5 U.S. states have passed laws requiring welfare recipients to be tested for drugs. Proponents argue that testing will prevent public funds from being used to subsidize drugs habits and help get treatment for those that are addicted to drugs. Opponents argue that it is a waste of money since the tests will cost more money than they save.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@jwakleyIndependent3yrs3Y
Yes, and for those testing positive require proof of treatment for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent3yrs3Y
Yes, and for those testing positive, require proof of treatment for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent4yrs4Y
Yes, but provide treatment for those testing positive And require participation for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent4yrs4Y
Yes, but provide treatment for those testing positive and make participation mandatory for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, test those elected to public office as well. Also, provide treatment for those testing positive (and require participation for continued benefits)
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, test politicians as well. Also, provide treatment for those testing positive (and require participation for continued benefits)
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, but provide treatment for those testing positive and require participation for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, but provide treatment for those testing positive ... and require participation for continued benefits
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, but provide and require treatment participation for those testing positive
@98T87P7Independent2yrs2Y
Yes and if they are have them treated first.
@jwakleyIndependent5yrs5Y
Yes, test anyone receiving money from the government including employees and politicians. Also, provide treatment for those testing positive (and require participation for continued benefits)
Join in on more popular conversations.
