“The Social Welfare Act” House Bill 5223
As part of a national push to require drug testing for people currently receiving public assistance, Michigan is contemplating passing House Bill 5223, entitled the “The Social Welfare Act”. This bill is an amendment to current state law that "shall establish a program of substance abuse testing as a condition of eligibility for Family Independence Program assistance benefits,” according to Kenneth Kurtz (R), Chairman of the Families, Children, and Seniors committee.
In Michigan, “The Social Welfare Act” has already been deemed unconstitutional. In 1999 the National ACLU and the ACLU of Michigan challenged the constitutionality of these same efforts in the case Marchwinkski v. Howard, (113 F.Supp.2d 1134). In this case, Plaintiffs challenged a Michigan law requiring FIA to impose testing for substance abuse as a condition of welfare eligibility. After several court hearings and an en banc review, six federal court judges upheld the lower court’s ruling that the testing was a violation of Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights because the testing was done without particularized suspicion.
According to the National League for Human Services “no proposed or current policy in any state has been able to show that drug testing policies save any state dollars.” The legality of random or universal drug testing policy for cash assistance recipients is questionable, and it would behoove the State of Michigan to stay away from such controversial courses of action, as it will once again be challenged and end up in court. Arizona, Missouri, Oklahoma and Georgia have all passed bills to create suspicion-based drug testing policies, though the cost are high and not likely to save states any money. Arizona estimated that it would cost $3.4 million to just do testing for applicants and recipients, Oklahoma assumed a cost of $2.16 million for its program and Missouri expects to spend $1.9 million during FY12 and another $2.2 million in FY13.[i] Not to mention additional cost outside of the actual testing such as the administrative cost of staffing and training, and an increase of administrative hearings have not been taken into account. Drug Testing.
Many others have said there is a compromise. A family receiving or applying for cash assistance should be given at least two to three months to enroll in a drug treatment program if and only if there is reasonable suspicion that there is a substance abuse problem. Secondly, their participation and progress should be measured as a part of their accomplishments in meeting self sufficiency. Failure to comply with the development toward self-sufficiency should result in grounds for penalty or termination of benefits. Fortunately, this is what the law already stipulates and is established in DHS policy. Prohibiting recipients from assistance, without proper due process, will inhibit those who are having substance abuse issues from getting treatment, as they will be burdened with no money or support, nor have the ability to get access to treatment. Then no one wins.
Contact Legal Aid by: Al Williams
[i] ASPE Issue Brief, Drug Testing Welfare Recipients: Recent Proposals and Continuing Controversies, October 2011
