Congress Gives States the Right to Drug Test the Unemployed

Tuesday, February 21, 2012
While millions of Americans will continue to enjoy their modest payroll tax cut, many of them will now have to submit to drug testing as part of the deal struck between the two parties in Congress. As part of the compromise reached to extend the tax cut, Democrats agreed to a Republican provision giving states the right to require those seeking unemployment benefits who were fired for drug use to undergo testing administered by the state. What’s strange about this concession is that workers who are fired for drug use are not eligible for unemployment benefits anyway.
However, a second section of the bill is likely to impact hundreds of thousands of individuals. This section applies to workers applying for jobs in industries where drug testing is prevalent even if the workers have never been laid off because of drug use. Any state that chooses to apply this rule will shift the financial burden of drug testing from employers to state taxpayers. The Department of Labor has not yet announced which industries will qualify for the drug testing provision.
Some opponents of the bill have proposed that members of state legislatures who approve drug testing applicants for unemployment benefits should themselves be tested for drugs since they too receive government benefits.
-David Wallechinsky, Noel Brinkerhoff
To Learn More:
Congress Okays Drug Tests for Unemployment Benefits (by Phillip Smith, Stop the Drug

Florida Orders Applicants for Federal Needy Families Program to be Drug Tested…and Pay for It (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov) 


Use what works, ditch what doesn't, not rocket science! 6 years ago
what kevin said - i wish people would work on a true, transparent, meritocracy basis. we learned about this in school, starting hundreds of years ago if not thousands, so where is it? counter to human nature, is it? human nature needs an upgrade, then! i told a friend to permanently f**k off after he believed i was incapable of fixing his laptop and got all anxious just because it took a few days (100s of gb of data to backup/restore/test, takes time a over usb 2.0 connection!) then when presented with the good result, he says "i don't know why i didn't believe you could do it"... er, yes you do know, mate, you thought that i was incapable of being professional just because i wasn't scared to get sloppy in front of others when out partying! except he couldn't admit it openly. then, the guy didn't want to pay even 1/3 of the going rate (hence why he contacted me in the first place, obviously), even though it was hours and hours of skilled labour, which he himself charges for when he works and wouldn't do for free - as i asked him to reciprocate! so, i can do my job with 'drugs' in my system part of the time. or i wouldn't do my job or do 'drugs', whichever is the most important (guess?) personally, i'm happy to be judged fairly, on results. some people aren't happy to pay, and are always trying to take advantage of everything/everyone they can in life. some people need a victim, and choose the perceived weakest. those people sometimes get a well-deserved nasty surprise! with this kind of prejudice above in mind, i find myself having less and less tolerance for people who will be lazy, inefficient, badly-organised, mis-manage and still expect to be paid! those (considering the vastly larger sums involved) are the real thieves, spongers and scroungers. they're also more sneaky than your average, poor, welfare recipient. plenty of them work in local->regional->national and international government, and allied to those who do, too. know your enemy and refuse to support scapegoat-ing as a diversionary tactic!
Anon 6 years ago
i wonder who owns the drug testing company? surely not a politician ;). greedy bastards corrupting our government should be jailed for treason!
Kevin 6 years ago
how about this no fucking drug tests if you dont do your job you get fucking fired regardless of drug use
BF 6 years ago
now if they would just do the same for ebt bennies..
anonymouse 6 years ago
this isn't about capitalism. it's about democracy. they are not synonymous. what this is about is civil rights, and the continuing hypocrisy of (and election-year grandstanding by) the gop and gop lite (the democrats). it's well past time that that minority of politicians in washington who haven't got their heads stuck up their nether cracks take a stand against an absurd and unworkable prohibition which is destroying civil society around the world and subverting the bill of rights at home.
John Steinsvold 6 years ago
an alternative to capitalism (if the people knew about it, they would demand it) several decades ago, margaret thatcher claimed: "there is no alternative". she was referring to capitalism. today, this negative attitude still persists. i would like to offer an alternative to capitalism for the american people to consider. please click on the following link. it will take you to an essay titled: "home of the brave?" which was published by the athenaeum library of philosophy: john steinsvold “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." ~ albert einstein

Leave a comment