From the story.
That happens to be Florida's experience so far. A Florida television station, WFTV, reported that of the first 40 applicants tested, only two came up positive, and one of those was appealing. The state stands to save less than $240 a month if it denies benefits to the two applicants, but it had to pay $1,140 to the applicants who tested negative. The state will also have to spend considerably more to defend the policy in court.
I love the math on this, "The state stands to save less than $240 a month if it denies benefits...", which by my math equals out about $2880 for the whole year.
Also I think it stands that people may not even APPLY for the program if they think/know they won't pass the drug test, which will also save the state money.
Many of you know that I'm a State Employee, before I got hired I had to do a drug test. The major arguments that I've heard against drug testing are
A) It's a Violation of Privacy
B) It's gonna cost the state too much
C) You're not going to hurt the addict, but the addicts children.
To counter these I say this
A) If you don't want people to know you do drugs, then don't apply for the program. If the PUBLIC is giving you money, then you have no expectations of privacy.
B) Please check the above math, it may cost a little more at first, but over all it'll save money in the long run.
C) This is probably the most emotional, yet valid argument. If you take away the users extra money are they more likely to spend it on drugs or bread for the kids? The likely answer is that they're gonna probably spend it on the drugs. Which means that the kids will suffer. However, if the kids are living with a drug user or dealer then I need to point out that THEY ARE ALREADY SUFFERING. As such they should probably be removed from that situation in the first place.
I know I'm gonna catch a lot of flack about my thoughts on this, and that's OK. I also think that more of the argument is on who came up with the plan as opposed to the plan itself. Is there some possibilities of conflict of interest? Yeah, there probably is, but ask yourself, if someone else had proposed the plan, would you still be against it?
