Urine Samples Required From Welfare Recipients In Just-Passed TN Bill
Tennessee State Senator Stacey Campfield‘s bill requiring drug testing — presumably, urine tests — for welfare recipients was just passed in the Senate by a 24-9 margin. Applicants for TANF — Temporary Assistance For Needy Families — may have to be drug-tested first if they might be drug users, now or in the future. It’s unclear who would make that determination, or what the basis for that determination might be…
It’s unknown when the Tennessee House will vote on the bill, or if the Governor will sign it.
It seems Campfield, best-known as the sponsor of Tennessee’s infamous “Don’t Say Gay” bill, might fail a reading test just as quickly as he might fail a math test, because Campfield apparently either couldn’t or couldn’t be bothered to read last week’s New York Times article, “No Savings Are Found From Welfare Drug Tests“:
Ushered in amid promises that it would save taxpayers money and deter drug users, a Florida law requiring drug tests for people who seek welfare benefits resulted in no direct savings, snared few drug users and had no effect on the number of applications, according to recently released state data.
“Many states are considering following Florida’s example, and the new data from the state shows they shouldn’t,†said Derek Newton, communications director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, which sued the state last year to stop the testing and recently obtained the documents. “Not only is it unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, but it doesn’t save money, as was proposed.â€
This week, Georgia instituted a nearly identical law, with supporters saying it would foster greater personal responsibility and save money. As in Florida, the law is expected to draw a legal challenge. The Southern Center for Human Rights, based in Atlanta, said it expected to file a lawsuit once the law takes effect in the next several months. A number of other states are considering similar bills.
The Florida civil liberties group sued the state last year, arguing that the law constituted an “unreasonable search†by the government, a violation of the Fourth Amendment. In issuing a temporary injunction in October, Judge Mary S. Scriven of Federal District Court scolded lawmakers and said the law “appears likely to be deemed a constitutional infringement.â€
From July through October in Florida — the four months when testing took place before Judge Scriven’s order — 2.6 percent of the state’s cash assistance applicants failed the drug test, or 108 of 4,086, according to the figures from the state obtained by the group. The most common reason was marijuana use. An additional 40 people canceled the tests without taking them.
Because the Florida law requires that applicants who pass the test be reimbursed for the cost, 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 people who failed the test, Mr. Newton said.
As a result, the testing cost the government an extra $45,780, he said.
And the testing did not have the effect some predicted. An internal document about Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, caseloads stated that the drug testing policy, at least from July through September, did not lead to fewer cases.
What the Times article neglected to mention is that Florida Governor Rick Scott is a co-founder of — and he or his family likely have a financial interest in — the company hired to do the drug testing. Nifty, huh?
But, we digress.
Back to Tennessee State Senator Stacey “Don’t Say Gay“Â Campfield’s drug bill.
“If the bills are passed it would mean welfare recipients would have to go through a screening process before being approved for benefits,” a report yesterday in the Examiner states. “If it appears as though an applicant has used drugs in the past or that they would use drugs in the future, then they would have to submit to a drug test before being approved.”
Think about that. Republicans go nuts when they hear the term “hate crime.” They hate the very idea of hate crime legislation so much one lawmaker attempted to get the name of the Matthew Shephard Hate Crimes Bill changed to the Matthew Shephard Thought Crimes Bill.
Yet Campfield thinks he can determine which welfare applicants might use drugs, now or in the future?
Sounds a little like Campfield would want to, say, give a kid a maturity test before entering kindergarten.
Then there’s this from a local Nashville news channel:
One local man has issued a challenge to lawmakers : take the same drug test they are proposing making welfare families submit to.
Alex Friedman spent the day Monday on Capitol Hill challenging every State Senator and every State Representative to take the same test that Tennessee residents applying for welfare might be asked to take.
Back to Tennessee State Senator Stacey “Don’t Say Gay” Campfield, whose math skills are as dull as his reading skills.
Campfield, you’ll remember, is the lawmaker who was kicked out of a local Knoxville, Tennessee restaurant in response to his comments about how HIV/AIDS originated from a gay guy “screwing a monkey.”
Campfield actually had gone on the Michelangelo Signorile radio show and did math in his head and concluded, falsely, that it is “virtually impossible†to contract HIV via heterosexual sex.
Which is the other reason he got kicked out of that Knoxville restaurant.
Now, if only we could come up with a test that would get him kicked out of the Tennessee  Senate.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
A freshman Republican Senator is promoting an unusual interpretation of the Senate’s role in the constitutionally mandated “advice and consent” responsibility.
