100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Cash Assistance/Urine Testing | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
4th amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. You are right, a person has the right to not have their house, their vehicle or their body searched without due cause upholdable by a court of law. Nor may anything be taken away from those three areas without due cause. HOWEVER, welfare, social service, whatever you want to call it, is not something you own, nor is it a RIGHT for you to receive it. A right by definition is something that can not legally be taken away from you. However, a priviledge can be denied if you do not meet certain criteria. It is my opinion that one of the deciding criteria should be to have to undergo random drug testing, or forfeit your benefits. You could legally decline to give your urine when asked, but that would put an immediate end to your case, and you would have to start all over again (which most places means a 30 to fourty five day wait for benefits to start), and have to take a urinalyses in order for them to begin any way. And if this happens more than once, then you have a one year black from assistance. As far as children involved, the law is the law. If someone pisses hot they almost always go to jail, at least initially, and if they have children the state is capable of coming in and removing them from the home due to drug use. The same would still hold true if you pissed hot for welfare. And I would go so far as to suggest tat if you chose to have your case closed instead of giving urine, it would automatically have to be reported to the child welfare department (just like a doctor is required to report certain injuries and such), and investigated. yep take the children to force the poor people to comply.,good idea..not. Dont twist my words. I said the children can be removed from a persons custody when they prove positive for illegal drugs. This is because that environment is not a safe or healthy environment for the kids, if for no other reason than it teaches the kids that there is nothing wrong with breaking the law as long as you dont egt caught. Now, if you are not using drugs, then there is no reason for you to even be concerned about being tested, is there? You will show negative and thats the end. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sorry but you said if i refuse to take the test then child welfare should be called.i pay taxes just like you,since i was 16 so if I need a little help now then I've earned it and I am insulted I have to piss to prove myself worthy of welfare money,subsidy,pell grant etc.The only people that are going to suffer in this piss test scenario are the kids whether from loss of the money or being ripped from their parents.
I don't do drugs or participate in illegal activities,or take welfare and I refuse to pee without probable cause just because I am poor and some ass is pissed he had to help a fellow American |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sorry but you said if i refuse to take the test then child welfare should be called.i pay taxes just like you,since i was 16 so if I need a little help now then I've earned it and I am insulted I have to piss to prove myself worthy of welfare money,subsidy,pell grant etc.The only people that are going to suffer in this piss test scenario are the kids whether from loss of the money or being ripped from their parents. I don't do drugs or participate in illegal activities,or take welfare and I refuse to pee without probable cause just because I am poor and some ass is pissed he had to help a fellow American Yes it is my belief that a person shuld have to take a piss test ino rder to qualify for aid. This is nothing personal against anyone, it is a means to finding those who are abusing the welfare sstem by using drugs. And for those that say it is not abuse, I am sorry but yes it is abuse of the system if you are using drugs and collecting welfare. You obvviously can not hold a job, most likely due to being on drugs (not you cldmom), so you are collecting assistance. While you continue to use drugs, you will continue to be unable to be employed. Thus you will continue to receive assistance. In the end you are receiving assistance for being on drugs, and that is absolutely wrong. Now, I am not saying everybody on assistance does this. There are a lot of us who follow the letter of the current law to get the assistance so we can continue to pay our bills, and keep a roof over our heads, feed our children and take them to the doctor when neccesary. But a sad fact of the matter is, there are way too many people that do abuse the system, and no not just by usig drugs, but drugs are the issue of this a[prticular topic. I for one do not want my taxes going to help someone continue their drug issues. I have no problem paying taxes, I agree with it completely. But I believe that if you are going to collect assistance, then you need to step up to the plate and do everythign you can to get off of it as soon as possible. And this means getting clean from drugs if that is a problem for you. If you are not trying to do your best to get off of assistance and carry your own way, then you don't need to be receiving assistance, as I am sure every single person here will agree. And biggest of all, if you have children, and you are using drugs, then the children need to be removed from your home anyway cause you are a danger to them. But as far as having child protective called if you refuse