Allen, Andrew, and Jennifer I. Flores. Drug- and Crime-Related Restrictions in Federal Assistance Programs. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2012. Print.
Unlike most of the sources found on this subject, this book by Allen & Jennifer is an interesting one. Allen & Jenifer addresses the reasons as to why most states embarked on this process, with the aim of justifying their courses of action. The authors of this book defend the decision to test those people who are applying for the welfare programs for use of illicit drugs. They describe the process as one which was a necessary one, for the good of the American taxpayers. According to them, such programs should be carried out so as to maximize the benefits derived from public funds. However, the authors points out at the biasness of the program, for its target to the poor.
Babalavi, Parviz. Addiction from Start to the End. 2nd ed. Xlibris Corporation, 2010. Print.
In this book, Dr. Parviz, who has been in contact with hundreds of patients while he was a Practitioner focusing on Addiction Medicine, comprehensively looks into the issue of drug-use. Most of the information published in the book originates from interviews that he carried out on Substance Abuse Addicts while engaging them in counseling as well as treatment sessions for 30 years. On page 200, he describes drugs addicts as innocent people who have been accidentally trapped in the issue of drugs dependency. Dr. Parviz valiantly tries to open the eyes of the readers into the realism of the matter, and goes ahead to recommend that welfare recipients ought to be tested for substance abuse so as to make sure that they use the funds allocated to them in the right use. He suggests that the government should be accountable to its citizens even when offering welfare services to them.
Barbour, Ian G. Why Drug Testing Welfare Recipients is Wrong. San Francisco, Calif.: HarperSanFrancisco, 2009. Print.
Barbour’s book addresses on the reasons as to why the program of testing the people who are in need of the assistance provided by the different states through the welfare programs is wrong. The author goes ahead to highlight one issue after the other, specifying on the cons of this approach. On page 65, he provides the recommendations that ought to be implemented instead of testing the welfare applicants for the usage of drugs. The book offers a comprehensive coverage of the wrongfulness of the program, highlighting significant issues that support or fails to support the program.
Bloom, Rachel. "Just as We Suspected: Florida Saved Nothing by Drug Testing Welfare Applicants." Drug-Testing Welfare Recipients (2012): n. pag. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
Bloom describes Florida as the first state that passed as well as implemented the bill requiring that every welfare applicant be tested for drug, prior to giving them basic assistance. Four months following its implementation, a lawsuit was filed by the ACLU of Florida, referring the act as being unconstitutional. The author of the article advances to illustrate how this law by the state of Florida was a failure, referring to the information that was released by the New York Times. Among the 4,086 applicants for TANF in Florida, just 108 people tested positive. This stands for a mere 2.6% of all the applicants. Bloom therefore describes the law by the state of Florida as being absurd, taking into account the amount of money that was spent in carrying out the exercise, that is, $118,140 in just four months.
Cohen, Robin. Electronic Benefits Transfer, Use of Welfare Funds, and Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients. Hartford: Connecticut General Assembly, Office of Legislative Research, 2009. Print.
Cohen describes the objective of testing welfare applicants for drugs as a way of assuring those who contribute in paying taxes that their money does not get wasted on individuals who subscribe for the welfare programs by the state, and goes ahead to use the assistance they receive for purchasing of drugs. The author compares the results of the people who tested positive for use of illicit drugs within different states. He describes the entire process as being wrong on the basis that even those people who apply for the funds are as well taxpayers. In addition, Cohen describes how his family was as well not financially well-off and that he had to apply for the welfare programs. However, he asserts that there was no one time that he using funds awarded to him in purchasing illicit drugs. He opposes the notion that the poor people abuses drugs excessively and calls for the government to extend this process to a bigger population so as to avoid being bias.
Bryce. "Tennessee Drug Tests Welfare Applicants, Discovers Less Than One
Percent Use Drugs." (2014): Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
Covert addresses the drug testing program that was initiated in Tennessee, in July, towards those people who apply for the welfare program that the state provides. The author of the article describes the process that is used during the testing for the presence of any drugs. According to Covert, it is only one individual out of a possible eight hundred who has ever since tested positive for substance abuse. In addition, other four individuals were denied to benefit from the welfare program after they refused to be tested for substance abuse. Bryce compares the positive rate of substance abuse that was identified during drug testing with that which corresponds to residents of the entire state. The rate of positive drug tests is 0.12% among the welfare applicants whereas that of state residents is 8%. The findings presented in this article disapproves the assumption that there is a high rate of drug use amongst the poor people.
Dodie Smith. The Morality of Testing Applicants for State Welfare. Greenwich, Ct: Twin Books, 2008. Print.
The book by Dodie basically looks into the morality of the subject of testing applicants for welfare benefits. He describes the issue as a moral dilemma where the government is faced with the need of making sure that tax paid by Americans is put in the right use, as well as the need to help those individuals who are in dire need of the funds to cater for their basic needs. The book concludes that even though a few welfare recipients are struggling with the problems of illicit drug use as well as alcohol abuse, there is need for substance abuse prevention along with treatment services among the groups that are exposed to high risks.
