As much as I have often wondered what kind of hallucinogenic drugs Missouri state legislators are on when they pass one ludicrous bill after another, I never dreamed the same thoughts were running through their heads.
That revelation came this week as the Missouri House of Representatives debated a bill that would require anyone receiving public assistance to undergo periodic random drug tests.
From all appearances, it was just another election year bill designed to warm the cockles of the Republican majority in our state as it tries to further increase its advantage in both houses. After all, what stirs up voters in this Tea Party era more than a chance to stick it to the poor?
And then, the debate took an unexpected turn. An amendment was offered that would require state legislators to undergo drug tests every two years before they take office. Even more surprisingly, the amendment passed by a wide margin. The entire package then sailed through the House on a 113-40 vote.
The bill should have no problems making it through the Senate during an election year….which means Missourians will have taken another step in the continuing march toward eroding our freedom of privacy completely.
It is not just welfare recipients and state legislators who are the targets of this drug testing frenzy. Another Missouri bill would require random drug testing of public school teachers.
The U. S. Supreme Court has already approved school policies that require random drug testing for students who participate in extracurricular activities, and my school has adopted such a policy, even though you would think in a country that prides itself in its freedoms that someone would have to have probable cause in order to invade a student’s privacy in that fashion.
Even worse, the students have bought into the same line of reasoning fed to them by those who instituted drug testing. “Why should a drug test bother me if I don’t have anything to hide?” I have heard that comment many times.
Some day in the not-so-distant future, when everyone has to submit to random drug tests and we have been stripped of all expectation of privacy we may look back and see what a precious freedom we have lost.
12 comments:
So those who are teaching in our schools..and those who are taking government money shouldn't be subject to the same rules that a very large percentage of others in the country who work in the private sector. How convenient.
I support it completely. You want my hard earned money so you can sit home on your butt? Fine. But you're going to have to prove to me you're not sitting home popping pills and smokin' hooch. That's not what my money is for.
What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Now we have to prove to you we're not "popping pills" and smoking antiquated slang terms?
This is exactly like red light and speed enforcement cameras. Seems fine to most, but when you think about it all they do is chip away at your privacy and rights.
You can have all the privacy you want as long as you don't insist on taking my tax dollars.
Now let me get this straight, all legislators will be required to take a drug test before they take office? If they know they will be required to take the test on a certain day, will they just not do drugs for 30 days before that date? After that, they can go back to doing drugs if they are so inclined. How convenient. Where is the word "random" in the amendment?
Chief Justice Price said it best: For years we have waged a “war on drugs,” enacted “three strikes and you’re out” sentencing laws, and “thrown away the key” to be tough on crime. What we did not do was check to see how much it costs, or whether we were winning or losing. In fact, it has cost us billions of dollars and we have just as much crime now as we did when we started. We have created a bottleneck by arresting far more people than we can handle down through the rest of the system.
What has got to be hilarious is seeing some former hack journalist and present school teacher who used to be in favor of expanding the power of the government to essentially determine whether or not who we could associate with and how high of taxes we could pay now is all of a sudden in favor of limited government when that same government proposes drug testing those bottom of the trough tax-feeders like himself.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Turner.
looks like we still have some real seriously hostile hard core people out there. wonder what would/could ever happen to calm them down? sometimes it appears that there are a number of people that can only settle for "my way or the highway".
how are as a nation ever survive with this diverse attitude?
Hey anon 12:21, you need to mellow out.
Stay away from that meth, it makes you mean.
Why stop at welfare recipients? If you receive government money than you should take a drug test. Social Security. Medicare. Medicaid. Unemployment benefits. FHA mortgage recipients. People who accept FDIC coverage on their bank accounts.
And why just "drugs" - why not alcohol and tobacco. In terms of cost to our health care industry and economy, alcohol abuse and tobacco addiction are just as expensive as other drugs.
And then ..........
It always seems like we are very supportive of intrusive programs for "those people." But when WE become, through whatever circumstances, THOSE PEOPLE, it's an entirely different issue. It's not just a slippery slope...it's throwing people off the cliff in the name of judgment. What about the children of "those people" who have no say in what choices their parents make? Guess they are thrown off the cliff, too. After all, they'll probably grow up to be just like their parents...right?
It is so ironic that someone so opposed to recognizing the parental right to select schools supports protecting the freedom of drug abusers to receive welfare.
Post a Comment