There are 2 issues here: 1)These checks you're talking about,and 2)Drug testing.
I think it's not a great idea for people of any ideology to link the two issues.Even if ya think it's cool for the Gov't to drug test,I really think it's a mistake to link it to financial need.That's unequal treatment(to test one group routinely, because they are poor.)I'm against the gov't drug testing citizens,but if it was done,I think it should be done 2 ways(neither based on financial need.)The 1st would be when people get their drivers license,and the second would be when your actions cause you to get arrested.I'm against either situation,but it's better than just testing poor people.People who are addicted to drugs will point themselves out.You don't have to test all the poor in order to point them out.People are mistaken if they think this amount of money will satisfy an important drug habit.This isn't like somebody laying around eating too many cheeseburgers.They go through money,and they get more money in various illegal ways.Most of these people are costing you money,but not particularly with these checks.They cost you money to keep locking them up.It's a big problem.We haven't tackled it well.If there was an easy solution,we would have done it.Free societies are are always gunna struggle to control supply.I think aggressive capitalist countries are "naturals" for producing drug addicts.Look at our role models.They aren't teachers,priests,ministers,government workers,factory workers,policeman,etc.No,the role models sold to us are examples of excess.Like this guy Romney.He has spent 30 million of his own money to run for a job he may/may not get.The fact one guy even has that much money is excessive,and then his actions (spending it on running for a job he probably isn't gunna get) are excessive.This is an example of what Americans are taught as the ideal role model.The target is excess,and we get there(unfortunately often in artificial ways like taking drugs.)
|