Bcom 275 Week Five Final
- Submitted by: seffanb
- Views: 659
- Category: Politics: Economics
- Date Submitted: 08/03/2013 04:14 PM
- Pages: 6
- Report this Essay
II. Money
A. States participating in this law are saving money.
a. Under this new law, applicants must cover the expense of the
mandatory drug test.
b. The state will reimburse the individual for the expense of the test
and provide them with welfare benefits if they pass the
test; applicants will be denied all benefits for a year’s time if the
test is failed.
B. States participating in this law are not saving money.
a. Florida law requires that applicants who pass the test be
reimbursed for the expense, an average of $30; the cost to the
state was $118,140. This is more than would have been paid out
in benefits to the individuals who failed the test. As a result, the
testing cost the government an extra $45,780 on average.
b. It has been reported the law "has led to a dramatic 48 percent
drop in monthly approvals, an overall drug-related denial rate of
19 percent, and almost $1.8 million in savings to taxpayers." The
state has only paid out $57,000 in reimbursements to applicants
who passed the test, even though more than 7,000 people have
done so. If each is repaid as they're supposed to be,
reimbursement costs should average roughly $210,000. Previous
back-of-the-envelope estimates have suggested the program's
reimbursement costs could nearly outstrip its savings.
What is the main driver of insisting that those who on receiving welfare or any form of government assistance, why would there be a need to ensure that there are no participants who are using drugs? Money as in most situations is the motivating factor pushing this idea of drug testing welfare recipients within different states around the country. This idea...
A. States participating in this law are saving money.
a. Under this new law, applicants must cover the expense of the
mandatory drug test.
b. The state will reimburse the individual for the expense of the test
and provide them with welfare benefits if they pass the
test; applicants will be denied all benefits for a year’s time if the
test is failed.
B. States participating in this law are not saving money.
a. Florida law requires that applicants who pass the test be
reimbursed for the expense, an average of $30; the cost to the
state was $118,140. This is more than would have been paid out
in benefits to the individuals who failed the test. As a result, the
testing cost the government an extra $45,780 on average.
b. It has been reported the law "has led to a dramatic 48 percent
drop in monthly approvals, an overall drug-related denial rate of
19 percent, and almost $1.8 million in savings to taxpayers." The
state has only paid out $57,000 in reimbursements to applicants
who passed the test, even though more than 7,000 people have
done so. If each is repaid as they're supposed to be,
reimbursement costs should average roughly $210,000. Previous
back-of-the-envelope estimates have suggested the program's
reimbursement costs could nearly outstrip its savings.
What is the main driver of insisting that those who on receiving welfare or any form of government assistance, why would there be a need to ensure that there are no participants who are using drugs? Money as in most situations is the motivating factor pushing this idea of drug testing welfare recipients within different states around the country. This idea...