Friday, February 10, 2012

Minor Inconvience: Major Expense


There is a wedge issue that has become very popular among Republican circles in the last two years.  It has even had some support among Democrats.  It is the drug testing of welfare recipients.  Read quickly, it sounds like a no-brainer: Drug test those who are receiving Gov't dollars in welfare.  However, when you dig deeper, you realize that there is so much more to it than that.

Maybe you think this is a good idea, but did you think about the cost?  Yeah, drug testing costs money.  Let's go to Florida, where they have had this in place already.  Florida reported in it's first batch of results that 98% of all tested, passed.  2% failed and were denied their welfare benefits.  So you're saying, "Ok, there are people on welfare who do drugs, and this is a good way to punish them and save the state money."  You're pretty wrong about that.  Read the statistics for yourself:

Cost of the tests averages about $30. Assuming that 1,000 to 1,500 applicants take the test every month, the state will owe about $28,800-$43,200 monthly in reimbursements to those who test drug-free.
That compares with roughly $32,200-$48,200 the state may save on one month’s worth of rejected applicants.
Net savings to the state: $3,400 to $5,000 annually on one month’s worth of rejected applicants. Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800 to $60,000 for a program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year.*

So a program that costs $178MM a year, and saves less than 1% of that cost spent.  So why would fiscal conservatives push this through and be proud of having this in place?  Some of them really do feel that drug users shouldn't have welfare.  That's fair, but not even close to the majority consensus that this is a great way to make money.  Yes, Governor of Florida, Rick Scott, who championed this bill had monetary ties to this bill.  Surprised?


Rick Scott used to be in the health care business.  He started a chain of walk-in clinics called Solantic Corp., which provided many services including drug testing.  *Spoiler Alert* Solantic Corp landed the monopoly on drug testing welfare recipients in Florida after the bill became law.  Rick Scott transferred $62 million in stock to his wife at this time.  So basically, tax payers are putting a lot of money directly into Rick Scott's wife's bank account, and getting nothing in return.  The state is losing millions of dollars.  So much for the fiscal conservatism myth huh?

Rick Scott: *Insert Super Villain Laugh Here*

In October, the ACLU filed a lawsuit to stop this law, and a federal judge issued a halt order to the drug testing program.  Rick Scott, of course, has vowed to fight for this law and it is making it's rounds in court.  Currently, the drug testing program is still on hold while it's constitutionality is being questioned.  The judge ruled that it may violate the Fourth Amendment, illegal search and seizure.  I for one, hope that the citizens of Florida get the right deal on this.  This law needs to be scrapped from the books and the tax payers do not need to be paying for a program losing this much money, yet making their Governor exponentially richer at the same time.  Floridians voted this man in, and they kind of deserve what they get, but the ones who didn't don't deserve this.

Making money off of a social issue must be a dream for conservatives.  I mean, what a better way to get the best of both worlds?  You punish people you hate, and at the same time are making a fortune.  It's not really a minor inconvenience for the state of Florida, it's a major waste of tax dollars.  Are there people on welfare who are also on illegal narcotics?  Sure, it was 2% of those tested who came back positive.  However, it is not worth this kind of cost to make sure that everyone on welfare is clean.  The cost far outweighs the "benefit."


 *http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/08/98_of_florida_welfare_applicants_pass_newly_implemented_drug_tests_discrediting_governor.html

No comments:

Post a Comment