to take a piss test, yes I firmly believe that should be the case. Not to punishyuo or the children. Not to harrass you; but the simple fact is, the only reason you could possibly have to refuse to do so, would be if you knew you were going to come up hot. And refusing to take a test suggests that yuo are going to come up hot. Remember if you are pulled over by a cop, yes you can legally refuse to take a breathalizer. However, you will be arrested on the spot and taken to have your blood drawn in order to get a blood alcohol level assessed. It is one of the statements you sign and agree to when you first get your license. With that being the case, then yes if you refused to give a urine sample for the priviledge of receiving assistance, then yas you should lose your assistance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THIS GUY MAKES A GOOD POINT This was written by a construction worker in Fort MacMurray...he sure Makes a lot of sense to me! Read on... I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my Taxes as it sees fit. In order to earn that pay cheque, I work on a rig site for a Fort Mac Construction project, I am required to pass a random urine test, with Which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my Taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare cheque because I Have to pass one to earn it for them ... ? Please understand - I have no problem with helping people get back on Their feet. I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their Arse drinking beer and smoking dope. Could you imagine how much money the provinces would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance cheque ... ? And just a side note, I have received public assistance checks in the past, and will probably be doing so again. due to being laid off. I have absolutely no problem with having to pee in a cup in order to receive benefits (just let me have a cup of coffee first so we are not waiting all day, lol) This is a prejudicial comment and should not be allowed. Welfare recipients already jump through hoops to get benefits, I used to be a welfare technician and I know. To assume that they sit on their asses and collect is sick and prejudicial.  I just have to wonder "do people not have enough problems of their own to worry about in their own lives without creating some for others", Just because the hatemongers in our country want you to believe that welfare is the lazy peoples way of life, does not make them right. Really people, clean your own yard before working on others yards, please and thank you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
daniel48706
on
Sat 02/23/08 05:45 PM
|
|
This is a prejudicial comment and should not be allowed. Welfare recipients already jump through hoops to get benefits, I used to be a welfare technician and I know. To assume that they sit on their asses and collect is sick and prejudicial. I just have to wonder "do people not have enough problems of their own to worry about in their own lives without creating some for others", Just because the hatemongers in our country want you to believe that welfare is the lazy peoples way of life, does not make them right. Really people, clean your own yard before working on others yards, please and thank you Please tell me how this is prejudicial. The definition for prejudicial (in this case) is as follows: leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion Now, I for one can name off DOZENS of welfare recipients, who use and abuse the system. I have seen them do so myself, and I have heard them admit to it of their own free will, most of them stating they would continue to do so, as they did nto want the hassles of going to work and being a single parent. Thus I am not being prejudicial. In michigan, if you are on cash assistance, you are required to go to a state mandated program that has three phases. Phase one, you are taught how to write a resume and cover letter; you are taught how to write business letters, and ways to look for work other than looking in the paper. If you need assistance with housing ro whatever you are given said assistance (to a point). Phase two: you continue with the resumes and cover letters, letters of introduction, and you start learning how too present yiourself in an interview, and over the phone etc. Phase three: You go out for the day looking for work. You are required to bring back proof of how many places you went to looking for work, etc and to report back at the end of the day. There is also a littel more training and seminars but it is primarily job hunting. Now the easiest way to beat the system here, is hit all the places ina certain radius the first couple days. Get applications to take home with you and make copies of them. Then every day you go into class you tell your istructor that you are going out looking for work, and instead go home for the day. You bring back the applications for three places or whatever at the end of the day. This is what a LOT of people do to get past the system. There are dozens upon dozens of other wyas to do so as well, although that is the easiest cause the isntructors, for the most part, do not follow up and make sure you are actually going to these places. They can't. Now, please do not tell me that people do not use the system or that there ar enot people out there working the system cause they are unwilling to go out and work. I am not syaing all people do this. I am not even saying the majority do so, but a major percentage do, and we have GOT to do something to start holding them accountable. And as far as welfare recipients being on drugs, I have watched three girls come into "class" higher than a kite. one ended up being rushed to the er for an overdose. All three were arrested. They had been on welfare for over five years each, and doing this the entire time. The one lady is now clean, and thankful that she had been arrested as it helped her get her life straightened around. I have no idea about the other two. The only reason they were caught too, is they had become lazy i their habits because no one is holding them accountable for their own actions and responsibilities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Sat 02/23/08 06:05 PM
