VIEW; substance abuse screening and assessment of public assistance applicants and recipients. (SB6)

Introduced By

Sen. Steve Martin (R-Chesterfield) with support from 6 copatrons, whose average partisan position is:

Progress

√
 Introduced
X
 Passed Committee
☐
 Passed House
√
 Passed Senate
☐
 Signed by Governor
☐
 Became Law

Description

Substance abuse screening and assessment of public assistance applicants and recipients.  Requires local departments of social services to screen each VIEW program participant to determine whether probable cause exists to believe the participant is engaged in the use of illegal substances. The bill provides that when a screening indicates reasonable cause to believe a participant is using illegal substances, the local department of social services shall require a formal substance abuse assessment of the participant, which may include drug testing. Any person who fails or refuses to participate in a screening or assessment without good cause or who tests positive for the use of illegal substances shall be ineligible to receive TANF payments for a period of one year, unless he enters into and complies with the requirements of a drug treatment program; however, an individual has one opportunity during the subsequent 12-month period to comply with the screening, assessment, or treatment requirements and be reinstated to eligibility for TANF benefits. View Full Text »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

  • 12/05/2011 Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/12 12100189D
  • 12/05/2011 Referred to Committee on Rehabilitation and Social Services
  • 01/18/2012 Impact statement from DHCD (SB0006)
  • 01/20/2012 Impact statement from DPB (SB6)
  • 01/30/2012 Assigned Rehab sub: Social Services
  • 01/31/2012 Impact statement from DPB (SB6)
  • 02/03/2012 Reported from Rehabilitation and Social Services with substitute (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/03/2012 Committee substitute printed 12105051D-S1
  • 02/03/2012 Rereferred to Finance
  • 02/06/2012 Incorporates SB318
  • 02/06/2012 Incorporates SB83
  • 02/06/2012 Impact statement from DPB (SB6S1)
  • 02/09/2012 Reported from Finance with amendments (9-Y 6-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/13/2012 Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Read second time
  • 02/14/2012 Reading of substitute waived
  • 02/14/2012 Committee substitute agreed to 12105051D-S1
  • 02/14/2012 Reading of amendments waived
  • 02/14/2012 Committee amendments agreed to
  • 02/14/2012 Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute with amendments SB6ES1
  • 02/14/2012 Printed as engrossed 12105051D-ES1
  • 02/14/2012 Constitutional reading dispensed (39-Y 1-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Passed Senate (20-Y 19-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Reconsideration of passage agreed to by Senate (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Passed Senate (20-Y 20-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/14/2012 Chair votes yes
  • 02/15/2012 Impact statement from DPB (SB6ES1)
  • 02/16/2012 Placed on Calendar
  • 02/16/2012 Read first time
  • 02/16/2012 Referred to Committee on Health, Welfare and Institutions
  • 02/21/2012 Reported from Health, Welfare and Institutions with amendment (14-Y 8-N)
  • 02/21/2012 Reported from Health, Welfare and Institutions with substitute (14-Y 8-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/21/2012 Committee substitute printed 12105598D-H1
  • 02/21/2012 Referred to Committee on Appropriations
  • 02/24/2012 Assigned App. sub: Health & Human Resources
  • 02/27/2012 Subcommittee recommends continuing to 2013
  • 02/27/2012 Continued to 2013 in Appropriations

Comments

Jody writes:

When all of the state representatives & senators have to do at least one random drug test during session, this bill will get my support. Both groups are receiving funds from the taxpayers, so why not test both? The data does not support the popular view that drug use is rampant among welfare recipents.

Posted 17 months ago.
Helen Gregory writes:

Why do I have to be drug tested to work and the recipients don't have to
be tested to receive tax payers money?

Posted 16 months ago.
wayne writes:

Jody ,It's not so much that drug use is rampant among welfare recipients but if I must take a drug test to get a job with the state then those that do nothing but get a check should be tested also. At least I'm willing to work for mine. If the testing shows it's not worth the cost in savings from those that get cut off, then stop the testing.
Remember, the state cannot give away anything that it has not taken from someone else.

Posted 16 months ago.
Mike writes:

Based on your illogical statement Wayne, anyone to whom the State gives money should be drug tested. Is there empirical data to support your position that testing is necessary among welfare folks as their drug use is out of control, who tend to be females with young kids? Or if we compel them to take vaginal ultrasounds, we'll so urine out of them instead. When do we set up the testing of State Senators, and Delegates, County Executives, Veterans, farmers, disabled kids, the unemployed, we give them money we got to test them. Tell me, once we get all this negative and positive pee, what do we do with the results? I think we should mail the results to Wayne and Helen and let them sort it out. So many things wrong in our economy and we waste our time and money on social issues that 98% of the people don't care about.

Posted 16 months ago.
Monica Sanders writes:

Of course there should be an appeal for those on Rx drugs with doctors affidavit. Otherwise, random drug testing should be mandatory.

Posted 12 months ago.