Rick Scott Halts Drug Testing For State Employees Thanks to ACLU Lawsuit

By Tim Elfrink Fri., Jun. 17 2011 at 9:52 AM

Categories: News

Pin It

illustration by Derf

DMV blunt smoking part-ay! Gov. Rick Scott today put a temporary hold on his harsh-mellowing plan to randomly drug test all state employees -- an absurd idea in the first place that would have cost millions just to root out the odd pothead or two at the parks service. (All while conveniently putting cash into a drug-testing company Scott co-founded.)

But not to worry, anti-mary jane fanatics: Scott says he's still ready to fight to the Supreme Court for his right to force Department of Citrus bureaucrats to pee in a cup.

From the start, Scott's drug-testing fetish ignited a firestorm. State unions have pointed out that courts around the country have struck down tests for government employees and opponents have argued the plan would cost millions with minimal benefit.

Scott countered that the plan would create a "safe, effective, productive, and fiscally accountable workforce."

But how can you take this guy seriously when he has a personal financial stake in drug testing?

Scott co-founded an urgent care chain called Solantic, which makes millions by doing quick drug tests at $35 a pop. When critics pointed out that his Solantic stake might make his drug-testing fanaticism a bit of a conflict of interest, Scott sold his shares --- to a trust owned by his wife!

But don't worry. His drug testing passion is purely ideological, Scott says. Supporters say they expect the courts to toss the ACLU's lawsuit and the program to resume shortly.

"I fully anticipate ultimately that the courts will allow the governor to implement the policy to ensure that we have a drug-free workforce," Rep. Mike Weinstein tells the Florida Times Union.

Follow Miami New Times on Facebook and Twitter @MiamiNewTimes.

Like this Story?

Sign up for the Weekly Newsletter: Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.

Tags:

Rick Scott

Write Comment

Email to Friend

Print Article

Related Content

Can't understand how this happen, since whenever I apply for a position in order to gain employment I must consent and be tested My beleived is that the people entrusted with running our goverment should be held accountable and that means drug tested.
The main issue at stake here is a law stating that the government can not under any circumstances violate your constitutional rights, and they can not ask you to sign them away on a contract. Forcing you to give a urine or blood sample on a schedule in the absence of probable cause is still a violation of your constitutional rights. They can write a contract permitting "random" drug testing but can still only test based on probable cause. They can still DO the tests whenever they like provided they have probable cause as the US constitution requires. Now there is one exception to this rule, and it's when your job is critical for the public welfare like fire fighters, police, or military. Otherwise probable cause is absolutely required.
Well, they SHOULD BE! If they are terminated because of poor performance caused by drug use, why sould taxpayer money go to support their drug habit and vacation?
I agree. And it does present problems legally. For instance, you can agree to an employment contract that allows drug testing, or be terminated for failure to submit to testing. But would ex-post facto rules apply to tasting existing employees? Each applicant (If I'm not mistaken) for a state job swears that they are drug free and will remain so. They are already informed of periodic drug tests and the requirement for a drug test if there is an accident. They are also advised that they will be terminated for drug use or forced into a drug treatment program. So given that the requirements are already there, the only thing Rick Scott is pushing is to actually DO the tests.
For what it's worth, the fourth amendment of the Constitution forbids unreasonable search and seizure. The city and state are allowed to test it's employees at will provided they have probable cause to do so. Testing them without probable cause amounts to an illegal search of a persons bodily fluids. It's not a bad idea to test these people but to do so at the cost of our rights and freedoms is not a good idea, so bad in fact it's unconstitutional. If you have reason to believe an employee of the state is using drugs and it's sufficient to constitute probable cause then you can test as much as you want, but doing so without probable cause is just plain illegal.
Rick Scott should be focused more on the unemployment rate here in FL, than randomly testing public workers and welfare recipients which the tax payers are most likely are gonna foot the bill. Just cause they're on welfare or work for the public sector doesn't mean they all do drugs. I've seen very well off people smoke weed, pop pills or do coke in front of me and even offer me. We should drug test Rick Scott first, he looks like a pill popper.
Drug testing is business. Serious drugs are out of your system in a few days, whereas weed stays with you for over a month. So, you can cook all the meth you want as long as you stop a week before your test. Still, through proper techniques all over the web, a drug test can be beat. And alcohol continues to destroy our society, but that's okay because its legal. Look up on the web on how to beat a drug test and you will come up with all sorts of information and well as products. It's a whole other business in response to the drug testing business. The last time I got a drug test, the facility was disgusting. Stained carpets, dirty doors, I was afraid to sit down. If a person wants to make lots of money, they should open up one these drug testing clinics. Little overhead and lots of profit. Then, if you consider the fact that Rick Scott was already making money this way and then insists on filling these clinics up even more, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that his drug policy is more about making money and not keeping the public "safe". And, to continue with these failed policies on "the war on drug", the jail time for minor drug infractions keeps our prisons full of non-violent criminals. Take a guess at what our state politicians want to privatize next to maximize profit? Oh, that would be our prison system. And if you think that these politicians have real concern for the people of Florida, then why is there no money for rehabilitation? Look at what the state is doing to the common man in this state by denying us the federal funding for healthcare and jobs, and you will be able to see that Rick Scott only cares about the profits for himself and his cronies. His company already stole millions from medicare and medicaid. He does not give a shit about the rest of us. Drug testing does not keep us safe from anything. Drug testing is considered an illegal search and seizure. Police can't enter your house or search you car without a good reason, and then they need a warrant. If that is our right under the law, then search and seizure of our bodily fluids should be considered under the same law. We have certain rights and freedoms in these United States. We must stand up for them or risk losing them! For a governor that ran on "less government", what the heck is he doing in my urine? Once that urine (or blood or hair) leaves your body, you no longer have control over it. Like your car or house, it is possible to "plant" evidence so that the results turn into what "they" want it to be. "Only a year away from your pension Buddy? Not anymore. Look at what we just found in your urine!" Then it'll be up to you and your very expensive lawyer to prove them wrong!
Scott's rationale is that they can be tested when they file for unemployment benefits.
Thanks, but LEO's are tested when the apply for the job and they will probably never be tested again. The same goes with fire department. If there is an accident on the job, then they may test, but it's optional. Judges are not tested to my knowledge, nor are social workers.
I got to you calling me a name, and stopped reading. Have a good day being ignored.
dude i agree, but no reason to call that guy names..
money could go to somewhere else...what a freakin' waste of time and money.
First off, they already test police! Dip $hit..... They test almost all first responders on a pretty regular basis.... and if there is any indication that something is wrong or suspicious with them they can be tested randomly whenever managment desires. As for other state employees, they can be tested if suspected of wrong doing.... What good is it to waste millions when the state is already strapped for cash on a program that will largely prove that most of that state work force 99.99% is clean of illegal substances ?.?. there are better uses of state monies than enriching our crook of a governor through his wife's company
Tell me why it is such a bad idea to test your local police officers for cocaine use? Or testing the social workers for using speed? Or testing the judge that is presiding over your case for crack use?