More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Adam Winkler

Adam Winkler

GET UPDATES FROM Adam Winkler

Tea Party: Drug Tests for Everyone!

Posted: 06/ 2/11 12:59 PM ET

Although random drug testing has not been a big issue over the past few years, Florida is determined to bring it back to life. This past week, Florida adopted two new drug testing requirements: one imposed on welfare recipients and the other on state employees. The irony is that these quintessential illustrations of Big Government were promoted by the Tea Party and one of its darlings, Governor Rick Scott.

Wasn't the Tea Party all about restoring limits on our government and protecting our constitutional rights?

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that government-mandated drug testing is a "search" governed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. That provision says in part: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" and mandates that government have "probable cause" before a search warrant is authorized. Random drug testing is what is known as a "suspicion-less" search. Even without probable cause to believe the person required to pee in a cup has done anything wrong, he or she is forced to turn over bodily fluids for government inspection.

The Supreme Court has upheld the ability of government to mandate random drug tests in a few limited circumstances. The earliest cases held that people with sensitive government jobs in high-risk public safety environments, like railroad operators, or involving national security, like border and customs agents, could be required to submit to testing. The Court's most expansive ruling allowed public high schools to randomly test student athletes, even though the public safety concerns weren't nearly as apparent.

High school students, however, have historically enjoyed fewer constitutional protections than mature adults, and courts have generally frowned upon random drug testing of them. Indeed, courts have stuck down policies just like the ones put in place by Florida this week. (See, for example, here and here.)

Governor Scott insists the drug tests are necessary to insure that recipients of welfare payments don't use that money to commit crimes, like purchasing drugs. He adds that taxpayers shouldn't be required to finance someone's drug habit.

Yet the government almost always has decent reasons to justify an invasion of personal privacy. The question for Scott and the Tea Party is why are these reasons sufficient to support an expansion of government--especially when other compelling public policy reasons, like fixing our healthcare mess or restricting access to guns by people who can't pass a background check aren't?

Perhaps the Tea Party is not the shiny new force for libertarianism on the American political scene it often claims. Promoting big government when it comes to moral and cultural issues makes the Tea Party seem like just the latest incarnation of the New Right and the Moral Majority so popular in the 1980s and '90s.

And it's not just outlier elected officials in Florida. Some in Congress have proposed a similar bill to require drug testing of all federal welfare recipients. It's unlikely to pass--and even if it does, that law, like Florida's, is almost certain to be struck down in court.

Which raises another question for the Tea Party. If the goal is to reduce government expenditures and protect taxpayer money, why are we passing laws that will cost the government valuable resources to defend even though they are almost certain to be invalidated?

 

Follow Adam Winkler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/adamwinkler

 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,525
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (23 total)
03:18 PM on 07/24/2011
I notice quite a few people arguing that such drug testing to receive government benefits is wise. Of course they only seem interested in benefits specifically for the poor or unemployed but following their logic, drug testing should be mandatory to get your license renewed, your tags renewed, or to receive your tax refund, government grants, student loans, disability & SS payments. We don't want anyone using such monies for illegal activities, right?
photo
Marlyn
Always wrong, but never in doubt.
10:58 AM on 06/07/2011
"Governor Scott adds that taxpayers shouldn't be required to finance someone's drug habit." ???

