I post mostly messages and commentary about religion and politics, and the scary occasions when they collide.
I am a: Liberal, Green, Christian, Math teacher
Lover of Math, Philosophy, Animals, Civil Rights, and Arguments of all kinds.

20th October 2011

Photo reblogged from with 700 notes

stfuconservatives:

getyourpokeon:

cognitivedissonance:

Uh-oh. Looks like Florida’s mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients is costing the taxpayers more than they’re actually saving.
Governor Rick Scott had praised the program when he signed it June 1st of this year, proclaiming, “It’s the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don’t want to waste tax dollars.”
However, the numbers are not adding up. From WFTV:

Just six weeks after Florida began drug testing welfare applicants, WFTV uncovered numbers which show that the program is already costing Central Florida taxpayers more than it saves. 9 Investigates’ reporter George Spencer found very few applicants are testing positive for drugs. The Department of Central Florida’s (DCF) region tested 40 applicants and only two tested positive for drugs, officials said. One of the tests is being appealed.
Governor Rick Scott said the program would save money. Critics said it already looks like a boondoggle. “We have a diminishing amount of returns for our tax dollars. Do we want out governor throwing our precious tax dollars into a program that has already been proven not to work?” Derek Brett of the ACLU said.
DCF said it has been referring applicants to clinics where drug screenings cost between $30 and $35. The applicant pays for the test and the state reimburses [the applicant] if they test negative. Therefore, the 38 applicants in the Central Florida area, who tested negative, were reimbursed at least $30 each and cost taxpayers $1,140. Meanwhile, the state is saving less than $240 a month by refusing benefits to those two applicants who tested positive.

I’m not at all shocked by this, and the ACLU is planning to file suit. Oh, and they’re also saying to Rick Scott: “We told you so.” Literally. 
The sad part? These measures scare people off from applying for benefits. If people test positive for drugs, it means two things: Either they ingested that substance at least once, and maybe only once, within the testing window - or it’s a false positive. Here’s a short list of things that can cause a false positive:
Poppy seeds: (Opioids)
Cold medications: (amphetamines)
Wellbutrin: (amphetamines)
Tricyclic antidepressants: (amphetamines)
Zoloft: (benzodiazepine)
Daypro: (benzodiazepine)
Quinolone antibiotic drugs: (Opioids)
Sustiva (prescribed for HIV): (cannabinoids)
Ibuprofen: (cannabinoids, barbiturates, phencyclidine [PCP])
Foods made with hemp and hemp oil: (cannabinoids)
Effexor: (phencyclidine)
Vicks Inhalers: (methamphetamines)
Zantac: (amphetamines)
Ultram: (phencyclidine)
Over-the-counter cough medicine containing dextromethorphan: (Opioids) 
Huh. So drug tests aren’t infallible and they’re not saving Florida any money? As the ACLU points out, Florida should have learned this 10 years ago, when they tried this program and had to dump it for cost reasons.
I’ll indulge the governor for a moment, though. Let’s say there’s parents who have used some kind of drugs in the period before the test. Why deprive children of quite possibly the only support they’ll receive because their parent(s) may or may not have used drugs voluntarily or involuntarily in the testing period? I’m not comfortable with that thought, and any other person with an iota of compassion should not be thrilled with that proposition either.



I know I’ve posted before about how this is a terrible idea that has saved zero dollars but by god it always bears mentioning again. MANDATORY DRUG TESTS FOR WELFARE ARE POVERTY-SHAMING AND COST MORE THAN THEY SAVE. CONGRATULATIONS ON ACCOMPLISHING NOTHING.

 I’d have to wonder if it ‘saves’ any money at all, given that poor people tend to spend everything they get, which goes right back into the economy. Dening them benefits might be hurting the state twice.

stfuconservatives:

getyourpokeon:

cognitivedissonance:

Uh-oh. Looks like Florida’s mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients is costing the taxpayers more than they’re actually saving.

Governor Rick Scott had praised the program when he signed it June 1st of this year, proclaiming, “It’s the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don’t want to waste tax dollars.”

However, the numbers are not adding up. From WFTV:

Just six weeks after Florida began drug testing welfare applicants, WFTV uncovered numbers which show that the program is already costing Central Florida taxpayers more than it saves. 9 Investigates’ reporter George Spencer found very few applicants are testing positive for drugs. The Department of Central Florida’s (DCF) region tested 40 applicants and only two tested positive for drugs, officials said. One of the tests is being appealed.