|
|
This is a prejudicial comment and should not be allowed. Welfare recipients already jump through hoops to get benefits, I used to be a welfare technician and I know. To assume that they sit on their asses and collect is sick and prejudicial. I just have to wonder "do people not have enough problems of their own to worry about in their own lives without creating some for others", Just because the hatemongers in our country want you to believe that welfare is the lazy peoples way of life, does not make them right. Really people, clean your own yard before working on others yards, please and thank you Please tell me how this is prejudicial. The definition for prejudicial (in this case) is as follows: leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion Now, I for one can name off DOZENS of welfare recipients, who use and abuse the system. I have seen them do so myself, and I have heard them admit to it of their own free will, most of them stating they would continue to do so, as they did nto want the hassles of going to work and being a single parent. Thus I am not being prejudicial. In michigan, if you are on cash assistance, you are required to go to a state mandated program that has three phases. Phase one, you are taught how to write a resume and cover letter; you are taught how to write business letters, and ways to look for work other than looking in the paper. If you need assistance with housing ro whatever you are given said assistance (to a point). Phase two: you continue with the resumes and cover letters, letters of introduction, and you start learning how too present yiourself in an interview, and over the phone etc. Phase three: You go out for the day looking for work. You are required to bring back proof of how many places you went to looking for work, etc and to report back at the end of the day. There is also a littel more training and seminars but it is primarily job hunting. Now the easiest way to beat the system here, is hit all the places ina certain radius the first couple days. Get applications to take home with you and make copies of them. Then every day you go into class you tell your istructor that you are going out looking for work, and instead go home for the day. You bring back the applications for three places or whatever at the end of the day. This is what a LOT of people do to get past the system. There are dozens upon dozens of other wyas to do so as well, although that is the easiest cause the isntructors, for the most part, do not follow up and make sure you are actually going to these places. They can't. Now, please do not tell me that people do not use the system or that there ar enot people out there working the system cause they are unwilling to go out and work. I am not syaing all people do this. I am not even saying the majority do so, but a major percentage do, and we have GOT to do something to start holding them accountable. And as far as welfare recipients being on drugs, I have watched three girls come into "class" higher than a kite. one ended up being rushed to the er for an overdose. All three were arrested. They had been on welfare for over five years each, and doing this the entire time. The one lady is now clean, and thankful that she had been arrested as it helped her get her life straightened around. I have no idea about the other two. The only reason they were caught too, is they had become lazy i their habits because no one is holding them accountable for their own actions and responsibilities. Your whole post hit the definition you gave of prejudicial so now what? The welfare system by design assists those who need a leg up in life. And I can verify that the majority of them get the leg up and do well. By your very biased, prejudicial rant you have painted them with criminal tendencies and unlaw abiding nature. This is the definition of prejudice, some take a preconceived thought they are taught and paint all who look the same as the same, some take one experience with one type or kind of person and paint all of them as the same as this one person or experience, some watch people without knowing them form a prejudgement of what they believe them to be like and paint all just like this ideal. ALL of this is prejudice. Now as for violators or criminals in our country, there are criminals in all backgrounds, races, economic status, religious background, sexual orientation, etc...... To name one of those more criminal than the other is prejudicial. Sorry your defense of your stance is still prejudicial. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
AllSmilesInTulsa
on
Sat 02/23/08 06:04 PM
|
|
When my tax dollars are used to assist someone else (for which I do not mind) their yard becomes my business. I think it is a good idea. I also feel the only people that should have a problem with it are the ones using the drugs.
