Ashley Romig Research Techniques 3/28/14

Sulzberger, A.G. (2011 October 10). States adding drug test as hurdle for welfare. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/us/statesadding-drug-test-as-hurdle-for-welfare.html?pagewanted=1&_r=4 There are more and more Americans losing their jobs and fewer people using the welfare system. With all of the talk about unemployed people having a higher percentage of use of illegal substances there is a bigger push for there to be a drug test before receiving welfare money. Studies have been done to see how much money would be saved with drug testing but there may not be much in savings if the state pays for the test. If parents are not allowed to receive welfare money than what would happen to the children? This article was written from Kansas City and was published in The New York Times which gives it a lot of creditability. I dont see any gramm atical errors or it does take the side of the citizens that are getting tested. Also talks about the other side of the positives of giving a drug test but there is less of this information. This still has a lot of factual information to use in my essay. Sulzberger is informing the general public of what is happening when the drug test is implemented. Newell, W. (2011). Tax dollars earmarked for drugs? the policy and constitutionality of drug testing welfare recipients. 43(1) 215-254 Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Retrieved from http://www3.law.columbia.edu/hrlr/hrlr_journal/43.1/Newell.pdf This book is a more recent look at is drug testing welfare recipients really constitutionally correct or is there a line being crossed. It starts out in when Bill Clinton tried to change welfare as the public knew it but then progresses to look at the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment is one of the places that the constitution supports the drug testing of welfare patients. Then continues on to look at multiple places where the drug testing is not so ethical and that there needs to be suspicion before drug testing them. Finally to close this section of the book it talks about how much is it going to cost the public and government to actually drug test before giving out welfare benefits compared to how much it cost to leave it the way it is. This book was written in 2011 so it isnt quite up to date as some of my sources but there is a lot of good factual information in it. No grammatical errors visible and there are very good detailed footnotes so that I can look for more information. The foot notes bring in a lot of good information from other authors. This book gives both sides of the argument of drug testing for welfare recipients and has very solid evidence for both. This may take a little bit of thinking about but this is a really good read for anyone who wants to learn more about drug testing in order to get welfare benefits.

Ashley Romig Research Techniques 3/28/14

McLaughlin, B. (2013). Drug testing, welfare, and the special needs doctrine. Cleveland State Law Review, 61(2), 569-595. Retrieved from http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1414&contex t=clevstlrev&seiredir=1&referer=http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=drug+testi ng+of+welfare+applicants&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2010 Many times there is no right answer in cases like if there should be drug test before receiving welfare money but this article goes into great detail on why there should be and that if the United States didnt they just would be losing money. The article also takes a look into how children could be affected by drug testing before welfare. Also they use a very interesting analogy of the true story of Michael Ore from the Blindside and how his mother was a drug addict and receiving welfare and he was still treated badly. There is also a history of the previous attempts to have drug testing before welfare benefits are given out. This is a very organized book with a title page, table of contents, and proper footnotes for additional information. There are no grammatical errors that I see. There are a lot of footnotes that show that most of what he is saying is from others research and he is just putting in some information while bringing others research together. I believe this is intended for audiences that are interesting in the constitution and what it says. Lindsey, Lyle. "STUDENT POLICY NOTE: FLORIDA'S LEGISLATION MANDATING SUSPICIONLESS DRUG TESTING OF TANF BENEFICIARIES: THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND EFFICACY OF IMPLEMENTING DRUG TESTING REQUIREMENTS ON THE WELFARE POPULATION." 8. 2012 July 1. 68-70. EBSCOHost. Web. 3 Apr 2014. Bringing a true story in the light of the public is what this journal does. This a true story that is about a dad that is trying to get his degree in Florida while supporting his son. It shows the struggles that he had and he decided to apply for TANF. The problem was that new TANF applicants were required to have a drug test before they received their benefits. He refused to do this and told them that he had never used any illegal substances and then he sued the state of Florida for violating his rights as a citizen. This story really only shows one side of the story and that is the side that drug testing is against citizens constitutional rights. This article doesnt have very many facts to use regarding the topic of drug testing, but is very interesting and could be used to grab the audiences attention when needed. This will just a small part in my bibliographic essay and will be used solely for the use of showing the how really life families are affected. General public would get a lot out of this because it shows the results of the drug testing.

