Including all elected officials?
2007-01-21 11:25:21 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
In the case of our elected officials, I think it would set a good example.
2007-01-21 11:30:14 · update #1
Great answers here! Keep them coming!
Yes, welfare recipients and students too! I'm all for that.
2007-01-21 12:10:06 · update #2
Yes I think that is a wonderful idea. I have been employed by the government since 1998 in 3 different jobs but have never had a drug test unless it was for the physical. I have nothing to hide and I am in a position where I arrest people who use so why would I? I think it is a great idea and for the welfare crew too, OMG, that burns me up.
2007-01-21 12:33:47 · answer #1 · answered by Rhode Island Red 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In other countries, drug testing of public employees and of those applying for driver's license is already a law. It's timely and appropriate considering the use of illegal and prohibited drugs. I think there's no question on the requirement. The big question is on the consistent and fair implementation. For instance, when you say random, it should really be randomized, i.e., all employees are given a number in chronological order and a committee will choose for example all even number or all odd number starting from a certain number. This will make the testing not subjective because every one has an equal probability of being tested regardless of position title. It will also avoid the cases when drug testing is used to boot out a 'suspected' drug user in the workplace or supervisors and managers using that 'not so positve' results of the test to harass a subordinate.
2007-01-21 11:43:13 · answer #2 · answered by Willie Boy 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe it should be, but the results of those tests cannot be made public without the consent of the peron taking the test. HIPPA laws basically mean a congress person, or the president, could be tested, but the public would never hear the results. Public officials still enjoy the same rights you and I do.
Also, there would be no reason to do a hair follicle test monthly. Hair follicle testing will give you about a 90 day history of the person. Realistically, you could do one every three months. Every month would be a waste of money. Try learning a little about drug testing before posting answers about it.
2007-01-21 11:36:17 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, IF this testing begins with the very top elected official (the President) and includes all other elected officials and civil service employees, federal, state, and local, no exceptions.
2007-01-21 11:48:44 · answer #4 · answered by Kraftee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is a trick to it. For publicity purposes virtually all State and Government agencies hold that policy. In reality though, you generally take one test when hired and as in my years with the government (except for the military) never see one again.
2016-05-24 09:08:08 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely and include any and all that except federal, state or local monies. Have all welfare recipient piss in the cup before they pick up they're check. The new "pass the test, get the check" rule.
2007-01-21 11:30:54 · answer #6 · answered by rikv77 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, starting with the President on downwards.
2007-01-21 11:29:32 · answer #7 · answered by zipboing 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, hair follicle drug tests monthly.
2007-01-21 11:30:27 · answer #8 · answered by Timothy M 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no , but it should be mandatory for all students to have a drug tests once a month
2007-01-21 11:51:29 · answer #9 · answered by cprucka 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
YES and the results should also be public.
They seem to think we work for them and it's actually them working for us.
2007-01-21 11:33:48 · answer #10 · answered by Enigma 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