I feel that politicians, law enforcement and other civil servants who are paid with tax dollars should submit for drug testing as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a prejudicial comment and should not be allowed. Welfare recipients already jump through hoops to get benefits, I used to be a welfare technician and I know. To assume that they sit on their asses and collect is sick and prejudicial. I just have to wonder "do people not have enough problems of their own to worry about in their own lives without creating some for others", Just because the hatemongers in our country want you to believe that welfare is the lazy peoples way of life, does not make them right. Really people, clean your own yard before working on others yards, please and thank you Please tell me how this is prejudicial. The definition for prejudicial (in this case) is as follows: leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion Now, I for one can name off DOZENS of welfare recipients, who use and abuse the system. I have seen them do so myself, and I have heard them admit to it of their own free will, most of them stating they would continue to do so, as they did nto want the hassles of going to work and being a single parent. Thus I am not being prejudicial. In michigan, if you are on cash assistance, you are required to go to a state mandated program that has three phases. Phase one, you are taught how to write a resume and cover letter; you are taught how to write business letters, and ways to look for work other than looking in the paper. If you need assistance with housing ro whatever you are given said assistance (to a point). Phase two: you continue with the resumes and cover letters, letters of introduction, and you start learning how too present yiourself in an interview, and over the phone etc. Phase three: You go out for the day looking for work. You are required to bring back proof of how many places you went to looking for work, etc and to report back at the end of the day. There is also a littel more training and seminars but it is primarily job hunting. Now the easiest way to beat the system here, is hit all the places ina certain radius the first couple days. Get applications to take home with you and make copies of them. Then every day you go into class you tell your istructor that you are going out looking for work, and instead go home for the day. You bring back the applications for three places or whatever at the end of the day. This is what a LOT of people do to get past the system. There are dozens upon dozens of other wyas to do so as well, although that is the easiest cause the isntructors, for the most part, do not follow up and make sure you are actually going to these places. They can't. Now, please do not tell me that people do not use the system or that there ar enot people out there working the system cause they are unwilling to go out and work. I am not syaing all people do this. I am not even saying the majority do so, but a major percentage do, and we have GOT to do something to start holding them accountable. And as far as welfare recipients being on drugs, I have watched three girls come into "class" higher than a kite. one ended up being rushed to the er for an overdose. All three were arrested. They had been on welfare for over five years each, and doing this the entire time. The one lady is now clean, and thankful that she had been arrested as it helped her get her life straightened around. I have no idea about the other two. The only reason they were caught too, is they had become lazy i their habits because no one is holding them accountable for their own actions and responsibilities. You whole post hit the definition you gave of prejudicial so now what? The welfare system by design assists those who need a leg up in life. And I can verify that the majority of them get the leg up and do well. By your very biased, prejudicial rant you have painted them with criminal tendencies and unlaw abiding nature. This is the definition of prejudice, some take a preconceived thought they are taught and paint all who look the same as the same, some take one experience with one type or kind of person and paint all of them as the same as this one person or experience, some watch people without knowing them form a prejudgement of what they believe them to be like and paint all just like this ideal. ALL of this is prejudice. Now as for violators or criminals in our country, there are criminals in all backgrounds, races, economic status, religious background, sexual orientation, etc...... To name one of those more criminal than the other is prejudicial. Sorry your defense of your stance is still prejudicial. You need to learn to slow down and read things through completely, and then you would see that I did not say everyone was like that. I specifically stated that the majority {b} were not like that. As you said for it to be prejudicial I would have to claim even the majority of the people are like this; I would have to place them all in a group, which I am not doing. I am talking specifically about the ones who this DOES refer to, the ones I have witnessed myself, and listened to them brag about how they play the system. I am talking about a specific subgroup of the entire grop of welfare recipients. