2010 Unemployment Extension Bill: Drug Testing for Benefits Alternate Plan
Dealing with the Lack of Unemployment Benefits If the Senate Fails to Pass the 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill
The amendment to the 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill not only insinuates that the unemployed are a bunch of drug addicts and alcoholics, but that they are also addicted to getting paid while doing nothing. This argument pushes the idea that the unemployment benefits magically appeared and that hard-working Americans had nothing to do with those funds accruing over the years. And although there is little doubt that a few of those hard workers have substance abuse problems, it is hardly an epidemic that requires cutting off the only funds many of those unemployed need to maintain their households.
Besides, where would they then get the money for treatment? A government program? Which leads to the next point: that of saving the nation money and reducing the national debt. How? Starving the unemployed and their families to death? Less people, less expenditures? And what about those drug treatment programs? Paid for through the job they don't have (they're still unemployed, in case that doesn't quite register)? Forcing them to go on welfare that many have managed to steer clear of? Forcing them into more diresome and worrisome circumstances, situations that gradually eat away at their self-worth, increasing cases of depression and suicidal tendencies? More dead? And if the unemployed becomes a corpse, exactly how will that person ever become employed again for the unemployment taxes to be paid?
Senator Orrin Hatch and those who helped him write this piece of legislation miss the point. For the most part, the nearly 10 million people on unemployment (soon to be 9 million at the beginning of July if a version of 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill isn't passed because 900,000 people will have their unemployment benefits suspended or not renewed) are and have always been hard-working individuals who have come face-to-face with the "Great Recession" (a depression by any other name would smell just a rotten) and lost the face-off. All the unemployed want is for their government to stand by them and lend a financial hand until they can find gainful employment and begin contributing to the tax system that supports the programs that they need at present -- what they did up until they became the unemployed.
So, instead of driving people to become homeless and destitute, forcing them to shed the last vestige of their pride and collect welfare, and pushing people to desperate acts (which includes, all sarcasm aside, people actually committing suicide and murder-suicides), perhaps Senator Orrin Hatch could retract his drug and alcohol amendment.
In its place, perhaps the good senator from Utah could confer with his other millionaire colleagues in the Senate and come up with a workable solution to get the unemployed back into the ranks of the employed without causing more consternation, disappointment, and depression.
If not, here's a suggestion: Since there is already a government program on the books that offers incentives to businesses who hire the unemployed, how about adding an incentive for companies that replace someone they fire after failing a drug and/or alcohol screening with someone from the unemployment roles? You know, instead of leaving the position unoccupied to compensate for less profit in these tough economic times? This kind of program is a winner. The company gets rid of a potential lawsuit or safety problem and the terminated employee becomes ineligible for unemployment due to being fired. The company picks up another employee whose looking for work from the unemployment office rolls. The federal government pays the company a small remuneration. The new employee has found gainful employment, the company remains at manpower strength and acquires an incentive bonus, and the government (in its various forms), even though they'll pay the company through a tax incentive, makes more money through various taxes by dropping an individual from the unemployment benefits rolls.
And the individual who got fired? He shouldn't have been doing drugs and/or consuming alcohol and going to work anyway, so he got what he deserves.
Now, that's a plan that a fiscally conscious, socially conservative Republican can appreciate.
But in the meantime and until you can come up with something substantially better, stop insulting the millions of people who've paid taxes for years, grow a heart muscle and talk it over with the other 37 stonewalling Republicans in the Senate and pass the 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension Bill.
Published by Saul Relative
WVU graduate, with degrees in History, English, Secondary Education, Computer Programming, and Psychology (and nearly a degree in Political Science). Originally from West Virginia, with stints in Virginia,... View profile
- Senate Pushes 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension Decision to Next WeekThe unemployment benefits extension could ease the burdens of jobless workers who have exhausted benefits. Now those same people will have to wait a week for a vote.
Unemployment Extension 2010 Voted Down in Senate ~ Drug Testing for Peop...The unemployment extension has been shot down in the Senate and now one Senator is suggesting drug testing for the people on unemployment. Did they drug test the AIG executives...- Could Senate Vote No to 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension?The number of jobless Americans not receiving benefits is growing. Yet, there is a possibility that the Senate will vote no on the 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension.
- Unemployment Extension 2010 Voted Down in Senate ~ Where the Money is Go...Unemployment extension 2010 voted down in the Senate. Too much government spending is the reason given for the "NO" vote. Possible $25 cut weekly coming soon. That is $100 a mon...
- Unemployment Extension 2010 is Shot Down in Senate ~ the Heart Breaking...The unemployment extension 2010 has been shot down in the senate, this is not just a bill, these are peoples lives depending on this money. They are not the big businesses looki...
