Thank you for dropping by!

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Drug Testing for Those Needing Gov't Asst

Rhetorical Analysis Essay:
Drug Testing for Those Needing Government Assistance    
       I have decided to do my research for my rhetorical analysis essay on testing for those who receive government assistance. I found this subject both informative, and interesting, as well as controversial. 

      I found a few articles that were quite informative, however when I came to this one in general, it alone gave me a reason to decide to use it:

      The article in itself was written in February 26,2015, which is almost a year ago. Which means the specs on it should not be that far off. Therefore current aspects on drug abuse are overwhelming. Such tactics should be considered with the way of the world in this day and age. However, within these aspects, are the ever changing controversial changes of the legalizing of marijuana.

     The article was written by two people:  Bryce Covert and Josh Israel. These two gentlemen happen to be current writers for the “ThinkProgress” team. As for if they are credible, “ThinkProgress” hires only people with degrees qualified to maintain their criteria. “ThinkProgess” has a reputation that they need to uphold, they aren’t going to hold to just hire someone from the street.

     The main site this is through is whereas it is an org site designed to point out where and what should or could be done and sometimes more effectively. This site is owned and ran by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. The site is a well funded and protected site, that people look up to and respect, as well as expect correct facts and figures from.

     On this page, the writers point out how monies are being spent on the drug tests for TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) and how they are deeming it cost ineffective. According to these writers, millions of dollars are being spent on the testing, when it can be spent in other ways. They even provide you, as the reader with the statistics from each of the states then doing it. This is giving you the realization of facts and figures and where to look.

     Yes, there were people that came back with positive results to the drug testing. Not as many as they had anticipated. The goal was to clean up the population of drug abusers, and put them into rehab, and hopefully even slow down any welfare fraud. The question then would be, if it has helped or hindered the problem.

     Oklahoma had 297 people arriving with a positive drug test result, they ranked the highest at that time frame. 297 Positive tests for 3,342 applicants. 

     From the above mentioned article I quote regarding the controversy: “A spokesman for the Oklahoma Department of Human Services told ThinkProgress that, not counting personnel and system costs, the state paid $185,219 for the 2013-2014 year for this program, which came out of its TANF and Medicaid budgets.”Cite:State Section OklahomaCovert & Israel “” article on tanf-drug-testing-states 2015 February’

     In 2011 Florida passed a law, and as the article states, here in Florida, residents pay for their own testing. The article proceeds to inform us: “108 out of 4,086 applicants tested positive at a cost of $118,140. Applicants who tested negative would be reimbursed by the state.”  However, shortly thereafter, the Court decided it was a violation of the fourth amendment right-the “Unreasonable search and seizures.” clause in 2013 — a ruling upheld in December by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. The three-judge panel noted that Florida had “not demonstrated a more prevalent, unique or different drug problem among TANF applicants than in the general population.” Cite: Paragraph ‘The Future’ Covert & Israel”” article on tanf-drug-testing-states 2015 February’

     Other states, are still moving ahead with the new law, requiring drug testing for help. But it is a very controversial problem, with the cost effectiveness, and the fact that people do feel their rights are being violated. There is a problem within a problem, and the only way to fix it, is to keep investigating it further, and see where the real problem stems from, and what can be done to fix it. More people need to care, and more people need to want to change. The biggest problem stems with change, and stems with issues. More research needs to be done, a step was taken, but things are still inconclusive. 

     The article I am sharing however, did make its points very loud and clear throughout, along with proper visualization, and even links. I was more apt to share this, than anything else I found because the amount of information it did have to offer! Within this article stood out many good points, but behind the scenes there were several others. The things you are ‘not’ truly seeing or even understanding, are in fact, behind the scenes. 

     To conclude: My finding found that perhaps we should make the recipients pay for their own testing, and reimburse them, such as Florida tried. I do understand the concept of it seeming as a violation of the fourth amendment rights, however, on the same tactics, you are coming to the Government for help. If you are seeking Assistance, than you should be willing to be completely honest with your Government, sometimes sacrifices need to be made to get results. 

     On the same token, I do not find it credible, to warn the receipent days in advance f the testing. This prepares the person, said person can now flush their system, or even buy urine, and do whatever it takes, to see to it, that they can see to it, that they are able to pass their test, by falsification purposes. This happens, more times than you may be aware. And this is why, we need to be more intelligent in our preparedness. 

     The Government is our protector, and our shield for safety, the one we look up to for guidance and safety. ‘We the people’ go to them when we need help. But when ‘we the people’ are going to Government for Assistance and using those funds illegally to buy gold teeth, Cadillac’s, and drugs, we need to do something about it. The benefits ‘we the people’ are receiving are for the needy, to feed our children, and protect them, and take care of our families. Not to hinder us, and our health. When the Government has recognized this, which they have, it is when they have decided to step in and try to make a difference. Just because they are still unable to resolve this issue and make a difference, does not mean, the Government is the problem. The problem still stems from ‘we the people’.


No comments:

Post a Comment