I worked for the U.S. Government 1970-1996, and then my job was privatized and I worked as a contractor until 2001. Every time there was an administration change, we were affected by the pet projects of the current administration. During the 1972 presidential election campaign we soldiers overseas who supported McGovern were investigated. Then there was Management By Objectives, which required us to play silly games. And there an administration that insisted that government employees should write well, so they had high school graduates teach us English from workbooks, even though our jobs required a college degree. And then there was the Reagan Administration, with its "just say no" /Drug-Free America campaign. The administration decided that all 700 of us investigators in the Office of Personnel Management would be subjected to random drug testing, even though our agency had never had a problem with drug abuse and our job wasn't hazardous. So, we were supposed to check in with the boss every morning to see if we were to be tested that day. If we were scheduled, then we had to drop everything, cancel all appointments, and run off to pee in a cup.

It was demeaning, and it was a real crimp on our efficiency. The ACLU recruited two of my California coworkers to sue the government on this issue, and we won. They put a stop to the random drug testing before the program was put in place, and testing was limited to hazardous positions and to employees suspected of having a drug problem.

It seems to me that most mass drug testing is done to make a political point, and it doesn't seem to make a lot of difference unless it's targeted at a group that really needs testing.

It seems to me that whether people use drugs or not, they need the basic subsistence provided by welfare payments. If they use the money for drugs, then that's their problem.

-Joe-