There has been much speculation over the past years as to whether Welfare is even necessary, and with the large list of people who benefit from it growing every day, the answer some state legislatures give is not eliminating Welfare, but rather tweaking the rules a little bit. This all started in 2011, it was proposed at the Florida, Missouri and Arizona State Legislature. These state legislatures proposed for the people who receive Welfare be tested on a regular basis. (Finzel) I believe that although it may seem like a morally great idea, it is something difficult to accomplish; considering all of the people on Welfare that would have to be tested and the money that would go into them being tested. Not just that, the children that would be affected if their parents failed the test. Taking that all into consideration puts me on the fence with this issue. …show more content…
In reducing the amount of people on Welfare it would be a huge tax reduction for many tax payers. A big problem that happened at the start of the year in 2015 was the lack of people looking for jobs. All the baby boomers from the 1970s were retiring at the masses and younger people are opting to educate themselves rather than work. (Soergel) So, a lot of high entry level positions were available, but with no one to fill them. And with this new regulation it would put a lot of people outside of Welfare and out looking for new jobs, in return helping the
Maybe by providing stricter guidelines, such as job search requirements, along with proof of the job search, welfare would not be as attractive and recipients will be more likely to get a job. Newt Gringrich, a Former speaker of the House of Representatives, wrote an essay titled “Renewing America” “The welfare system has sapped the spirit of the poor and made it harder to climb the first rung of the economic ladder.” (usnews.com). Sucha system has placed an unfair burden on the hard workers who are forced to pay for these programs. Gringrich states, “Why should taxpayers be forced to take fiscal responsibility for those who do not take responsibility for themselves? He continues to say “As individuals,we are responsible for our own actions and their consequences.” If people do notcare about their own well being then why should I be forced to care? As Gringrich sees it, “If society is responsible for everything, then no one is personally responsible for anything. With that said, without responsibility, are we truly free? Welfare should be used for the right purposes; to help those who are truly in need get on their feet and become successful. But because of the excessive misuse, welfare has now developed a stigma, and should be reformed to its original notion, and that is for its help and not
Vitter feels that there are certain people who are receiving welfare, and they are misusing the program. Removing welfare recipients or even having them to enter a rehabilitation program and successfully complete it in order to receive help that they need, will save taxpayer and the government billions of dollars. He also feels that the rehabilitation program will help create a better life for those that complete it and want to stay on welfare.
Welfare, enacted by one of the greatest presidents of the United States’s existence, Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt, is an effective and useful means to assist American families in need. Throughout history, welfare has proven to help people get back on their feet and into society. Despite the system’s many useful benefits, like most attributes in this world, welfare has kinks in the system. In fact, welfare has yet to be perfected, even though it was established in the year of 1935 and is still in use today. The system may never be perfected, but it can be improved. There are many different thoughts and ideas pertaining to how welfare should change. Some believe it should be eliminated entirely. In doing so, many people all across the nation would be harmed in financial and mental manners. How can welfare be reformed? Is it even possible? The answer is absolutely. It must be reformed, and many would agree on the matter. It is, however, a sensitive and controversial topic to most. Political parties tend to take interest in the discussion of welfare reform, as well. The typical, left-wing Democrat wishes to give more to welfare users, while the standard right-wing Republican would like to decrease what is given to Americans. If everything has its imperfections, why should welfare be reformed? Why not leave it the way it is and let the government figure out the fine print? There are those that take this sort of stance on welfare reform, and there are some that believe differently.
So what are the opinions of the individuals within the country? It’s a very controversial topic within the states, and people have very strong opinions regarding drug testing recipients of welfare. There aren’t many with a ‘middle’ opinion. They normally take one side of the argument. People who passionately believe anyone who receives welfare should be tested, and there are many people who swing the complete opposite way and essentially believe that it’s unconstitutional.
People collecting welfare should undergo drug testing to get the money the government is giving them, because it makes welfare applicants go down at least 48 percent, it also will help the national debt go down and help people with their drug problems. There are many benefits of drug testing welfare recipients.
