The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

​GORMAN: Drug testing welfare recipients is cruel

In addition to being ineffective in achieving its stated goals, drug testing policy also has many moral problems

Last Monday, a law came into effect in the state of Wisconsin mandating drug testing for recipients of the state’s welfare and food stamps programs. Gov. Scott Walker lauded the legislation, stating in a recent speech, “When I proposed this, the status quo defenders cried that we were making it harder to get government assistance. My response? No, we’re making it easier to get a job.”

While Walker’s allegations are likely more of a tool of political rhetoric than an argument that should be taken as factual, his support of drug testing welfare recipients raises some important questions, namely, what does drug testing welfare and food stamps recipients truly accomplish? And, perhaps more importantly, what does the legislation reveal about Walker’s perception of drug abuse itself?

An evaluation from ThinkProgress of seven states currently implementing similar programs for recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known as TANF, revealed the general ineffectiveness and the costly nature of drug testing initiatives. In 2014, Missouri spent nearly $340,000 testing a portion of roughly 40,000 TANF applicants, of which only 48 tested positive. Interestingly, approximately 7 percent of Missouri residents reported illicit drug use in a recent study (the national average is 9.4 percent), compared to only .0012 percent of welfare applicants.

Evidently, the “success” of drug testing programs may not be justified by the costs. Walker clearly had a vision of reducing drug use rates in implementing his plan — the law ensures that those who fail drug tests can enroll in a drug treatment program — though this well-intentioned vision hardly addresses the problem of drug abuse. Rather, the truth is revealed in the statistics: when a government institutes drug testing initiatives, low-income illicit drug users will simply choose not to apply for government benefits. Missouri, for example, saw a drop of over 5,000 TANF recipients in the fiscal year of 2014, perhaps caused in part by its drug testing initiative.

Proponents of Walker’s plan will argue cutting drug users from state funding is a good thing; the legislation essentially implies that illicit drug users should not even bother requesting welfare benefits from their government, that drug abuse is a product of flaws in one’s humanity — an area into which the government should not intervene. A true cynic may argue drug abuse will fade as users are driven further and further into despair from this form of government apathy. And, even if Walker will not admit it, he is essentially advancing the same logic.

Drug testing welfare applicants is a classic example of a government superficially recognizing a problem while remaining completely ignorant of its roots. It is certainly not a coincidence that illicit drugs make their way to individuals of lower socioeconomic status; lack of opportunity and generally lower levels of happiness among low-income individuals naturally breed a demand for drugs. So, what right does a government have to blame and victimize drug users? Does a government not determine the degree of opportunity, equality and potential happiness for all of its citizens?

Drug abuse is a product of environment, not disposition. If Walker had a shred of empathy for his low-income communities (other than potentially recommending a few dozen welfare applicants to drug treatment over the next several years), he would use the money saved from denying welfare to low-income drug users — if any money is saved — to intervene into the problems that cause the abuse itself. Yet, for some reason I don’t think that will be the case. Something tells me Walker’s perception of drugs users simply does not comply with using government funds to address the factors that generate this destructive lifestyle — that he regards drug users as inferior, oblivious to the idea that government and infrastructure could play a role in this supposed “inferiority.”

I do not take issue with incentivizing welfare recipients to function as productive members of society; I take issue with how misleading the idea of drug testing is, how Wisconsin legislators think punishing drug users will drive them closer to an ideal, moral life, when it merely succeeds in driving them further from any sort of concrete integration into productive society. At some point, lawmakers need to realize rampant drug use is a consequence of a cruel, unequal system. Swatting aimlessly at flies doesn’t make them go away.

Ryan Gorman is an Opinion column for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at r.gorman@cavalierdaily.com.

Comments

Latest Podcast

The University’s Associate Vice Provost for Enrollment and Undergraduate Admission, Greg Roberts, provides listeners with an insight into how the University conducts admissions and the legal subtleties regarding the possible end to the consideration of legacy status.



https://open.spotify.com/episode/02ZWcF1RlqBj7CXLfA49xt