do know that, right?

Oh and btw, your fascist attitude sucks.

[girl gone mad]

39. Drug test everyone on Wall Street first.

Everyone who benefited from the bailouts and quantitative easing programs, every CEO of a company who gets government contracts, every politician who gets a pension, etc.

[era veteran]

48. I think drug testing is complete bullshit

I watched the Constitutionality question go back and forth in the early seventies. Gee, guess what thought won over time no matter how much it violates this on face.

Article the sixth ...... The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What the fuck is the probable cause for drug testing. Being a human being? That is how I think we have "Too much Government". Test one citizen? You had better test them all.

"The price" being moved to 2nd rate or 3rd rate citizenship. The right of the people to be secure in their persons!!!!

Why would we even debate this on a Democratic site??

[Bluebear]

49. Neanderthal

[LanternWaste]

50. I assume once genetic and DNA testing is more cost effective...

I assume once genetic and DNA testing is more cost effective, you will of course support both the private and the public desire to test relevant individuals for workplace violations receiving either a wage or a subsidy from either?

If not, what is the specific and relevant moral difference?

[JCMach1]

63. You saw the wasted millions this program is costing in FL

Please!!!!!

[devilgrrl]

68. Who's paying for the tests? Who's profiting?

:popcorn:

I pity your myopia.

[Occulus]

14. This is a horrible idea and it's catching on.

This will end up like employment drug tests; the vast majority see nothing wrong with it and think it'll save states money. We can't stop this one. In a few years, this will be law everywhere. Thanks, drug hysterics! Your positions are going to literally take food from the mouths of hungry children!

I'm really starting to just hate people on principle. :evilfrown:

[krabigirl]

37. It is especially creepy that this is happening while states legalize medical cannabis.

[jmowreader]

43. Oh, sir, you have NO idea...

A fairly substantial part of that vast majority was trained by Ronald Reagan to hate anyone who doesn't have at least one job. The more abuse we can heap on "those people," the better the jpbless-haters like it.

Drug testing welfare recipients, drug testing unemployment recipients...probably auditing EBT holders' cash purchases to be sure they're not buying luxuries like clothes they can't wear to work, pet food or alcohol is coming...basically, they're going to try cutting down the assistance rolls by making it so much more humiliating and difficult to seek assistance than it is now, people stop trying.

[Froward69]

15. They are convinced EVERYONE is having a better time than thay are.

or that everyone is on dope... as they are the ONLY sober people living in conservativeland...

[Johonny]

29. The is so anti-republican

they are suppose to be for trimming pointless fat from budgets. Yet here's a program that is very unlikely to save money, and at best is a push. Yet here they are trying to create a costly program that has no tangible benefit other than to funnel money into drug testing companies. It's crap like this that drive fiscal conservatives away from the Republican party.

[Tom Ripley]

30. More $$$ for a parasitical industry

[treestar]

41. Sounds like a big waste of time and effort

Why is it so important to Haley? Aren't there bigger problems?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

55. You really have to wonder

about somebody who "so wants" to drug test people. Does anybody else you know just wake up in the morning and go to work "so wanting" to drug test a group of people? Truly bizarre! :crazy:

[GoCubsGo]

59. Nothing bizarre about it.

Not if you have a deal with the company that would be doing the drug testing. I'm betting she'd be getting a kickback from it.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

60. Most likely that is the case (as with Scott in Florida)

Still, her almost frothy enthusiasm is still bizzare IMHO. Has she even explained WHY she thinks it's so important all of the sudden (I mean, aside from any potential deals with drug-testing companies, of course.)? Are they having an epidemic of drug-using people seeking UI and/or using it to support their habit or is it, as I suspect, just another opportunity for Republicans to start picking on yet another group of (un-)lucky "duckies" whom they don't like (I'm guessing the latter)? :puke:

The Republicans have gone off the charts in their disregard for people whom aren't them (or their campaign contributors). I guess the new mantra is, "they won't vote for us anyway, screw 'em!" :puke:

[GoCubsGo]

72. She's a teabagger.

That explains a lot right there. They consider the unemployed on the same par as they do those on welfare. They're all on the gubbmint teat, so they're all the dregs of society. Which means they're all on drugs, booze, etc.

Actually, their mantra is just plain, old "Screw 'em. I got mine. To hell with everyone else."

[TwilightGardener]

69. She's just POSITIVE they're all on drugs. That's why she's so excited.

[Initech]

58. Fucking disgusting, I'm getting so tired of the rich worship / poor hating mentality of the right.

[Viking12]

65. Govt waste and govt intrusion. I though Conservatives opposed those things?

[Blue_Tires]

71. she should test herself and the state legislature first...