The topic of mandating regular drug testing for those on welfare is very controversial. It seems too one-sided to say that those who do drugs are the only people who should not be allowed welfare. There are many other ways that people might abuse their need of welfare money in illegal and unethical ways. Also, with the ever-increasing demand for welfare it seems more cost prohibitive to conduct regular drug testing on those who receive welfare. There is also the possibility of the drug test being compromised or destroyed due to human corruption. Instead, we should put more focus on the advancement and use of technology to monitor how welfare money is being used.
Living day to day throughout our country, many people receive government assistance in order to meet the basic necessities needed in life. These people are provided with benefits because of the many assistance programs that have been created to help the citizens of the United States. However, people are beginning to notice that there are many recipients that use the money for things other than living essentials. This is a big problem in the eyes of the tax payers because they see people who are on welfare take their money and buy drugs with it. This has raised the question, should the government drug test welfare recipients? Due to the increase of government assistance programs being abused, welfare recipients should be drug tested because
Although testing for welfare often receives backlash there is information that it would decrease drug abuse, that people deserve to know where their money is going, and it would ultimately save money.
This will give people what they want, it limits placed on government spending and improving the economy's debt. (Magoon 12, 61) Welfare is made to help individuals get back on their feet not a life supply, if you need assistance the government is willing to help but it should be temporary.Welfare is a privilege and abusing the system ruins it for the families in need of help. The government wants to get families out of poverty and by eliminating the problem only helps us by improving our economy. (Magoon 11)
Some people think that drug testings those on welfare is unfair to the kids, because if the parents are positive on a drug screening, they think the kids take the punishment because they wont recieve benefits, and food. I would feel as if the parents would stop using drugs, if that were the case to keep their kids from not having any food, or medical help. In the long run it could be helping
The article, “States Adding Drug Test as Hurdle for Welfare” stated that in three dozen sates proposed drug testing for the people that are on welfare. However, people say that the tax dollars given to them are not being misused and that it’s promoting stereotypes about the poor. the article says that in Florida, people that receive welfare have to pay for their own drug tests. Also, it says that people argued that it was unreasonable to drug test those on welfare and that it was an act of search and seizure. It’s noted that drug tests are getting more and more required for getting jobs. Ellen Brandom, a state representative in Missouri said, “Working people today work very hard to make ends meet, and it just doesn’t seem fair to them that
I feel if someone has to pass a drug test to gain employment the same rule should apply to a person(s) before the qualify for welfare assistance. There are others that hold a similar position on mandatory testing, for example, Governor Paul LePage of Augusta, ME “hailed drug screenings for certain welfare recipients a way of protecting taxpayer’s dollars…arguing that welfare dollars shouldn’t be enabling drug abuse” (Durkin, 2015, para. 1). Illinois state representative Bill Mitchell, “would like to see mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients, and work requirements for those who receive food stamps” (Keever, 2015, p. 1). On November 3rd, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, “approved an administrative rule…that would establish a process to screen for and test for the use of controlled substances by applicants for state work experience programs, and to refer those determined to be abusing drugs to a treatment program” (King, 2015, para. 2). These are but a few examples, which suggest mandatory testing is gaining ground.
Welfare should be more regulated, for the reason that many people are getting paid not to work and for luxuries. For example, in the source “10 Most Important Welfare Pros and Cons” by anonymous, it asserts, “While many of the people that receive welfare benefits truly do need them, there is of course the abusers of the system. There are thousands of
Welfare should not be reformed because it helps single parents. 40 percent of single mothers are poor, 12 million single parents-mother-headed families are poor (Freeman). Welfare can help keep these single parent families stay stable to be an effective families. 12 million single parents mothers headed families can be reduced to less underachieving families with the assistants of welfare. Also with single parents they never had an significant other.
With this being said, it is only fair that those who receive their income from the state (and ultimately from those with jobs) should also be subject to the same testing. Companies and independent testing agencies have been conducting these tests for years now, it does not seem too unjust to ask those receiving welfare to be added to these employed groups already being tested.