Government Aid And Assistance During The United States

There is no doubt that those Americans in need of assistance have been subjected to unconstitutional treatment by the welfare program. As a result of the criminal actions of a few, all of the needy are being unfairly scrutinized. The implementation of unfounded drug testing in addition to the already criminalizing application process will only serve to further stigmatize the needy—and all in the name of the mighty dollar. Some believe that it is not the quest to save money that is the driving force behind the push for this legislation. Rather, it is a desire to make millions for the pharmaceutical companies that lawmakers are seeking to achieve.

Federal Government has the ability to create positive change in many social welfare systems. The support of the government ultimately determines the success of a social welfare program. They play an important role in the decisions of how funds are allocated and the importance of these various vulnerable populations. The federal government is used as a tool, to help implement and support social welfare programs. However, from my own opinion, it is sometimes lacking in the proper support needed in many aspects. This is caused by a plethora of reasons, not to say that the government is completely unsupportive. Yet, there may be a gap in the perception of these social issues. The government puts in place laws, regulations, system structures, and so on. Therefore, because the government are the implementers of how our country is ran, it is their responsibility to be a main facets in the support of the gaps that inevitably occur. Nonetheless, it can be difficult to understand the needs of these population’s and the reality of their hardships. Most in a position of power, such as the federal government, have not experienced the severity of the many situations, that results in individuals needing assistance from these social welfare programs. Moreover, it is essential that there is outreach to these populations. All the same, getting a more realistic view of the life in these contexts. For instance, the time cap of being on assistance throughout one’s

Over the years welfare has been provided to several people who cannot support themselves. This system was originally invented to help those who lost jobs or were not making the minimal salary required to support them. Recently, several American citizens have begun to raise questions about drug users and welfare. Debate soon broke out in 1996 causing several states to take drug testing into consideration. Welfare drug testing can only take place in certain situations: the state must have a law for drug testing, only when there is suspicion of drug use, and if the supreme court passes a law requiring it.

Author Ilan Wurman argues in this his publication, that drug testing to apply for welfare violates the fourth amendment of the constitution so changes must be made to the current system. A failed testing program in Florida required all applicants to complete a drug screening test before receiving benefits and the cost of the tests are paid for by the applicant, but reimbursed if the test results are negative. Wurman concludes by stating that suspicion less drug testing of government assistance recipients in

a.i) Government assistance, or welfare, is a very broad term. There are many different welfare programs available in the United States e.g., food stamps, cash assistance, and government housing. Currently there is mass debate, in courtrooms across the U.S., regarding the legality and morality of pre-assistance drug testing. This report is intended to familiarize the reader with the history of welfare reform; the histories of drug testing in regards to assistance eligibility; and persuade the audience to vote yes for mandatory pre-assistance drug testing.

The process of drug testing individuals who are applying or receiving welfare benefits has recently become the focus of a widely spread controversy. Florida, the first state to pass the law, now requires all individuals applying for public assistance to undergo drug testing. The state of Kentucky, among others, have considered following this trend. State lawmakers hope to prevent the squandering of taxpayer dollars on drugs by proposing similar guidelines. Alabama’s states representative Kerry Rich clearly affirmed his state’s position on the matter, “I don’t think the taxpayers should have to help fund somebody’s drug habit” (qtd. in Time).

Poverty has been a growing problem in many cities around the United States. Because of this growing problem,many state governments currently give welfare benefits to people that may not be able to provide for themselves. However, there are some some taxpayers that object to these benefits being given out. It is because they imagine that the people receiving these benefits will spend the money on drugs instead of what the benefits are intended for. It is because of this thinking that since 2009 seven states have enacted legislature to drug test those receiving government assistance. By drug testing citizens receiving government assistance, the government is unfairly assuming that welfare recipients are using their money that they receive on drugs. There are people arguing for both sides, I for one am against drug testing for government assistance.

In today’s America, government aid is highly depended on. The US government has spent $498 billion dollars this year on welfare alone. The state of Tennessee has an average of 250,000 residents on welfare and has $3 billion dollars this year alone. To help cut costs and help tax payers, 36 states, including Tennessee, have proposed a bill to drug test all welfare recipients. Since the beginning of the year, the welfare rate has jumped 7 percent while at the same time, the welfare funds are drying up. Tennessee funds have dropped 17.5 percent, which comes out to be about $215.3 million dollars this year. State lawmakers have proposed that if drug users on welfare are

