Nikki Haley Can't Back Up Drug Testing Claim

[RandySF]

Oops! South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) on Monday said she can't back up a claim she made about job seekers' drug use in her state.

Earlier, Haley claimed that about half of the applicants at a nuclear site in South Carolina failed a drug test -- evidence she used to justify the need to drug screen applicants for unemployment benefits. But it turns out that less than 1 percent of applicants failed the drug test, the Associated Press reports.

"I've never felt like I had to back up what people tell me," Haley told the Associated Press. "You assume that you're given good information. And now I'm learning through you guys that I have to be careful before I say something."

"I'm not going to say it anymore," she added.


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

[Kennah]

1. Maybe Naughty Nikki fucked her brains out.

What a dumb ass.

Heh, Nikki, everything Harry Mudd says is a lie..

[gateley]

2. Probably the same "source" who told Bachmann of the vaccine-induced

mental retardation.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. I see she's still going ahead with the proposed legislation.

If there's no factual background to prove the testing is necessary in order for indigent citizens to survive, I wonder if the law could survive a0 Fourth Amendment challenge of "unreasonable search" or whether it would survive the defense of the Commerce Clause where legislatures can enact laws that are "necessary and proper" to legitimate goals that have a "rational basis". (The evolving level of scrutiny applied by Federal courts to Commerce Clause cases should be considered in the context of rational basis review. The idea behind rational basis review is that the judiciary must show deference to the elected representatives of the people. A respect for the democratic process requires that the Courts uphold legislation if there are rational facts and reasons that could support Congressional judgment, even if the Justices would come to different conclusions.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause#Rational_basis_review

My question is how much or how little evidence of negligible drug use among welfare/food stamp recipients in South Carolina would be necessary to uphold this proposed legislation?

[HappyMe]

4. She don't need no stinkin fact check!

Jeez, another oblivious moran.