My problem with drug testing welfare recipients is that they found that the drug testing cost more money than what they saved by kicking people off it. Turns out welfare recipients use illegal drugs at a lower rate than the general population.
Citation, NY times - "State records showed that the requirement cost more money to carry out than it saved."
"Only 108 out of 4,086 people tested — 2.6 percent — were found to have been using narcotics." - Which is lower than the estimated
8.9% of the general population. In the WSJ article, workers pop hot at 3.7%.
Keep in mind that I've heard that the wife of somebody important owns a good amount of stock in a drug testing company down there... They'd probably save more money hiring some auditors to catch fraud ala signing up fake kids, multiple registrations, illegal aliens, and such.
I'd prefer to have 'work fare' rather than 'welfare', but as long as we're going to have it, we might as well keep it as economical as possible. Bring back government cheese. At least then we had food in the warehouses that were intended to be used to prevent famine in the case of widespread crop failures. I like some of the reforms the governors are pushing, but find the drug testing irrelevant given the findings thus far. I don't object to trying it, but keeping it is stupid given the data. My process: 1. Idea, seems reasonable. 2. Try it. Doesn't work. 3. Rather than the usual government answer of 'keep doing it anyways, it's law!!!', get rid of it.
Don't forget that in most cases if you bring up ending welfare your opponents will start putting up pictures of the kids you'd 'starve'.