Grant, Boniface, and David Dawson. "Alcohol and drug use, abuse, and dependence among welfare recipients." American Journal of Public Health (2010): n. pag. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
The objective of the article by Grant & David was to find out the national estimates on the cases of heavy drinking, use of illicit drugs, as well as alcohol abuse among the individuals who are recipients to the different welfare programs by the respective states. To do so, they utilize the data obtained in 2008 by the National Longitudinal Drugs Epidemiologic Survey. The authors analyze the data statistically. According to their findings, the number of individuals relying on the welfare programs were generally low in all the states in 2008. In addition, the findings as well illustrated that there was consistency in the percentages within the general population in the U.S. The number of people who have been denied access to the benefits from the welfare programs were found to be relatively low in all the states.
Greenblatt, Alan. "Does Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Save Money?" (2012): Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
In this article, Greenblatt complains on how it is hard for Americans to access assistance from the states even as the nation experiences anemic economic recovery. He argues against the inclusion of strict laws which are frustrating needy people from getting help. The author asserts that these programs are aimed at making sure that taxpayers’ money does not end up subsidizing the drugs by some people. He as well states that those who are supporting these programs are not merely saving costs, but also encouraging people who are on drugs to change their behaviors.
Healey, Justin. Should Welfare Recipients be Tested for Drugs?Thirroul, N.S.W: Spinney Press, 2011. Print
The book by Healey looks into the arguments put forward by the Democrats as well as the Republicans in 2011 on the debate as to whether those people who receive welfare ought to be tested for the usage of drugs. According to the author, the Republicans were by then empowering all the states with the capacity to test all the welfare recipients for the usage of illicit drugs. Healey presents the concerns raised by different House Representatives on the constitutionality of this procedure. This procedure, according to then Majority Leader, Harry Reid, was motivated by the concern that some individuals will utilize the taxpayers money for the purchase of drugs.
Lucas, Pamela. Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients. Hartford: Connecticut General Assembly, Office of Legislative Research, 2011. Print.
Lucas’s book discusses the essentiality of the program of testing people for the presence of illicit drug use prior to allocation of welfare funds. However, she uses the findings collected on the performance of these programs among different states and recommends that the program ought to be dropped due to its inefficiency in ensuring that the government is putting the public funds in the appropriate use. According to her, different states have spent millions of dollars in conducting the exercise, yet very few welfare applicants have been found to test positive for illicit drugs. In one instance, she asserts that the state of Florida spent a lot of taxpayers funds in executing the procedure of drug-testing, funds which would otherwise have been put into much useful projects by the state. The author concludes by asserting that even though the program is an essential one, it is not the most appropriate as it has led to wastage of public funds.
Manpower Information, Inc. "5." Employment and Training Reporter. Manpower Information, Incorporated, 2008. 392-400. Print.
According to a survey conducted by the organization, psychiatric disorders among employees in the place of work occurs due to a variety of causes, one of them being misuse of drugs. Manpower Information, Inc. asserts “this was what motivated this organization to study the cases of drugs in different companies, as well as how this issue should be addressed. Research by Manpower Information, Inc. illustrates that employers are relatively unable to monitor their employees in terms of drug use, and most problems are usually discovered when the problem has escalated. On page 393, Manpower Information, Inc. From the findings presented from twenty-five organizations in 2008, one-sixth of the recipients were reported to be using illicit substances over the past six months. The recommendations that the organization provides include the testing of chemicals among the employees so as to find out illicit drugs that some of them may be using.
National Conference for State's Legislature (NCSL). "Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients and Public Assistance." (2014): Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
The journal by NCSL looks into the different proposals that have been brought forward by different states in relation to testing of welfare applicants for the usage of illicit drugs since the year 1996. According to this journal, the federal rules allow the testing for drugs among the people who are applying for assistance from the welfare programs by various states. This approach is particularly used for screening the applicants so as to determine who will receive assistance from the welfare program kitty. According to the journal, most of the proposals by the states to implement these proposals have been met with a lot of resistance, hence resulting to many lawsuits between individuals or organizations and the respective states. The journal describes the states that have enacted the proposals in the past as well as the developments that took place.
Newell, Walker. "Tax Dollars Earmarked for Drugs?: The Policy and Constitutionality of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients." Columbia Human Rights Law Review. 43.1 (2011): 215-254. Print.
Newell points out that there have been cases where individuals have applied for the welfare programs and ended up using the funds to buy illicit drugs. The author describes this act as one that is not morally upright as there are some other individuals who need the funds to carry on with their daily lives. As a result, Newell asserts that the program as one that had very good motives, having the interests of those who direly need the funds allocated to welfare programs for the right reasons. However, the author questions the constitutionality of the program asserting that it is the right of every American in need of assistance to apply for the funds, regardless of whether they use illicit drugs or not.
Szyperski, Norbert. Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Unconstitutional. Braunschweig: Vieweg, 2014. Print.
In this book, the author describes the unconstitutional aspects of testing welfare applicants for drugs. Szyperski refers to a number of sections from the U.S. Constitution in elaborating why he thinks that the approach is unconstitutional. The book as well provides a lot of insight into various interpretation of the Constitution. The readers get enlightened on a number of legislations that have been well put forward by the author. Szyperski develops well-argued points in explaining why the testing of applicants is not moral or constitutional. On page 45, he asserts that the unconstitutionality of this program is the reason that will lead to its failure. He concludes by asserting that all Americans have the right to receive welfare benefits if need be.