U.S. Senator Katie Britt, elected in 2022, is the first woman Alabama voters have sent to the U.S. Senate. She gained national attention, and bipartisan criticism, after delivering the Republican response to President Joe Biden’s 2024 State of the Union Address. During her speech, Britt criticized President Biden’s immigration policies and referred to an incident involving human trafficking, suggesting in her remarks a woman had been sexually trafficked because of Biden’s policies. However, as NBC News reported, the incident occurred two decades earlier, in Mexico, not in the United States.
READ MORE: Wildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting
At the time, even Republicans were outraged and mystified by her speech. One GOP strategist told The Daily Beast it was “one of our biggest disasters ever.” A Trump advisor told Rolling Stone, “What the hell am I watching right now?” as The Guardian reported.
This weekend, Britt spoke with CNN’s Jake Tapper about President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees. Senate Republicans are beginning hearings this week, CBS News reports.
Senator Britt, an attorney, told Tapper that Trump’s “great nominees” will be on Capitol Hill, where they will “have the opportunity not only to make their case” to the members of various committees, “but they’ll have their opportunity to make their case to the American people of why they are best, where they are best suited to move President Trump’s agenda forward.”
In contrast, Senator Angus King (I-ME) recently outlined his view of the Senate’s role in evaluating cabinet nominees. In an op-ed last week, he wrote that a president’s “advisors, and especially Cabinet Members, must be qualified for the sake of the people they represent.”
“My position on Cabinet nominees has always boiled down to two priorities: the candidate needs to be experienced and capable, and not have a stance that is hostile to the department or bureau they would be leading,” Senator King added. “The framers of our Constitution set up a Senate confirmation process as a check on the executive branch to make sure that all parts of government are working by the people and for the people.”
READ MORE: ‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts
Senator Britt appeared to suggest alignment with Trump’s goals should be a key qualification, telling Tapper that she and the Senate will see if they “are best suited to move President Trump’s agenda forward.”
Tapper continued to press her.
“Why would you think somebody who’s willing to lie about the election results in Pennsylvania is going to restore integrity in the Justice Department the way that you are calling for?” Tapper asked.
After a brief pause, Britt replied: “Look, Jake, I’ve had very direct conversations with each and every one of these nominees that I’ve had the opportunity to sit down with. I take my duty as a United States senator seriously, Article Two, Section Two, mandates that I do.”
“We have an obligation both to the American people and to the president, to ask these tough questions. I asked that question very directly. And with each and every nominee, the answers that I have been given with them, has satisfied me that they’re gonna move forward in that direction.”
Watch the video below or at this link.
Jake Tapper to Katie Britt: “Why would you think somebody who’s willing to lie about the election results in Pennsylvania is going to restore integrity in the Justice Department the way that you are calling for?” pic.twitter.com/aTCa5fg8Cq
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 12, 2025
READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports
Image via Shutterstock
House Republicans, especially the California delegation, are facing sharp criticism after spending portions of the weekend with President-elect Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort and residence. They reportedly discussed ways to take the unprecedented approach of tying passage of relief funds—for the Golden State’s historic wildfire disaster—to raising the debt ceiling, as the fires continue to burn and the death toll rises to 24 people.
“Of the nearly two dozen House Republicans who attended the Sunday dinner at Mar-a-Lago, where this option was discussed, several are caucus leaders and appropriators with major influence in upcoming budget reconciliation and government funding negotiations,” Politico reports. “Trump also discussed the wildfires Saturday night with a group of House Republicans from California, New York and New Jersey.”
According to J.D. Wolf of MeidasTouch News, the California GOP members of Congress “chose to leave the state at its most vulnerable moment,” and “have drawn criticism for abandoning their … state during the crisis, opting instead to join Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago.”
READ MORE: ‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts
“California [GOP] Representatives Jay Obernolte, Tom McClintock, Kevin Kiley, Doug LaMalfa, Darrell Issa, Ken Calvert, Vince Fong, and Young Kim were spotted in a photo with Trump this weekend when they could have been back home seeking ways to help even if the fire isn’t in their district,” he declared. “Instead, these lawmakers have prioritized meeting with Trump over exercising leadership in their home state. Their absence sends a troubling message to their state.”
In a stern rebuke, Wolf added: “In doing so, they have not only abandoned their duty to Californians but also cast doubt on their priorities and dedication as elected officials.” He also wrote: “Californians are left wondering if these leaders will ever prioritize their needs over political maneuvering.”
One House Republican from California was “not invited,” according to Politico’s Meredith Lee Hill.
“But all the talk of unity at Mar-a-Lago this weekend only went so far – Trump did not invite David Valadao (R-Calif.), 1 of the 10 House Rs who voted to impeach after Jan. 6, to the mtg of CA, NY and NJ GOP members.”
READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports
Valadao’s presence would have made sense. Hill reports he is a caucus chief and senior appropriator.
Trump, who has a history of trying to withhold relief aid to California, has been accused of politicizing the tragedy, which Politico notes, “could become the costliest natural disaster in U.S. history.”
It may become even more costly.
The Associated Press reports, “firefighters are preparing for a return of dangerous winds that could again stoke the flames on Monday.”
Over the weekend, on his social media website, Trump reposted this:
View the social media post above or at this link.
READ MORE: ‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’
Image via Reuters
House Republicans are circulating a “menu” of options that Speaker Mike Johnson’s conference could chose from—reportedly a massive $5 trillion worth of federal government programs to put on the chopping block to pay for the President-elect’s promised priorities, including tax cuts and border security.
According to Politico, there is an “early list” of proposed cuts (below) that “includes changes to Medicare and ending Biden administration climate programs, along with slashing welfare and ‘reimagining’ the Affordable Care Act.” Also, in addition to suggesting cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), “the document floats clawing back bipartisan infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act funding.”
Politico also reports that Republicans appear to be considering cuts to “the country’s largest anti-hunger program”—or, SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps. This would “spark massive opposition from Democrats and would also face some GOP resistance.”
There is far more, including siphoning about $2.3 trillion from Medicaid, a federal government program that has been providing critical health insurance for low-income adults and children for six decades.
READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports
The early list, published by Politico, has positive-sounding categories like “Making Medicaid Work for the Most Vulnerable,” but within that are proposals like “Medicaid Work Requirements.”
Republicans have for years been trying to institute work requirements for Medicaid recipients, despite the fact that about two-thirds of recipients who are able to work are already employed.
“An analysis from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that a national Medicaid work requirement would result in 2.2 million adults losing Medicaid coverage per year (and subsequently experiencing increases in medical expenses), and lead to only a very small increase in employment,” KFF (formerly the Kaiser Family Foundation) reported in 2023.
The list also proposes “Ending Cradle-to-Grave Dependence,” which, among other items, suggests “Reduce TANF by 10 Percent.”
According to the federal government, “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is a federally funded, state-run program. Also known as welfare, TANF helps families pay for” items including food, housing, home energy, and child care.
Republicans also suggest they can save $152 billion in the section titled, “Reimagining the Affordable Care Act.”
Politico got a hold of a leaked list of GOP plans to cut federal spending on Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act
www.politico.com/news/2025/01…— Cynthia Cox (@cynthiaccox.bsky.social) January 10, 2025 at 2:01 PM
Politico adds that Republicans are “also eyeing repealing significant Biden administration health care rules, which could include ending a rule requiring minimum staffing levels at nursing homes.” It is unclear how that would provide cost savings to the federal government.
READ MORE: ‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’
They also suggest they can pull $468 billion in savings by putting President Joe Biden’s climate policies “on the chopping block.”
Politico’s Meredith Lee Hill on social media noted: “Huge cuts to SNAP – the country’s largest anti-hunger program – proposed in here…would quickly hit +40 million low-income Americans…it’s already triggering immense backlash among some GOP centrists + even more conservative Rs.”
“Speaker Johnson can’t afford any GOP defections,” she added.
Vanity Fair’s Molly Jong-Fast characterized the proposals as “Taking food stamps away from hungry children to pay for tax cuts for wealthy people.
Salaam Bhatti, the director of the Food Research and Action Center, remarked: “Cutting & gutting SNAP and kicking millions of poor people off the program at a time when people voted because they can’t afford to put food on the table is the most out of touch thing I’ve ever seen.”
“Trump voters in red states who rely on those programs are going to love this,” quipped Alex Gonzalez, a political analyst and editor-in-chief for Latino Public Policy Foundation. “Trump wants to cut $5.6 trillion from federal programs to fund $10 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. Ironically, red states depend more on these programs than blue states.”
READ MORE: ‘Bananas’: Congressman Asks How Trump’s ‘Insane’ Threats Benefit Americans Economically
Image via Reuters
Wildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting
Senator Suggests Unusual Interpretation of ‘Advice and Consent’ Responsibility
Senator Suggests Unusual Interpretation of ‘Advice and Consent’ Responsibility
Wildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting
‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts
Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports
‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’
News3 days ago‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’
News4 days ago‘MAGA Friendly’ Fetterman Blasted for Accepting Trump Mar-a-Lago Invite
News3 days agoTrump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports
News3 days ago‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts
News4 hours agoWildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting
News1 hour agoSenator Suggests Unusual Interpretation of ‘Advice and Consent’ Responsibility