EDITORIAL WRONG TO CRITICIZE SCOTT'S STAND ON DRUG TESTING

On June 1, the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board criticized Gov. Rick Scott
for signing a bill that will require Floridians applying for welfare
to submit to a drug test.

At issue is not the ability of needy citizens to apply for assistance.
Nobody disagrees with the state providing a safety net for those who
fall temporarily on hard times or who cannot provide for themselves
due to physical or mental impairments. But it should be a safety net,
not a comfort zone.

What is at issue is the prudent use of taxpayer funds. As taxpayers,
we must hold our elected officials accountable for how our tax dollars
are distributed. The bill's signing is an example of Gov. Scott
properly executing his fiduciary duty to Florida's citizens.

There is no debate that our welfare program is systematically abused
by many able-bodied people who have no intention of ever becoming
self-sufficient -- some for multiple generations! And many of these
people are users of illegal drugs. When tax dollars go to these
people, it is an enabling factor for an activity that is illegal --
it effectively makes every taxpayer an accomplice in the commission of
a crime.

Some, commenting online on the editorial, argued that the bill
violates the Fourth Amendment rights of those applying for assistance.
Yet, to exercise one's Second Amendment right to carry a firearm in
Florida, one must provide proof of training, pay a fee and submit
fingerprints for an FBI background check -- and that is to exercise
an actual right that is specifically protected by the U.S.
Constitution! Welfare is not a right -- it is an auxiliary service
provided by the benevolence of the citizens' agents in the egislative
and executive branches.

One could argue that the preamble of the U.S. Constitution says its
purpose is to "promote the general welfare" -- but it would be a
sophomoric argument. The Constitution was drafted in 1787, over 140
years before the first incarnation of a welfare program was created in
the 1930s as part of President Roosevelt's New Deal. But the New Deal
was very different than what we have today -- people had to actually
work to receive the benefits.

There is a big difference between "promoting" the "general" welfare
and "providing" for "individual" welfare. Our Founding Fathers wanted
to create a government that would be committed to providing an
environment in which people would be able to provide for themselves.
They did not want to initiate a nanny state.

I applaud the Florida Legislature and Gov. Scott for taking one more
step in the right direction on behalf of the hard-working citizens of
this state.