to voluntarily spend more money than you already do on a program to add an extra step that won't actually change anything?Answer Question
Answer by Sisteract at 11:12 PM on Jun. 8, 2011
Answer by KateDinVA at 11:16 PM on Jun. 8, 2011
Answer by KateDinVA at 11:22 PM on Jun. 8, 2011
I think the only way it would make sense is if it were to protect whatever entity creating the program from litigation.
If this is about the FL drug testing for welfare, I think it's cost prohibitive and no state is doing well enough to blow money on testing, especially given the fact that the money is given anyhow. I wonder what happens when the recipient fails and then designates someone to receive their money, and the designate runs off with the cash. What happens then? Does the designated recipient have to take a test as well to make sure that they aren't going to run off and buy drugs? Too many questions left unanswered.
Answer by QuinnMae at 11:30 PM on Jun. 8, 2011
Answer by hot-mama86 at 12:36 AM on Jun. 9, 2011
Answer by itsmesteph11 at 9:30 AM on Jun. 9, 2011
Answer by Tracys2 at 9:42 AM on Jun. 9, 2011
Answer by attap5 at 12:33 PM on Jun. 9, 2011