Chicago Housing Authority Drug Testing Plan Called 'Slap In The Face' To Residents

Chicago Sun-Times:

The Chicago Housing Authority wants to require all adults who currently live in, or apply in the future for housing in any of its developments, to be tested for drugs -- including senior citizens.

The blanket policy proposal for anyone 18 years or older has residents and housing advocates crying foul.

Read the whole story: Chicago Sun-Times

Comments

[bluecollaramerican]

04:23 PM on 06/10/2011

Let's start with Congress and the Supreme Court. They act like they are on drugs.

[rwextthoughts]

06:44 PM on 05/31/2011

most prospective employees have to take drug tests and criminal background checks

[MilesLong]

10:12 AM on 05/31/2011

I'm okay with this if we also test all the Chicago bankers who received corporate welfare as well...

Miles "Good For The Goose..." Long

[KDMac]

10:39 PM on 05/30/2011

I hate to see little old ladies have to pee in a cup in order to keep their housing; however, knowing the rampant use of drugs in subsidized housing, it's nice to see a housing authority attempting to be proactive.

[Mafdet]

08:40 PM on 05/29/2011

Usually the expansion of a bureaucracy in Chicago is more about employing the mayor's relatives and special friends than about providing a public service.

[lgc12345]

04:47 PM on 05/29/2011

I will tell you what.... There are people who are abusing the system this is supposed to be housing so people can get back on there feet, not for people to live in for 30 years. So this will be more of an incentive to work hard, and get out and support your self like the majority of americans in this country. QUIT your crying, your getting subsidised housing if they require a drug test then do it. If you dont like it go to another country that will give you housing assitance.I understand people might hit hard times but if you cant get back on your feet in a couple of years something is wrong.

[gregcurts]

03:20 PM on 05/28/2011

I can only see this has making the environment better for those that live in Public Housing.

[KDMac]

11:15 AM on 05/31/2011

In the long run, yes. But in the short run, would you want to have to pee in a cup for your landlord?

[gregcurts]

03:48 PM on 06/01/2011

Personally, I do it for my boss. If it would knock a few hundred dollars off my rent, I would do it for my landlord.

[Larry Motuz]

06:04 PM on 06/04/2011

No. Having tenants' associations that have a voice in screening WHO gets into their building and WHO must go would make far more sense than treating everyone as a suspected drug abuser.

[Lisa Horowitz]

12:48 PM on 05/28/2011

I've worked hard all my life

[Lisa Horowitz]

12:45 PM on 05/28/2011

Sorry, but if MY tax dollars are supporting you, I don't give a hoot about your 'rights,' or your privacy. I've worked hard all my life,

[maxfax]

12:48 PM on 05/28/2011

Likewise for oil companies?

[Wonder Woman2]

02:24 PM on 05/28/2011

FANNED AND FAVED

[Wonder Woman2]

02:23 PM on 05/28/2011

Many of these families re the working poor and pay taxes as well!

[cornel]

12:43 PM on 05/28/2011

People under 18 do drugs too, yes this is really unfair !

[BushBites]

12:29 PM on 05/28/2011

Landlord makes the rules.

That's why I get itchy when I even think about going back to renting.

[gregcurts]

03:15 PM on 05/28/2011

Not in private renting units.

[BushBites]

12:05 AM on 05/30/2011

Of course they do.

[KDMac]

10:33 PM on 05/30/2011

I beg to differ.

[RationalCaliGirl]

12:13 PM on 05/28/2011

So all of the employees multi-billion dollar companies and small businesses which receive government subsidies should be drug tested in order to continue receiving their welfare payments, right?

[BushBites]

12:30 PM on 05/28/2011

You didn't take a drug test to get your job?

It's pretty common in the Midwest.

[RationalCaliGirl]

12:43 PM on 05/28/2011

No I didn't. The topic is being drug free as a prerequisite for receiving government subsidies. Businesses who's employees do not pass pass random drug tests should not be able to receive government subsidies.

[SamKnause]

11:48 AM on 05/28/2011

I guess the Federal and Private Prisons are making enough money.

[clarkkentdlyplnt]

11:22 AM on 05/28/2011

Big Brother is alive and well. The hand of Tyranny once in the back door will unlock the front.

[IdahoBlue777]

11:11 AM on 05/28/2011

I have a lot of questions about this. Will this be random drug testing or does there have to be a suspicion that drug use is taking place? Is the intent of this law to throw drug addicts out on the street or do we want to help them? Would people be given the opportunity to choose rehab if they tested positive or will they simply be tossed out on the first offense? I think law-abiding citizens in public housing deserve the opportunity to live in a crime-free environment. Drugs bring all types of crime into the neighborhood and threaten the safety of everyone living there. The real question is, when people become dependents to the state, do they give up their right to privacy? When you take certain jobs, you certainly give up that right. Random drug testing is common in the workplace. I suppose you could ask people to give up that right as a condition of receiving government housing just as an employer asks new hires to give up that right as a condition of accepting a job. This is a difficult question. I am considered a liberal on most issues, but I can see both sides of this one.

[clearasmud]

11:57 AM on 05/28/2011

If you were given a drug test to see if you qualify for unemployment, or social security, or medicare...would you be split then? It starts with the poor and the minorities and all of a sudden it is used when you go to get your drivers license. Give these fools an inch and they will take a mile to rid you of your freedom in the name of their morality.

[IdahoBlue777]

12:49 PM on 05/28/2011

Unemployment, Social Security, and Medicare are not "entitlements." They are investments that people have paid into. Welfare and federally subsidized housing are "freebies." I can see where the law abiding citizens in federally subsidized housing have the right to live in a safe environment, free from criminal activity. I can also understand the indignation over the loss of privacy. As far as the drivers license goes, when you get pulled over by a policeman, you can be forced to take an alcohol test or face legal consequences so that "freedom" is already gone. I have never taken a dime of government money and I don't drink or take drugs. It is much easier for me to have an opinion about these things because the only way it will affect me is if I accidentally get in the way of these people while they are conducting their illegal activity. The only thing I can say is that drug testing is expensive. Some lab is going to make a fortune and the legal expenses for tossing these people out will be high. I don't think the government is going to save any money with this policy.

[KDMac]

10:37 PM on 05/30/2011

My guess is that they'd have to test everyone (like the TSA screens everyone) to avoid discrimination or fair housing complaints. Currently, you can't pull random criminal searches on any tenants who are suspected of having run-ins with the law -- you either have to do searches on all tenants at recertification or none. Also, if you suspect/hear that a tenant has unreported income, you can't pull reports on that one particular tenant, you have to pull reports on all the tenants.