In this article, author William Judge states that United States senator Orrin Hatch proposed an amendment to a jobs bill that also included a requirement for states to drug test those receiving temporary government assistance. The proposal received a great amount of backlash because it failed to include a defined plan to treat the recipients that test positive for substance abuse. Judge elaborates that, drug abuse is an issue in the welfare system but the proposed amendment does not provide enough structure to change current laws and implement drug testing. The lack of structure discourages taxpayers from supporting the bill be the unknown amount of testing and treatment services could be costly. Judge believes that drug testing would result in a constitutional legal battle that would outweigh the government’s interest in the drug abuse problem. Evaluation: This article is primarily informative and the author only offers his opinion on the subject after all of the facts have been introduced. Judge provides a perspective on both sides of the proposed amendment, while giving useful background information. He shows that he critically analyzed the amendment by elaborating

This proposal points out how Texas should adopt drug testing policy for welfare recipients. We researched the state of Oklahoma, its efforts to improve its well-being, the decreased amount of welfare recipients received while increasing employment and the welfare program abilities. Texas is currently reopening this Bill and reconsidering this proposal for drug testing all welfare recipients. This will allow all of Texas welfare recipient’s access to different programs for personal improvement, job opportunists and economic growth.

United States lawmakers face one of the most pressing issues of our time-welfare reform. New screening processes, often considered a direct violation of constitutional rights, have already been enacted in many states. Strong evidence exists, asserting that the practice of administering drug testing to welfare recipients will cost the U.S. taxpayers more money in the long run, stigmatize applicants and participants, and serve only the purpose of making the pharmaceutical companies more powerful. In order to protect the constitutional rights of potential welfare recipients, United States lawmakers should avoid further criminalizing the poor by submitting them to drug testing and/or a nationwide welfare registry.

This paper will explore the pros and cons on the issue of drug testing welfare recipients and applicants. The journals and articles used to determine whether drug testing is necessary or a hindrance to public assistance applicants, recipients and the government vary in their argument on the effects of those who receive assistance. The study, completed by Anderson, Shannon, Schyb and Goldstein (2002) determined that, due to the change in Welfare reform in 1996, the disruption of benefits increased the risk homelessness and usage of drugs and alcohol. Montoya, Bell, Atkinson, Nagy and Whitsett (2002) studied the differences in 442 female welfare recipients’ psychological and employment well-being based on chronic use or non-drug usage. Morgenstern and Blanchard (2006) argue that the changes in welfare reform may significantly reduce the amount of drug using recipients and applicants on welfare and increase in substance abuse programs. This paper will examine statistical data, recommendations by the U.S. Commission of Civil Rights and the studies of Anderson et al. (2002), Montoya et al.(2002), and Morgenstern et al.(2006) to bring to light the varying conclusions made over the last 13 years, 2002-2015, as to the effectiveness and ineffectiveness that drug testing may have on welfare recipients and applicants.

In the United States there are “over 100 million people receiving some form of federal welfare” (Munoz#7). The purpose of creating the welfare system was to provide aid to those families with “little to no income” (article 1). Back in 1996 Clinton passed the welfare reform act; allowing state full control of the welfare system. The Welfare Reform Act was to help steer welfare

Public welfare is the term which stands for the variety of tax-supported programs that provide cash assistance or services to residents who are not able to financially take care of themselves (Hansan, 2011). This program was started in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. There are several types of welfare including health care, food stamps, child care assistance, cash aid, and housing assistance. Medicaid is considered to be one of the welfare programs; it is a medical care that provides cash income assistance for the poor (“Medicaid”, 2002). Recipients must meet multiple requirements that are established prior to receiving aid. The requirements include low income, child dependency, family size, and any crisis situation such as pregnancy, unemployment, and medical emergencies (Welfare Information, n.d.). As of today, some states require welfare recipients to get drug tested when applying for financial benefits. Arguments arose whether the test should take place or not. Many people believe that the government should not drug test welfare recipients because unpleasant consequences occur. Not only does drug testing recipients create chaos in the U.S. bureaucratic system, it also labels the recipients, creating stigma and deviance especially if the test comes out positive. Welfare recipients are being discriminated by society and this may lead to knowledge gaps between the underclass and other social classes which creates a caste system. Many negative effects take place as

This paper will introduce the controversial topic of the 1996 Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients Act used as a provision for receiving social welfare benefits. First, it will present to you two opposing views from the Dominant American Social Value system. Second, it will present the insight of both Social Welfare perspectives that may have guided these decisions. Third, it will present to you the implications of possible negative impacts on the family due to drug testing as it relates to Social Welfare. Lastly, I will give you my personal perspective on why or why not the law surrounding Drug Testing Welfare Recipients is justifiable.