Instead he proposes that taxpayers should be required to finance HIS COMPANY that does the drug testing.
09:19 AM on 06/07/2011
why on earth should tax payers have to support other peoples drug habits? its a waste of our tax money! if they can afford to buy drugs than they can pay rent or buy food! i'm not against helping people, but why should they get a hand out when its not benefiting them its just enabling them to continue their destructive behavior. if they want help then they should try to help themselves also!
02:34 PM on 07/24/2011
Then you should have to pee in a cup to get your drivers license renewed, your tags renewed, to purchase firearms, and get drug tested before you can receive your tax refund. We should be tested before receiving any benefit or service offered by the government.
photo
El Guapo Numero Uno
Forced to run to left after looking at the defense
09:37 AM on 06/06/2011
Um, why is this a problem? I would love CA to start doing this. Why stop at welfare? Do it for unemployment also. I have to take random screenings at both of my jobs, are those on welfare or unemployment on some sort of life vacation or something? Why stop the program at drug screenings? Lets have them do light community service for their money, ie. clean up parks, process paperwork, change lightbulbs in county offices....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
atalex
01:05 AM on 06/07/2011
My, what a good, obedient little peasant you are! Lick those boots, peasant! Like 'em clean!
photo
El Guapo Numero Uno
Forced to run to left after looking at the defense
08:14 AM on 06/07/2011
You know, I may lean to the left, but I refuse to be a total hypocrite. I believe in many liberal staples, such as; corporations and the rich in this country need to pay their fair share. That does not mean that those on welfare should get a completely free pass on back of the rest of us. Drug testing for welfare and unemployment should not draw gasps from all of you. We expect a drup free military and many positions at our local gov. Why can't we extend that to those that get handouts from those of us that work? Money that goes to help others should come with strings. I would not continue to give a homeless man money for food if I saw him passed out drunk on a park bench. That does him a disservice as well as waste my money.
10:11 PM on 06/05/2011
All military members are required to take random drug tests without probable cause and if they test positive are discharged from the service. Are welfare recipients so special they cannot be held to the same standard as our service men and women? If you don't want to take a drug test then do not apply for welfare. It's that simple. This nation is being ruined by leftist lawyers.
photo
derrickhoyle
...it's a league game, Smokey.
07:50 PM on 06/06/2011
Congrats. You completely missed the point.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BillKen
01:37 PM on 06/05/2011
If we are going to test for drugs then lets admit that alcohol is a drug, legal or illegal it does more destruction than all the illegal drugs combined. Semper Fi
11:07 PM on 06/04/2011
I've taken a drug test nearly every time I accepted a new job. Not only that, the employers have the right to demand random testing as they see fit. So far, I have not been required to take a random test, but if they required it and I refused, it would be grounds for dismissal. Apparently, that's not considered a violation of my privacy, it's considered a reasonable requirement in return for the opportunity to earn money to live on. If it is reasonable to expect drug test for people who work for money, why would it not be reasonable for welfare recipients who receive money they do not work for? (side note: I know that last sentence is grammaticality incorrect. If I remember right, it should be '.......who receive money which they have not earned." Here's the thing about that, I don't talk that way so I don't write that way either. My old English teacher, wonderful lady that she was, wont be correcting me at this stage of my life. We had kind of a teacher,student, love, hate thing going. Thank God for ladies like her. Just thought i would throw that in,)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Agy Wilson
For something to be a belief, it needs testing.
11:50 PM on 06/04/2011
I'm sorry you have to go for the drug test. In a limited judgment, The Supes ruled it okay (I have a problem with that, but who the hell am I). But it's CLEARLY a violation of the fourth amendment. You have the right to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. You have the right to not be forced to undue search and seizures. Anything less makes us an autocrat nation. One that lessens you. And in this case lines the pick pocket of Scott.
12:16 AM on 06/05/2011
Agy Wilson, thanks for your sympathy but I didn't consider the drug test that big of a deal. It was a number of years ago and they haven't required another one. If they did, I could pass it with no problem. The up side is, because of these tests, I don't have to work with any low life, brain damaged dopers. After reading these posts, I realize I may not have needed to take the test. I could have skipped taking the test and the job and gotten on welfare. Then I wouldn't have to take a drug test. By the way, I've always had to show my birth certificate too when I accepted a new job, but that's a subject for another thread.
12:19 AM on 06/05/2011
One more thing, I don't live in Florida so Gov. Scott is not involved in my situation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Morgan Stubblefield
09:23 PM on 06/04/2011
I understand on principle the idea of the 4th Amendment pertaining to drug screenings, however, are these screening truly required? No one is being forced to take this money, it is a choice to apply for it. Why can't a condition of the application process be a drug test? I agree that the Tea Party is completely against what they say they are, this is indeed big government, but I do not want my money going to fuel anyone's drug habit either.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cyjames1975
05:30 PM on 06/09/2011
I agree. There are two separate issues - whether this is right and whether the Tea Party is being hypocritical. I had to take a drug test before I got hired. Most companies just want to know you are responsible and clean enough to pull it together for the test. I wonder how they plan to deal with prescription meds...
08:15 PM on 06/04/2011
A point about welfare-
Many societies don't have laws about leaving children home alone. In this country a single parent must have child care. If that parent can't make more money than their baby sitter, they can't work. A catch-22. If the govenment mandates that a parent must stay home they can't turn around and let a family starve.

Poverty is by design. There is plenty of money in America but capitalism is a game of winners and losers. Lets not be so proud that we aren't the bottom 15 percent of earners in this country and not assume it's because we're so smart and hard working. Another roll of the dice might have landed us in a place where we needed help.
08:02 PM on 06/04/2011
What many commenters are describing is called charity. If you want to direct your money you are free to give it to whomever you choose. Welfare is distributed by the government so that it can't be withheld by the spiteful to minorities, atheists, and people you don't think spend wisely. If you don't like the concept of welfare my suggestion is to vote for someone who can provide prosperity to all classes of people. (In other words, the opposite of the guy you were going to vote for.)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Downrivers
Siskiyou Mountains
07:13 PM on 06/04/2011
Floridians should insist then that every State Representative and their staffs, including the Governor's office....should bed required to submit to mandatory drug screening.....
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
HotelDrama
03:15 AM on 06/04/2011
I think our elected officials, police officers, and military should be required to submit to random drug tests.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Morgan Stubblefield
09:20 PM on 06/04/2011
Those in the military do get random drug screenings.
01:46 AM on 06/04/2011
The point is to make govt so obnoxious an intrusive that everybody annoyed by it joins the Tea Party which is, by definition against big govt intrusiveness.

Actually it's to make the sheeple more used to submitting. When the govt of plutocrats decides that body cavity searches will be compulsory and the govt agent can use his sex organ to do the probing, you will finally understand that you got exactly what you voted for.

I welcome our new billionaire overlords.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChknLvr
05:27 PM on 06/03/2011
Ok, it's time to follow the money. Which companies are have the contracts for drug testing and who are the principals of those companies? What are their ties to state and federal politicians?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Agy Wilson
For something to be a belief, it needs testing.
06:21 PM on 06/03/2011
oddly enough Scott's "former"company Solantic specializes in drug testing. I say "former" because he signed it over to his wife. Is that a close enough tie for you?
11:08 AM on 06/04/2011
Wow, and I just thought it was the hypocritical tea-party thing "I want laws and regulation for you, but not for me." per the usual far right. I want small government except when we are talking about making rules and laws for others... But stay out of my back yard. I hate socialism... but don't take my social security... that sort of thing. But money usually trumps ideology. This is actually a win, win. for them.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
dancingstu
Christian, liberal lawyer
04:32 PM on 06/03/2011
I propose mandatory drug testing for all persons applying for handgun licenses, and random periodic screening for existing licensees. Or better yet, there's no constitutional rights involved with driving a car, so random drug tests for any person who holds a Florida driver's license!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BillKen
01:58 PM on 06/05/2011
I propose that the government install drug testing equipment at all residences and that everyone be tested before they leave their residence. This way we don't have to worry because if you are under the influence you will be placed under house arrest. Semper Fi