Drug testing of temporary-aid recipients may root out narcotics users, but it won't save Floridians the millions of dollars initially projected by Gov. Rick Scott.
During the 2010 election campaign, Scott said the state could save $77 million by imposing "more stringent standards on non-compliance with work requirements and require drug screening for recipients,"
But the Department of Children and Families, which will administer the newly signed drug-test law that takes effect July 1, isn't expecting a financial windfall.
"There won't be significant savings," said Joe Follick, DCF's director of communications. "The goal is to make sure taxpayers' money is used for the intended purposes."
For starters, the drug-testing regimen covers only one welfare program -- Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. As the name implies, TANF has short-term eligibility (48 months) and it is relatively small, with just 50,000 family recipients in Florida.
By contrast, 3 million Floridians are on Food Stamps, which is not included in the drug-test law.
A $77 million reduction would cut TANF outlays roughly in half -- an unlikely prospect under most plausible circumstances.
Also mitigating against savings, Florida's TANF test provisions allow for continued disbursement of funds for children even if an adult tests positive for drugs.
"We would find another family member or surrogate to receive funds," Follick said. "We don't want children to suffer."
DCF is still assembling the details of the TANF drug-testing program. By Monday, the agency expects to have a complete list of controlled substances that will be screened. Officials indicated that marijuana would be on the list.
Also in the works is a statewide directory of private, DCF-approved drug-testing centers.
Follick estimated that the test cost -- which would be borne by the recipient up front and reimbursed in the TANF check upon passing -- will run $35 to $40.
In cases of a positive urine test, an applicant can request (and pay for) a second screen. A second failure would remove the individual's eligibility for six months.
Non-passing applicants would be voluntarily referred to a rehabilitation clinic, but as with failed drug tests in private-sector employment screenings, the state has no protocol to press criminal charges.
"If they're using, the goal is to prod them to get the help they need," Follick explains.
Follick also said an appeals process would be in place to adjudicate disputes over false-positive results. "It will be there if someone can provide evidence, but the science is well-established. Misfires are much more rare."
DCF is steering clear of the simmering legal debate over drug testing, and says it intends to implement the law as enacted. The American Civil Liberties Union is considering a challenge on Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) and privacy grounds. Other critics bridle at the requirement that applicants put up funds for drug screenings.
Meantime, other states are entertaining the idea, with plans that go further into the welfare system.
Kentucky is considering drug testing for all welfare programs, including Food Stamps and Medicaid. Some experts say states can't include those programs because they are administered by the federalgovernment.
As for costs, an Idaho study concluded that the expense of mandatory drug testing of public assistance recipients would exceed any savings from booting offenders from programs.
According to the Associated Press, the study estimated that if all 10,500 people in Idaho's child-care assistance and temporary cash assistance programs were tested, the costs of the tests and subsequent treatment of those with positive results would range from $1.2 million to $1.3 million. Savings, however, would total just $1.13million.
Follick said DCF expects to absorb any added administrative costs through its existing budget, noting that processing and notification of drug-test results would be a function of the privately run labs.
But DCF acknowledged that failed drug tests could trigger deeper investigations into potential child abuse and money mishandling.
"We'll investigate if there appears to be an unsafe situation in the home. The safety of children is the key," Follick said.
Looking into who is handling the TANF checks -- which average $240 per month per family -- could also be part of such investigations.
--
Contact Kenric Ward at kward@sunshinestatenews.com or at (772) 801-5341 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (772) 801-5341 end_of_the_skype_highlighting.
