Welfare hasn’t been thought through

The new welfare law allowing random drug testing is a step in the right direction, even if it hasn’t totally been thought through.

Yes, it is harsh. It is pro-war-on-drugs, which in and of itself has many problems. I can tell you now it will most definitely need modification. But here’s the issue — drug addicts have a different kind of need than people who need basic government assistance. And we haven’t made sure we have the resources in place to deal with an addict’s needs.

Enacting these harsh laws was probably not the smartest idea without work done to make sure we are actually treating drug addiction, not just condemning it.

They need to be directed to rehab programs, doctors or some institution that would be able to help them. Drug testing people and then cutting them off entirely if they are found to still have an addiction would only increase the problem. Plus, it sounds like something out of a Charles Dickens novel.

Singling out people with a past, or people who have been to rehab, reeks of discrimination and could easily be the reason the law is demolished.

It also would allow addicts who have not been caught to slip through the cracks.We must separate the two entirely. If people are found to be using drugs and receiving welfare, the nature of the assistance given to them needs to change. We have done nothing to either create assistance or strengthen already existing programs.

These new laws do some good, though.

They recognize that if people are found to be on drugs, quite simply, they can no
longer be trusted to provide for themselves or their families, if they have them. It is a recognition that, in giving them welfare, the government inadvertently fuels a dangerous lifestyle.

But for the government to actually be able to reach the families and children in need, and to address some serious corruption in and exploitation of government assistance, it is exactly what the system needs.

Private staffing agencies and job sites need to test all applicants for drugs. Those who test positively are told to come back in a year. It would be more beneficial to say everyone who receives welfare must be drug tested.

We can’t cut them off, either.

We need to set a limit to the amount of times someone can test positively —
a three-chances system, or something similar.We also shouldn’t test randomly.

It should be while people are applying, and then if they pass we don’t worry about it. Let them have their assistance. For those who test positively, we need to have steps and systems in place to help them.

In short, the new law is far from perfect. It will need to be processed, there will be trials and there will be errors. But it’s a step in the right direction.

ewenning@indiana.edu
@EmmaWenninger