- Republicans Stop 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension Bill, Affecting Millions of...
- 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill a No Unless Mandatory Drug Testing Imposed?
- 2010 Unemployment Extension Voted NO in Senate ~ $25 a Week Cut in Unemployment...
- 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill Purposed with Drug Testing and $25 Cut Weekly fro...
- 2010 Unemployment Extension Big Deal for Many Still Seeking Jobs
- 2010 Unemployment Benefits Extension Bill Not Passed by Senate
- Republicans Filibuster 2010 Unemployment Extension Bill -- Do They Not Think the U...
136 Comments
Post a CommentYea, little timmy needs a new car for X-MAS and as usual we the tax payers have BEEN flipping the bill, which founding fathers said every 100 years we need to overthrow r government? mabe thay are right?!?! Reguardless we still have a population issue,we dont live within our means - no jobs, and the globe is heating up... to piss in a cup for benafits - NO PROBLEM - we would have to do it if we were working, and as far as who pays, u guessed it - I suppose we could shortchange the recipents first check, it would be a deductable, much like yer first check is rarely a full one when u first start to work... But really a drug check every time you recieve benafits, o.0? really? ide have to flash my wang every month for benafits:) is that a job in of itself ? 0.0? is their a opening for a screener of females, "take it all off baby, do it for yer welfare check"??? hmm... clicker ticket cameras at damn near every lite, anyone else feeling the heat here? and now more gas and time wa
I agree with the drug testing and willing to do whatever I have to, to get help from the government. I'm getting into the cridical stag now and it's down hill from here. Now behind about 2 months on my mortgage and all of my retirement and savings is gone. I need help NOW!
senator really get a life
Hatch's biggest lobbyists are health and drug companies so there you go. Just how would the cost of setting up the clinics, hiring staff, lab work, and the tests be worth the offset of catching maybe less than 1/2 of 1% of the unemployed? Talk about big govt interference in peoples lives from a Republican Senator riding herd on the concept of reducing govt size.
I worked as a professional in the constructio industry. I did indeed take a drug test prior to getting hired. I also arrived at work by 6am ans was at my job and most days ate at my desk while working and then was there till 4pm or 5pm. I also was in on Saturdays when needed. I also cleaned as a part time job. I was then laid off due to the economic conditions. Now, I have enrolled in school to obtain a degree in an entirely different field that will be more sustainable in the future as in the construction industry it is too flexible. So, if I am going to be required to take a drug and alcohol test weekly to receive my benefits, then I would like to have all of the people paid by tax payer dollars to also take WEEKLY drug and alcohol tests. I think that this testing can come out of their retirement plans. They can then put into their retirement plans as well as their healthcare plans. And let them get a regular company based plan that costs them 10% of their gross pay, as wel
Well there you go. Do they realize how much this will cost to screen all the people out of work? I guess they will have to hire more people just to do the testing. That should give jobs to some who are out of work. Never mind the fact that many of us work for companies who had drug and alcohol policies and required initial testing before you could be hired.
Seriously-drug testing-who will pay for that???? If we don't have the funds for extensions where is the money going to come from to pay for drug testing. It's very expensive. Do the senators have mandatory drug and alcohol testing???? It seems that our government has plenty of funds for everything else-GET REAL SENATOR HATCH! Do you really think US citizens enjoy being on unemployment-I DON'T!
I worked forty one years.I,ve been unemployed one year,on my finals on third extension.What happened to the rest of the money payed in on unemployment insurance?
If the over 1 million people out of work are on drugs then all the money spent on drug enforcement is not working and we could use it for a better reason, creating jobs for one. Why is all the name calling going on anyway, we are all in the same boat working or not, and it is sinking. Lets bail out those who got us hear and keep them feed and starve the rest. I am 60 years old and dought if I will ever see another job offer at anything that would even pay rent. Lets see, investments in 401k took my money and got bailed out so they are still rich. Now out of work the government does not want to help me because I do not pay them like big buisness with kickbacks. All this taking from may just drive me to taking drugs to ease the frustration and pain I feel now. So enjoy your cushy job Washington, but remember how this country started, with revolt.
I personally know of one alcoholic who has been on unemployment for a year. This person has been through two treatment programs during this year and is still drinking heavily. This person has done absolutely NO job hunting during this time, choosing to spend the money on vodka and shopping sprees (living rent free at mama's house). I know another individual on unemployment for 11 months who is just now making a serious attempt at finding a job. As someone who has been struggling with my own bills (I'm underemployed) it does make me angry that these two individuals are getting a weekly check and basically lying by saying they are looking for work when they are not. Sometimes not having a safety net gets a person off their butt and work hard at finding a job.