NO FREE DRUG MONEY

We're pretty sure the Founding Fathers never thought requiring drug
tests of welfare recipients was an unreasonable search. Mostly because
they probably never conceived of the possibility that so many people
would spend their days wasted, or that their Constitution would leave
open the door to welfare to begin with. Oh well.

But if they would be shocked that the government they designed is
being used to take money from one person and simply give it to
another, they'd be absolutely horrified at the claim that their
Constitution would somehow prohibit any strings from being attached to
that free money. Such as, oh, drug tests.

Nowhere in our historical documents does it say the government should
give out money, but it sure doesn't say we have to be played for
suckers by giving out free drug money.

Yet, a federal judge this week blocked a new law - do judges do
anything else anymore? - that requires Florida welfare applicants to
pass a drug test before receiving benefits. The judge said it may
violate the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.

Really? So it may be unreasonable to require those on the public dole
not to be using our money for hallucinogenic drugs? What passes for
reason these days?

If the government was stopping people on the street for drug tests,
we'd absolutely agree with the judge. But the state of Florida's
elected representatives have decided to make drug tests a condition
for getting public benefits.

And by any measure, it's a reasonable condition.

Meanwhile, if someone wants to get a job, he or she must fill a cup.
Is there a disconnect here?

Moreover, if those fighting the Florida law think they're being
compassionate to welfare recipients, they couldn't be more wrong.
There's nothing compassionate about blindly and unquestioningly
feeding a costly, illegal, self-destructive habit. Under the Florida
law, a one-year ban on benefits for a failed drug test can be cut in
half with completion of a drug course. The law could actually prod
some folks to get on the right path in life.

Most importantly, we think it's wholly unreasonable to take a
hard-working, law-abiding person's money and give it to someone who's
using illicit drugs - without any effort to require responsible, nay,
legal use of those funds.

If this were your nephew and he was asking for your money, you'd
expect him to stay clean; you'd be foolish not to. But according to
federal Judge Mary Scriven, our Constitution says we have to be foolish.

Pray she's wrong. If she's right, we need to change that founding
document one more time.