It's even more ironic that people hate the welfare recipients for getting benefits yet accept a huge national debt that sucks 30c of every tax dollar away to service a debt that is mostly interest and never bought us anything that the Cons haven't sold to their friends for a song. Nope, lets hate on the things that are offending our senses. Foolish, selfish, mean and pathetic, a great reason why we can't have a real democracy. The bulk of your taxes pays for debt, health care and education and your ignorant not to know that.

It's quite offensive to even consider such intrusion into peoples lives just on the basis of some peoples PREJUDICE.

Government rarely spends money that isn't for a service of some sort that the "people" have asked for. Politicans vote to spend money to make their constituents support them, and with only a limited time in office no one has to worry about the consequences down the road. Most of our National Debt is not owed to China, but to the Social Security Trust Fund, which has been used as a "slush fund" for decades. Not paying it only means that the people who've paid into it won't get anything back. And if you cut all Federal programs with the exception on Defence and Entitlements, you'd still have a deficit budget without paying for Education, Roads, Veteran's benefits, State reimbursements and the list goes on and on.

Yeah, the situation is pretty serious, and unlike decade past we now have manufacturing competition from other emerging economies. This is a factor we didn't have to deal with when pulling ourselves out of the pit the last few times.

Peeing for public benefits will not save any money, and I'm not sure why there's a belief that this is a problem. Obviously, this is a political point being made.

We are also seeing changes in some State laws that will make it more difficult for many poor people to vote. That's because most of the poor voted democratic and this is a convenient win-win GOP argument to limit their involvement. Again, this was a solution to a problem that didn't exist. I know of no reports that speak of massive voter fraud, but that wasn't what this was about anyway.

And this thread started out on JUST "is making folks prove that they haven't used drugs[no matter if they bought them ,found them, or they were a gift]to get help.Now we can spat all day about if we should have welefare or not [personally I'm again it] but THE main thing is making others give up their rights just gives away part of yours. That will be used to prove that you should have to pee also. If you are already having to piss each person they add to pissing makes them stronger and your rights weaker.

Nobody should have to pee for welfare or other cash.
Some politicians don't know how little most on govt assistance get & that amts will go down or #s that qualify will go down due to budget.

If an oz of pot costs over 1/2 of what they get to pay for essentials, nearly all the pee will be clean.

Some pols just want to look "tough on drugs" but why not *smart* on drugs? If people who need something to cope have to switch from pot to legal drugs, health care costs will go up. Did they think of that?

Pols who hate Constitution will lose. The internet is teaching the truth to all who will read. 20% say they will likely vote 3rd party; another 59% won't rule out that possibility. www.garyjohnson2012.com GWTJ

I agree 100% NO ONE should have too but that sad fact is there are many hard working people that are FORCED to take testing as part of their requirements, only to give a big portion back for these people in question. So you tell me whats fair?

Sadly your wrong about the clean pee. If you took 100 people in my area and tested pee, You would have a pretty good idea who is on welfare just by their pee.

What's fair is the equal treatment under the law. If the elected officials who are paid by the taxpayers are exempt from drug testing, which the supreme court of the United States has upheld, ALL CITIZENS who receive taxpayer money should be equally exempt from drug testing. The only LEGAL drug testing in the USA is voluntary through employment. Court ordered drug testing is equally shady IMO, unless the person was convicted of a crime where drug testing would demonstrate they are still breaking the law of which they were convicted and are under probation.

Right to privacy. Period.

No one is forced to take drug testing for employment, it is 100% voluntary, just as they aren't forced to continue the employment with that company or individual.

In case you can't understand that last statement: No one forces you to take the job, under the conditions of future, or pre employment drug testing, you volunteer for that, as part of the employment contract. If you don't want to be drug tested, find a different place to work. Simple adult behavior.

Taking a pee test isn't mandatory, as long as you don't want the job I guess. Somehow I think of having a job as being mandatory, and to allow business to use drug testing to screen applicants is a form of discrimination (IMO).

What Supreme Court ruling dealing with drug testing of elected officials are you talking about? I know of no "exemption", but there is also no "requirement" for substance abuse testing (or intelligence testing for that matter) for those who want to run for Office. But I'd be interested in the specific ruling, if you have one.

You may not be aware that drug testing of Members and Staff has been brought up by many Members of the House for political reasons, and some have put their Staff through mandatory testing. But, that was more than a decade ago and done as a demonstration.

Personally, I would like to make ALL drug testing illegal unless there is a provable danger.

Staff is not elected officials, and that is who is exempted from drug testing.

I can find supreme court case where the random suspiciousless search of "candidates" was declared unconstitutional. I'm guessing that's what they use as their shield, but still doing the research. It's hard without full access to actual law databases.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-126.ZS.html

http://worldnewsvine.com/2012/02/unemployed-now-subject-to-drug-testing-congress-remains-exempt/ that article also speaks to it, without specifically naming their source.

The argument "if I have to pee clean for a job, then these lazy folks on welfare should have to as well," is so utterly frustrating.

It is wrong to have to submit to drug testing for employment, but it's something lots of folks just accept as a given.

Making someone else do something wrong, just because you unfairly "must," doesn't make EITHER condition of livelihood right.

Even taken at face value, the argument is bogus. IF you MUST, they MUST; but like Mikey said, one does not NEED to submit to drug testing for employment, one agrees to submit to this when applying for X or Y employer.

The solution is to stick to one's principles and REFUSE to work for anyone who insists the wages they pay you for the labor you provide 40 hours per week somehow entitles them to dictate/know what you do with your own sovereign person (mind/body) the remaining 128 hours.

Easier said than done, sure - but it is doable and one must be willing to sacrifice for their principles.

IF you decide working in a certain position or earning a specific wage is more important than your right to privacy and/or ultimate control of your own mind and body, then it's your priorities mandating drug testing; you can't blame/punish anyone else.

Not saying your decision is wrong or flippant, just that it is indeed YOUR decision.

I would just hope folks would realize/recall employment-related drug testings is a prime example of the slippery slope of which we should all be critical. After all, "we're only going to test airline pilots and others in positions of public safety," remember???

My point ex. And Mikey how about that person that works at a job with no drug testing for years then the old onwer dies and the new wants drug testing. I guess anyone could just throw away 20 years of work toward a retirement plan. But come on, you way is but a simplistic answer. True personal freedom is hard but what America is about and no-one has a right to moninter me on my time off.