Governor Rick Scott said the program would save money. Critics said it already looks like a boondoggle. “We have a diminishing amount of returns for our tax dollars. Do we want out governor throwing our precious tax dollars into a program that has already been proven not to work?” Derek Brett of the ACLU said.

DCF said it has been referring applicants to clinics where drug screenings cost between $30 and $35. The applicant pays for the test and the state reimburses [the applicant] if they test negative. Therefore, the 38 applicants in the Central Florida area, who tested negative, were reimbursed at least $30 each and cost taxpayers $1,140. Meanwhile, the state is saving less than $240 a month by refusing benefits to those two applicants who tested positive.

I’m not at all shocked by this, and the ACLU is planning to file suit. Oh, and they’re also saying to Rick Scott: “We told you so.” Literally

The sad part? These measures scare people off from applying for benefits. If people test positive for drugs, it means two things: Either they ingested that substance at least once, and maybe only once, within the testing window - or it’s a false positive. Here’s a short list of things that can cause a false positive:

  • Poppy seeds: (Opioids)
  • Cold medications: (amphetamines)
  • Wellbutrin: (amphetamines)
  • Tricyclic antidepressants: (amphetamines)
  • Zoloft: (benzodiazepine)
  • Daypro: (benzodiazepine)
  • Quinolone antibiotic drugs: (Opioids)
  • Sustiva (prescribed for HIV): (cannabinoids)
  • Ibuprofen: (cannabinoids, barbiturates, phencyclidine [PCP])
  • Foods made with hemp and hemp oil: (cannabinoids)
  • Effexor: (phencyclidine)
  • Vicks Inhalers: (methamphetamines)
  • Zantac: (amphetamines)
  • Ultram: (phencyclidine)
  • Over-the-counter cough medicine containing dextromethorphan: (Opioids) 

Huh. So drug tests aren’t infallible and they’re not saving Florida any money? As the ACLU points out, Florida should have learned this 10 years ago, when they tried this program and had to dump it for cost reasons.

I’ll indulge the governor for a moment, though. Let’s say there’s parents who have used some kind of drugs in the period before the test. Why deprive children of quite possibly the only support they’ll receive because their parent(s) may or may not have used drugs voluntarily or involuntarily in the testing period? I’m not comfortable with that thought, and any other person with an iota of compassion should not be thrilled with that proposition either.

I know I’ve posted before about how this is a terrible idea that has saved zero dollars but by god it always bears mentioning again. MANDATORY DRUG TESTS FOR WELFARE ARE POVERTY-SHAMING AND COST MORE THAN THEY SAVE. CONGRATULATIONS ON ACCOMPLISHING NOTHING.

 I’d have to wonder if it ‘saves’ any money at all, given that poor people tend to spend everything they get, which goes right back into the economy. Dening them benefits might be hurting the state twice.

Source: cognitivedissonance

  1. reindarcy reblogged this from pixyled
  2. meghanbee reblogged this from eebnahgem
  3. angryqueerliveshere reblogged this from egoisme-a-deux
  4. endlesslap reblogged this from stormreach
  5. stormreach reblogged this from lostgrrrls
  6. cloudplusone reblogged this from hellosugarmouse
  7. galaxxxiez reblogged this from cognitivedissonance
  8. popeanon reblogged this from stfuconservatives and added:
    Holy crap, I didn’t know so many things could cause false positives. I mean everybody knows about poppies at least...
  9. hammerduke reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  10. unheardofsongs reblogged this from cognitivedissonance
  11. beahbeah reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  12. galileogst reblogged this from motherofserpents
  13. siuilaruinismoving reblogged this from lascapigliata and added:
    I would get false positives for BZD and PCP… sweeeet
  14. lascapigliata reblogged this from stfuconservatives and added:
    Ibuprofen?? Like… Advil?
  15. seeemsfine reblogged this from kalemason and added:
    i have some good-intentioned close friends who think that mandatory drug testing is a good idea. this is why it fucking...
  16. cloroxforshells reblogged this from absurdreasoning
  17. taigaluxcarpathia reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  18. xmasandribena reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  19. bethasaurus reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  20. lesbianlegbreaker reblogged this from bubonickitten
  21. carribou reblogged this from stfuconservatives and added:
    scott needs to go.
  22. dandelionchild reblogged this from methodistcoloringbook
  23. kagemni reblogged this from killsaatchi
  24. sara-sunflower reblogged this from stfuconservatives
  25. methodistcoloringbook reblogged this from cognitivedissonance and added:
    fuckin precious tax dollars indeed
  26. atravelersguidetospaceandtime reblogged this from coin-toss-girl and added:
    What she said.
  27. cognitivedissonance posted this