As states rush to follow the lead of Florida and other states to test welfare recipients for drug use, new facts are coming to light.  I have to admit, I was gung-ho in favor of  this practice.  But I was wrong.   And the results of testing in Florida prove it.  I, along with most everyone else, missed this one and missed it big.  In Florida, testing since July has shown that welfare takers aren’t any more apt to use drugs than anyone else.   Positives are coming in a little under 2%.  That’s right, two percent.  Savings are about a “wash” for the state.  It’s costing as much to test everyone as they’re saving in denied benefits.  But there are some other under lying issues that  I, for one, had not pondered.  Let’s say the father of 3 kids gets laid off.  He stops by a buddy’s garage to cry the working man blues for the evening.  They drink a few beers and “burn one”.   Are we saying that down the road that we won’t supply food stamps for his children because he burned a joint?  He could be gambling or drinking much more money away, and we would feed the children.  He could be doing much worse with another vice. But, he smokes a doobie, and we cut him off.  No sense in this at all.  Children will suffer.  One the other hand, suppose his wife is home with cancer, or suffering from a neurological disease, and the only relief she gets for nausea or pain, is a toke on the ole peace pipe? (I know the medical pot issue is a whole different can of worms)   But, I think before we pass anymore laws that do not actually save the states any money, we should all take a deep breath, INHALE, if you will. (No pun intended)  But pause and think:  Is this worth it to create a whole new layer of government to administer this in an already too large government as it is?  A new government agency of testing administrators is NOT what we need.   By the way, the laboratories are the only ones who really make out on this. Go figure?