Against Mandatory Drug Testing

Proposition of Value: Mandatory Drug Testing

Issue: Whether or not mandatory drug testing results in positive gains or negative losses for the United States in terms of economy and society.

Thesis: The enforcement of mandatory drug testing for employees and welfare recipients results in a more positive and productive society, as well as a developing economy.

The legal roots of mandatory drug testing are found in the common law doctrine of "employment at will." That doctrine states that either party to an employment contract can terminate the contract for any reason, at any time, unless the contract specifies otherwise. As the Court held in Adair v. United States (208 U.S. 161, 175-6, 1908), the employer "was at liberty, in his discretion,
to discharge [the employee] from service without giving any reason for so doing." Because of this, the Supreme Court decided that all employers have the right to give employees drug tests before and after they are hired. Companies have the right to know if their coworkers are abusive with drugs, because it could be very detrimental to overall production and development.

I. Drug tests are ethically and morally sound in the workplace.

A.
With an already growth-stricken job market, it is important for employers to choose their workers wisely. Employees whom have drug or other personal problems can hurt the overall development and profits of a company. 1. According to CNN.com, Drug Testing costs the United States an estimated $200 million a year, but indicates that that number is extremely small compared to the amount of money saved because of the production value it brings to companies. This way, companies view drug testing as an investment in the quality of their employees. 2. Mandatory drug testing prior to employment is an easy way for employers to weed out who is not fit for the job and who is. For example, if an interviewer for a company has a huge stack of people to choose to hire, it's very simple to announce to them that they will be drug-tested so that the number of potential employees will decrease. 3. It can be soundly stated that drugs are bad for all human beings' health, with the exception of doctor prescribed drugs to treat a medical malfunction. A healthy employee has more potential to be more productive than a non-healthy employee. Therefore, drug users have a higher chance to be less industrious and prolific than non-drug
users. B.
Corporations whose operations involve public safety are extremely cautious of drug users because of the fact that it can affect the health of many people in our society. 4. Companies that involve airlines, railroads, buses, electric utilities, construction, etc. have a duty to the public to hire sound and professional employees. It is morally incorrect to have a bus driver, who is responsible for many lives throughout the week, to be on drugs. The companies that employ these people have a responsibility to provide a safe, healthy, and productive environment for their workers and the public. They use drug testing to massively avoid potential problems in the future. 5. According to ACLU.org, nearly half of all major United States companies, including IBM, Kodak, AT&T, Lockheed Martin, 3M, Westinghouse and many more have a sound requirement for drug testing prior to employment. These corporations have extremely large profits and with their existing mandatory drug policies. How is it logical for outside parties to question their use of drug tests on their employees? 6. Companies have the right to do what they wish, and if they decide to invest their own money into drug testing their own employees, there is no wrong in
that.

II. It is morally and ethically sound to give drug tests to welfare recipients, prior to receiving money from the federal government.

A. Because the citizens of the United States pay their taxes, the citizens should decide what that money goes into, hence a democratic society. The people have a right to choose what kind of citizens receive their taxpayer dollars. 1. Drug testing welfare recipients will force people in need of money from the government to stop using drugs; therefore, they actually spend taxpayer dollars on food and shelter. 2. Recipients of welfare can therefore prioritize their spending much better, resulting in a more sound society. 3. According to Newt Gingrich, 2012 Republican Presidential candidate, "I think that we need to be taking more explicit steps to make it more expensive to be a drug user." One way to make it more expensive for drug user's to obtain drugs is to put standards on who the government can federal aid to. B. This also forces drug addicts off the welfare system, thus resulting in less people relying on government spending to keep their families going. Forcing parents off drugs is also highly beneficial to their children, whom are innocent and in danger to violence that some drugs may cause. 1. Instead of spending taxpayer dollars on drugs, welfare recipients can spend it on their family and kids, who need a ton of money to survive in the future. They can start saving that money for their children's college expenses, so that their children can grow up and have great lives with great jobs. 2. According to Orlandosentinel.com, "The best reason to drug test welfare applicants: Children." They indicate that family tragedy, broken homes, robbed childhoods, and fear is the result of drug use. The children are the ones that get effected the most because their parents are spending their time using hard drugs instead of being nurturing mothers or fathers. 3. Children either grow up too fast or don't grow up at all with the result of mind-boggling mental fallacies. Having parents that do drugs around their children is an extremely bad influence, and a great example of what parents should not ever do.

Drug testing is a great way to improve the proficiency of both the welfare system and the work force that we have here in the United States. It will force drug users who are welfare recipients to get off drugs in order to receive federal aid; it moves people from being addicted to having self control. As for mandatory drug testing in the work place, I feel if the company is not in any safety-related industries, it is their choice on who they hire. However, if people working in public safety are not drug tested, I feel that it endangers our society greatly.