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a prejudicial comment and should not be allowed. Welfare recipients already jump through hoops to get benefits, I used to be a welfare technician and I know. To assume that they sit on their asses and collect is sick and prejudicial. I just have to wonder "do people not have enough problems of their own to worry about in their own lives without creating some for others", Just because the hatemongers in our country want you to believe that welfare is the lazy peoples way of life, does not make them right. Really people, clean your own yard before working on others yards, please and thank you Please tell me how this is prejudicial. The definition for prejudicial (in this case) is as follows: leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion Now, I for one can name off DOZENS of welfare recipients, who use and abuse the system. I have seen them do so myself, and I have heard them admit to it of their own free will, most of them stating they would continue to do so, as they did nto want the hassles of going to work and being a single parent. Thus I am not being prejudicial. In michigan, if you are on cash assistance, you are required to go to a state mandated program that has three phases. Phase one, you are taught how to write a resume and cover letter; you are taught how to write business letters, and ways to look for work other than looking in the paper. If you need assistance with housing ro whatever you are given said assistance (to a point). Phase two: you continue with the resumes and cover letters, letters of introduction, and you start learning how too present yiourself in an interview, and over the phone etc. Phase three: You go out for the day looking for work. You are required to bring back proof of how many places you went to looking for work, etc and to report back at the end of the day. There is also a littel more training and seminars but it is primarily job hunting. Now the easiest way to beat the system here, is hit all the places ina certain radius the first couple days. Get applications to take home with you and make copies of them. Then every day you go into class you tell your istructor that you are going out looking for work, and instead go home for the day. You bring back the applications for three places or whatever at the end of the day. This is what a LOT of people do to get past the system. There are dozens upon dozens of other wyas to do so as well, although that is the easiest cause the isntructors, for the most part, do not follow up and make sure you are actually going to these places. They can't. Now, please do not tell me that people do not use the system or that there ar enot people out there working the system cause they are unwilling to go out and work. I am not syaing all people do this. I am not even saying the majority do so, but a major percentage do, and we have GOT to do something to start holding them accountable. And as far as welfare recipients being on drugs, I have watched three girls come into "class" higher than a kite. one ended up being rushed to the er for an overdose. All three were arrested. They had been on welfare for over five years each, and doing this the entire time. The one lady is now clean, and thankful that she had been arrested as it helped her get her life straightened around. I have no idea about the other two. The only reason they were caught too, is they had become lazy i their habits because no one is holding them accountable for their own actions and responsibilities. You whole post hit the definition you gave of prejudicial so now what? The welfare system by design assists those who need a leg up in life. And I can verify that the majority of them get the leg up and do well. By your very biased, prejudicial rant you have painted them with criminal tendencies and unlaw abiding nature. This is the definition of prejudice, some take a preconceived thought they are taught and paint all who look the same as the same, some take one experience with one type or kind of person and paint all of them as the same as this one person or experience, some watch people without knowing them form a prejudgement of what they believe them to be like and paint all just like this ideal. ALL of this is prejudice. Now as for violators or criminals in our country, there are criminals in all backgrounds, races, economic status, religious background, sexual orientation, etc...... To name one of those more criminal than the other is prejudicial. Sorry your defense of your stance is still prejudicial. You need to learn to slow down and read things through completely, and then you would see that I did not say everyone was like that. I specifically stated that the majority {b} were not like that. As you said for it to be prejudicial I would have to claim even the majority of the people are like this; I would have to place them all in a group, which I am not doing. I am talking specifically about the ones who this DOES refer to, the ones I have witnessed myself, and listened to them brag about how they play the system. I am talking about a specific subgroup of the entire grop of welfare recipients. Okay so by your explanation right here you are saying that for a few problems, we should spend millions of dollars of our tax money to drug test them all? How do you make that right? It is prejudicial to assume that all on welfare NEED drug testing and you are back tracking now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see no problem with testing on public assistance. As to being prejudicial, dang rights I am; I know a certain percentage, be it 1% or 90% will test hot. That percentage should be denied benefits after a second test, say within 30 days or whatever. I test my employees, once in the first 90 days, hot is outta there, no questions asked. After that, there is a random test every month, each employee is numbered on a list. those numbers are tossed in a box, shaken up, and 5 employees draw numbers. Those 5 numberd ppl are tested on the spot. anyone who tests hot is given the opportunity to submit to A....regular weekly testing, or B.....drug rehab at 50% company expense...or C. get fired. In three years, I have hd 9 employees fail. Of the nine, all 9 elected to be dismissed rather than the other options. I think the same would work for pub. assist. Their choice. A refused test is the same, to me, as a hot test. Problem with constitutional rights? refuse a breathalyser test in wyoming and see if it is not the same as a hot test. same punishment. JMO on the testing thing.
ps: My name is also numbered and I get the same tests if it comes up...and everyone knows my results, they are published on the company bulletin board, everyone elses is private. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you are not doing drugs legal or illegal, in an abusive manner, what do you have to worry about?
