UNBELIEVEABLE

What the heck is going on in this country? Here's another example of the pendulum swinging too far to one side, with a constitutional interpretation by a Federal Judge, that's simply hard for me to understand.

On July 1 of this year, the State of Florida enacted a statute that requires anyone applying for welfare to submit to a drug test. The basic premise behind this law is that the taxpayers shouldn't be subsidizing the habits of substance abusers. Naturally, there are those folks who argue that it's an invasion of privacy, and violates the 4th amendment guarantee against unreasonable government search and seizure.

Until day before yesterday, the only such law in the nation was being enforced, and the arguments from both sides were coming in hot and heavy. The residents of Florida are overwhelmingly in favor of the law, but naturally, the American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) is on the other side of the debate.

With the aid of the ACLU, Luis Lebron, a Navy veteran who is a student, supporting a 4 year old son, and a disabled mom, filed a lawsuit, contending that the government has no right to drug test him. He insists that he is not a drug user, but refuses to be tested in conjunction with his application for welfare.

On Monday evening, U.S. District Court Judge Mary Scriven sided with Lebron and the ACLU, granting an injunction against enforcement of the laws "suspicionless testing" of adults seeking welfare. Her opinion went on to say "Perhaps no greater public interest exists than protecting a citizen's rights under the constitution".

OK, so let me get this straight. Here's a case where an individual is asking the government (aka the taxpayers) for monetary assistance, but doesn't feel obligated to do anything, other than fill out the paperwork. This is a guy who was in the Navy, where he was subject to random drug testing, but now thinks that a test is unreasonable search and seizure, in exchange for free money.

I've got news for you dude! The taking of government welfare, without any obligation on your part, is in my opinion, unreasonable seizure of my taxpayer dollars! Hey Judge, what about my constitutional right to protect public funds from substance abusers? The basic point that Lebron, the ACLU, and this pinhead judge are missing, is the fact that no one is being forced to do anything. If you don't want to be drug tested, fine. Then don't apply for free money from the taxpayers. End of story.

Over the years, a multitude of laws allowing pre-employment, & random drug testing has been enacted, and stood up to all constitutional challenges. So what's the big difference between being subject to drug testing by an employer, and being subject to a drug test as a welfare applicant? In both cases, monetary compensation is the end result. The huge difference is that the welfare recipient doesn't have to do anything, except perhaps stay unemployed. The wage earner puts in his/her 40 hours a week, and in exchange for adherence to company policies, is compensated accordingly. If anybody should be complaining, or filing lawsuits about drug tests, it should be the wage earner, not the welfare applicant. There's something terribly wrong in this country when the entitlement mentality rises to the level where the Federal Judiciary has ruled that it's OK to drug test the work force as a condition of employment, but it's not OK to drug test a person requesting free money from the taxpayers. In a word...........unbelievable!