Bills would require welfare applicants to take, pay for drug tests

Bills are advancing in both houses of the Florida Legislature requiring applicants for welfare benefits to take and pay for drug tests, despite Democratic and even some Republican opposition.

In House committee hearing Wednesday, the bill's sponsor revised it to make it tougher, applying to all applicants, not just those with criminal records for drug offenses.

That brings it in line with the Senate version of the bill, which already applied to all applicants, but also raises more questions about whether bill is constitutional, according to the legislative staff analysis.

It also generated increased opposition.

All the Democrats on the House Rulemaking and Regulation Committee voted against it, even though one, Scott Randolph of Orlando, said it might have received bipartisan support in its original form.

Meanwhile, Gov. Rick Scott, who announced earlier this week that he'll begin drug-testing job applicants and employees in state agencies under the governor's control, couldn't provide information Wednesday on how many people are likely to be tested or how much it will cost.

His executive order didn't make it clear who will pay for those tests.

Spokesmen for Scott also had no comment on allegations by critics including the state Democratic Party that the drug-testing policy could be a conflict of interest for Scott.

A chain of medical clinics formerly owned by Scott called Solantic, which he has now transferred to his wife, advertises drug testing for employers as one of its services.

Scott spokeswoman Amy Graham noted that his executive order gives the governor's agencies 60 days to develop the new testing policy along with the Governor's Office.

"When the policy is finalized we will have a better sense of how many people will be tested and how frequently," she said. "We can tell you today that this executive order will create regular and random tests for the purpose of creating a more healthy and productive workforce in the Governor's agencies.

During his campaign, Scott also supported drug testing for recipients of unemployment compensation benefits.

Bills have been filed in both houses of the Legislature to do that as well, but they haven't yet been put on committee agendas - a possible indication that legislative leaders who determine the fate of bills in the Legislature aren't eager to bring them up.

The Senate version of the welfare bill made it through the first of its two Senate committee hearings Tuesday.

At the committee hearing Wednesday, the second of five House committee stops, Democrats argued the testing isn't needed, citing figures from a Putnam County pilot program in 1999-01 that only 335 of 8,797 recipients tested positive.

They said research indicates little difference in drug use between recipients of the federal welfare program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, or TANF, and the general population.

They also cited a Michigan federal court case ruling that such testing, without some grounds to suspect drug use, is unconstitutional.

The cost, they added, would be burdensome for the needy families.

The state Department of Children and Families estimated initial tests would cost $10. and a confirmation test for anyone who tested positive another $25 - a total of more than 10 percent of the monthly maximum TANF benefits.

Scott's company, Solantic, advertises a $35 fee.

Randolph said the Michigan case means, "We're about to knowingly and willingly violate the law."

But Republicans responded that the Michigan ruling, not binding in Florida, shouldn't stop the Legislature from enacting the bill.

Bill sponsor Jimmie Smith, R-Inverness, said he believes the bill is needed because, "I went out there and talked to the people. They don't want their tax money being spent on people who potentially could use it to buy drugs."

He said the money would insure that benefits go to truly needy and deserving families.

At one point, the debate became bitter.

"It seems like you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist," said Democrat James Waldman of Coconut Creek, who said the move would amount to a tax or fee increase for the poor.

Republican Matt Gaetz of Fort Walton Beach, sponsor of the similar House bill for unemployment compensation recipients, said sarcastically, "I'm just excited that we've found a tax Rep. Waldman doesn't like," earning a rebuke from committee Chairman Chris Dorworth, R-Lake Mary.

One Republican on the committee, Jeffrey Brandes of St. Petersburg, voted against the bill even though he said it was "very rare that I agree with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle."

He said he considered the bill "the camel's nose under the tent" for applying testing to Medicaid, Social Security, or any federal benefits program.

Brandes said he believes there will be other Republican opposition, and questioned whether the bill can make it to the House floor for final passage with five committee stops. "That's usually a pretty heavy lift," he said.

Scott told reporters Wednesday he's ready to go ahead with the drug testing because, "private companies are doing it, it creates safety, it's the right thing to do ... It's good for the taxpayers of the state."

A spokesman said Scott is "comfortable" that the drug testing initiatives are on solid legal ground, despite a 2004 Florida case that overturned random drug testing for all employees in the Department of Juvenile Justice.

But Howard Simon of the Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said the organization is already talking to state employees about mounting a possible legal challenge to Scott's executive order.

He agreed that the Michigan case "technically doesn't bind Florida."

But, he said, that case and other cases from the U.S. Supreme Court and elsewhere "all are based on the same general principle: When you're dealing with a government search, it must be based on some reasonable suspicion of wrong doing or use of illicit drugs."

Drug testing, he said, "is a government search - an intrusive government search."

813 259 7761