The testing is there for the benefit of everyone. The employer does not need someone constantly calling off work because of drunkenness or still being high. Calling off work excessively effects everyone at that place of employment, it is a domino effect. My son works for a hospital and is a Paramedic for an ambulance service. If he went to work high or drunk, can you imagine the danger that would present to all involved, including a person just picked up by an ambulance as the result of a car accident? What if that person becoming paralyzed or not paralyzed depended upon someone doing his/her job properly? One wrong move in a getting a person out of a car and onto a stretcher could paralyze that person for life. My son has come across this type of situation many times. It is a difficult feat sober, let alone higher than a kite. I know of a woman who is a crack addict, runs a crack house, and gets SSI every month, rent rebates, heating assistance, food stamps, and all the FREE medical help she wants and needs. Being considered disabled because you are a drug addict has been done away with for years, but she got in 'under the line'. AND the taxpayers pay for it forever. Yes, I am all for drug testing. Too much is at risk, and if a person really wants to clean up their act (and I feel all who succumb to drug addiction, and are alcohlics deserve help) they should welcome the challange of staying clean because they face drug testing at any time. It is, in essence,for their own good. Lindyy  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay being a welfare tech myself and having dealt with the clients myself I will just say this.
ALL who want the testing get together and put up or shut up the money to test all clients and continue to retest and run the rehab programs for them since you all think that you KNOW better how to run others lives. And while your at that, if you have a bad credit rating I do not believe you should be able to buy or drink alcohol so I will implement a program for all who want to drink alcohol to pass a credit test of the highest degree for you to drink ever. Sound stupid? Well so does your attempt to control others lives because YOU know better how others should live. Prejudice people....man
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was watching the news the other day and this boy was on there rallying for the same thing. His mother was a junkie and was on public assistance when he was born. When they delivered the boy he was addicted to heroine and had meth, cocaine and alcohol in his system. Which of course led to some serious birth defects. He can barely walk, and will need assistance for the rest of his life. He recently spoke to some law makers on the idea of drug testing anyone who asks for public asssistance, to help curb the amount of babies born addicted to drugs while they're mothers are recieving government benefits. I think its an absolutely wonderful idea. I know too many people abuse the help from the gov. when it should be going to people who really need the help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welfare is a government program, which is paid for by taxes generated by most of us on this site. I am not an expert on this, but I know that to receive certain government subsidies, one cannot have a criminal record and has to be drug free. In that connection, my feeling is that welfare recipients have done nothing to lower their expectation of privacy. They are no different than virtually every member of the general population who chooses to make use of some form of governmental benefits, including any type pf welfare programs, tax credits, medical insurance, and scholarships. Consequently, I agree that there should be random urine testing for those on welfare. sorry but the constitution applies to the poor also.kicking people while they are down is in a word,vile. cutelittledevil...... Reread my post. I never said anything about kicking people while they are down. Where is that in my post? My post states "........ welfare recipients have done nothing to lower their expectation of privacy......" That means welfare recipients are to be treated equally, like the rest of us. In connection with the above, why do you think welfare recipients should be treated better than the taxpayers who are paying for the welfare programs? I would be interested in knowing why you adhere to that belief? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay being a welfare tech myself and having dealt with the clients myself I will just say this. ALL who want the testing get together and put up or shut up the money to test all clients and continue to retest and run the rehab programs for them since you all think that you KNOW better how to run others lives. And while your at that, if you have a bad credit rating I do not believe you should be able to buy or drink alcohol so I will implement a program for all who want to drink alcohol to pass a credit test of the highest degree for you to drink ever. Sound stupid? Well so does your attempt to control others lives because YOU know better how others should live. Prejudice people....man just curious, what does a welfare tech do? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just curious, what does a welfare tech do not much if the people go out and get a job...it's an industry and it's a fallacy if you think it's set up to get people back to work... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay being a welfare tech myself and having dealt with the clients myself I will just say this. ALL who want the testing get together and put up or shut up the money to test all clients and continue to retest and run the rehab programs for them since you all think that you KNOW better how to run others lives. And while your at that, if you have a bad credit rating I do not believe you should be able to buy or drink alcohol so I will implement a program for all who want to drink alcohol to pass a credit test of the highest degree for you to drink ever. Sound stupid? Well so does your attempt to control others lives because YOU know better how others should live. Prejudice people....man just curious, what does a welfare tech do? Well under the new rules implemented by Clinton's welfare reform bill back in the 90s. A welfare tech interviews clients for the program and any other programs they may be eligible for. This will be short version cause it is extensive. The interview process is a 16 page application covering all financial information and family composition and then an extensive evaluation to determine mental illness, abuse, drug abuse, etc..... Basically anything that would interfere with employment sometimes it as simple as needing resume and interviewing skills other times it is as intense as referral to mental health and drug rehabilitation. If they are determined to be very mentally deficient they are referred to social security for possible benefits there. Citizenship is verified, all income is verified through the IRS computers and the social security administration computers, DMV computers, Police computer system as no fleeaing felons are allowed benefits, etc....... After evaluation and if determined there is no standing issues of drugs, abuse, etc.... in their way, clients are required to take tests for possible GED eligiblity and then a trade school of some kind. Some clients do not require this much, they only need help with housing costs and food for a short term until they start work again but these clients have to do the job search program to get any benefits. The others with more extensive needs must go to the places they are referred to and participate in the programs required to receive benefit. The techs job in this is to check on them and make sure they are doing what is required, help them when they have difficulties come up, and process and confirm all incoming information, etc..... This is why I am telling you that the people who propaganda the welfare recipients as lazy, druggies, criminals are being very prejudice and hateful. I can tell you from personal experience they are for the most part people that need a leg up in life and the system provides it. It is the few that make these rumors and they are not the norm. They are the exception. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was watching the news the other day and this boy was on there rallying for the same thing. His mother was a junkie and was on public assistance when he was born. When they delivered the boy he was addicted to heroine and had meth, cocaine and alcohol in his system. Which of course led to some serious birth defects. He can barely walk, and will need assistance for the rest of his life. He recently spoke to some law makers on the idea of drug testing anyone who asks for public asssistance, to help curb the amount of babies born addicted to drugs while they're mothers are recieving government benefits. I think its an absolutely wonderful idea. I know too many people abuse the help from the gov. when it should be going to people who really need the help. while i sympathize I also wonder wtf the public assistance had to do with his birth deffects?whether she got assistance or not,she would still be an addict and he would still have birth deffects. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just curious, what does a welfare tech do not much if the people go out and get a job...it's an industry and it's a fallacy if you think it's set up to get people back to work... you can only be on it for two years and they do have job training programs to get people to work so next. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well under the new rules implemented by Clinton's welfare reform bill back in the 90s. you say that was Clinton's plan dating back to the 90s. Didn't you know there was another bill in 1996 that was a bipartisan bill and that it expired during Bush's term in 2003? President's Welfare Reform Agenda Last year, Congress began the process of reauthorizing the historic, bipartisan 1996 welfare reform law. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, welfare reform helped to move 4.7 million Americans from welfare dependency to self-sufficiency within three years of enactment, and the number of welfare caseloads has declined by 54% since 1996. The 1996 welfare reform law expired at the end of last year. President Bush is calling on Congress to act now to sustain and expand on the success of welfare reform. President Bush proposes to make welfare even more focused on the well-being of children and supportive of families. The President's plan is designed to strengthen families and help more welfare recipients work toward independence and self-reliance. |
|
|
|
|
