Pubdate: Mon, 07 Nov 2011
Source: News Chief (FL)
Copyright: 2011 NewsChief.com
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/IRdyxK8H
Website: http://www.newschief.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3278
Note: This editorial appeared recently in The News Herald, Panama City.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Testing)

STATE SHOULDN'T APPEAL WELFARE DRUG TESTING

It didn't take long for Florida's new policy of drug testing welfare 
recipients to run afoul of the Constitution.

The state implemented the testing July 1, and on Oct. 24 a federal 
judge in Orlando issued a temporary injunction to halt it on the 
grounds that it likely violated the Fourth Amendment protections 
against illegal searches and seizures. ...

Gov. Rick Scott promoted drug testing of welfare recipients as being 
necessary to safeguard public dollars.

But U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven rejected that argument, writing: 
"If invoking an interest in preventing public funds from potentially 
being used to fund drug use were the only requirement to establish a 
special need, the state could impose drug testing as an eligibility 
requirement for every beneficiary of every government program. Such 
blanket intrusions cannot be countenanced under the Fourth Amendment."

Indeed, why are welfare recipients held to a higher standard of 
conduct than other recipients of taxpayer largess?

Being poor doesn't give you fewer rights. Florida spends tens of 
millions of dollars each year on "economic incentives" - cash payouts 
to businesses to lure jobs to the state.

Why not drug test the CEOs of each company?

For that matter, why not drug test elected officials before each vote 
they take in the Legislature? (Actually, that would be pointless - 
they've already proved they don't need to be high to waste tax dollars.)

There is no evidence that people on welfare use drugs at a higher 
rate than the general population.

Scriven cited a 1999 study of a state pilot project which found that 
only 5 percent of Florida's welfare applicants tested positive for 
illicit drug use, which is lower than the national rate of 8 percent. .

The prospects of the law surviving further judicial scrutiny are 
slim. Instead of wasting more time and taxpayer money, Florida should 
refrain from appealing Judge Scriven's ruling and admit what was 
obvious from the start: The statute is unconstitutional.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom