We Want Your Pee

Austin's Chronicle, Michael King blesses us with his overly opinionated article called "We Want Your Urine" about Governor Rick Perry and Governor David Dewhurts' bright idea to mandate urine drug tests to anyone receiving a welfare check, or filing for unemployment. Perry and Dewhursts intentions are to cut the government spending on welfare and create jobs for those who would be running the mandatory drug tests. At first glance this may sound like a good idea, who wants to give money to those who are wasting it on drugs, but after King's argument one's mind is quickly changed. King illustrates many validating points that prove not only is this unnecessary but it is overstepping a boundary, and if we are going to test participants who are working , or looking for work then there are a whole pool of people that should also have be mandated on cue to have their urine tested. His two main points being, one that the urine tests costs just as much if not more money than the welfare checks the people would be receiving, and two many of the people in higher positions such as Harold Simmons who makes tenfold the amount of money any of these people receiving welfare checks  a year would ever make are not drug tested on demand to receive their salary. Those in higher positions are just as if not more likely to abuse narcotics and they are potentially funded by the government just as welfare is. King's intentions are to make Perry's bright idea look ridiculous like many of his do. King says how Perry has earned us an unofficial motto of "Bad Ideas Tried Here First and Proven Not to Work". King points out not only is this a ridiculous idea, but it is violating a person's fourth amendment of unreasonable search and seizure. Other states that have tried to put mandate urine tests in effect have suffered a huge amount of law suits once again defeating the whole purpose of financial benefit. Michael King did a great job at making his point and in a humorous way I'm sure his audience was more than satisfied with his argument against Perry and Dewhursts "bright idea".