Ashley Romig Research Techniques 3/28/14

Schaberg, Abby. "NOTE & LAW SUMMARY: State Drug Testing Requirements for Welfare Recipients: Are Missouri and Florida's New Laws Constitutional?. Missouri Law Review." 77. 2012 April 1. 567-570. EBSCOHost. Web. 3 Apr 2014. Acedemic Journal There has been a lot of discussion about if there should be blanket drug testing for welfare recipients or is it against their constitutional rights? Missouri and Florida have taken steps in the direction of drug testing before giving out welfare benefits. This is all about what has happened in those two states. It gives the pros and the cons of the effects it has had on the states, citizens and budgets. Also it has information on why some citizens think it is legal and others have found evidence that it is against their constitutional rights. The journal also gives some insight into what exactly the Supreme Court is using to make decisions regarding this topic. This is a very accurate account of how Florida and Missouris drug testing laws for welfare recipients have affected the citizens and will be very good information to support my information. There are no grammatical errors that I see and it was written in 2012 so this is more recent information and will be useful to present the information to my readers. I dont sense any bias accounts in this reading which leads me to believe this is one of my better sources. This is another look at the results and is very interesting for all perspectives of readers. (2014 March 20). Senate advances welfare drug testing program. Saginaw News (MI). Retrieved from http://www.mlive.com/lansingnews/index.ssf/2014/03/michigan_senate_oks_ welfare_dr.html This is a recent article from Michigan that talks about their senate passing the welfare drug test. Michigan is getting close to using $500,000 to see how drug testing before welfare benefits are given out work in three counties. If someone fails the test then they will be referred to a regional substance abuse agency and if they fail a second test later on they will then stop receiving cash assistance for at least 6 months. Michigan passed a law stating that if the recipients are using medical marijuana than they would be exempt from having their cash assistance taken from them. This is my most recent source so it will have the latest information on my topic. There is less information found to validate this source but it was published in the newspapers in Michigan. The article doesnt take a side it just states what the courts decided and gives the information that they talked about. I didnt see any grammatical errors and this seems like a good source to use. Many people would like to keep up with what is happening currently with the drug testing before receiving welfare benefits and this is a good read for them!

Ashley Romig Research Techniques 3/28/14

Wurman, I. (2013). Drug testing welfare recipients as a constitutional condition. Stanford Law Review, 65(5), 1153-1193. This is another journal that tells us that there is evidence in the constitution that supports drug testing for welfare recipients and there are other parts that might be against it. There is evidence both ways so the ultimate decision is going to be left up to the courts. This particular journal takes a very deep look into the fourth amendment and what is actually meant by the writers. This gives both the pros and cons of giving a drug test before receiving welfare benefits. There are no grammatical errors which gives this journal credibility. The journal was written last year and has very up to date facts and information which leads me to believe that it is a good source to use. I believe this is good for anyone wanting to know about both sides of this topic. Rosenberg, Eric. "Mandatory drug screening for welfare recipients: fiscally responsible limitation on government handouts or constitutional violation?. Rutgers Journal Of Law & Public Policy." 10. 2013 April 1. 205-210. EBSCOHost. Web. 3 Apr 2014. Rosenberg takes a look at the state and federal government level of welfare drug testing. Once again the fourth amendment is thoroughly looked at to see what the motives of the authors were. There have been several states that have tried to set up a rule stating that citizens have to take a drug test before receiving their welfare benefits and Rosenberg takes a look at what the outcomes were. Again this article was written last year so there is more recent facts to use as support. There is a side taken but it doesnt try to lead us to believe something that isnt true. It still only states the facts of that side of the argument. As for most of the rest of my sources they are from EBSCOHost so that gives them the credibility I am looking for. The general public would really be interested in what Rosenberg has to say about the government and receiving welfare benefits. Goetzl, C. (2013). Government mandated drug testing for welfare recipients: special need or unconstitutional condition?. University Of Pennsylvania Journal Of Constitutional Law, 15(5), 1539-1543. This is a very interesting read on how some people believe that the fourth amendment is being violated. There are also some scenarios on what should be done about these violations and how they should be punished. Some people think there should be a second look at the meaning meant behind the fourth amendment and what it is actually saying. This journal is definitely one sided but has some good facts in it that I will use. This makes me have to double check before I use some of this information but is very

Ashley Romig Research Techniques 3/28/14

supportive of the cons to the drug testing before welfare is given. No grammatical errors were found and this was a recent journal so it will be up to date. Grovum, J. (2014). Some states still pushing drug testing for welfare. Stateline.org (Washington, DC). 2 April 2014 The article states that there is two reasons politicians support drug testing for welfare recipients, not only because they want to save money. Also there are states that are trying to find a way to implement the testing without having a lawsuit against them. With the states that have done testing most are finding that less than 10% actually test positive for hard drugs, but with these and those who are refusing to take the test there is a large savings in the citizens money. Grovum gives well rounded facts for both sides of this topic. It is the second most recent document that I have so it will be very useful for further research. This gives very accurate information and could possibly be the best source that I have for my research. Grovum does a good job of writing this so most of the general public could understand the current stand on drug testing for welfare.