Drug Testing for Government Handouts – Let’s Do it Right

Bradley Jones

There are those that believe that in order to receive welfare payments, you have to pass a drug test. There are those that believe this should apply to food stamps and other government entitlements as well. What do you think of this concept?

States like Maine, Michigan, and Missouri have pushed hard for drug testing people in order to receive welfare, food stamps, or even unemployment. Other states like Kentucky, Montana and Texas have tried to push forward testing as well.

These testing programs have actually been done. It has been stated that the number of people who have been found to fail drug testing related to these entitlement programs is minimal. In fact, they state that the cost and burden to do this testing exceed the results. Regardless of the failure of testing to justify their cost to implement, people continue to push for these testing programs.

My initial inclination was that testing for these government entitlement programs was not justified based on their costs and on the prejudicial statement the make toward those in need of government services. The issue of testing gets even more complicated as some states begin to legalize the use of drugs like marijuana.

Regardless, the idea of testing still remains a discussion point. The biggest argument seen for testing is that if a person has money to buy drugs, then they have enough to buy food or cover living expenses. Of course, a thrifty person could grow their own marijuana at no cost.

Recently, I’ve changed my stance on drug testing.

Originally, I considered the testing a waste of tax payer money based on the number of people found. Now I’ve decided that the idea of testing people in order to receive government subsidies is something we should consider and talk about a lot more. If we are going to do this, however, then let’s go all-in. Let’s make sure we test everyone getting a handout from the government. Rather than start with the people getting small amounts from the government (such as those getting welfare and food stamps), let start with those getting the big handouts.

Let’s start by going back and testing all of the CEOs and corporate officers that received bailout money. Let’s make sure they get tested, and let’s make sure everyone knows they are being tested. Let’s treat them the same as the person getting food stamps. Consider the auto bail outs and the more recent bank bail outs. Let’s start with the CEOs and CFOs of those companies. If they fail, then they need to give back the billions. After that, let’s look at all the businesses getting tax breaks or tax kick-backs for locating in specific towns. This includes big box stores, restaurant chains, and businesses of all sorts. In exchange for those tax breaks (which is effectively getting to keep money that should be going to the government), let’s again test all the owners of those companies.

The question comes down to, why only target welfare and food stamp recipients? If we are going to do this, then let’s be fair and apply the testing to the people getting the big dollars from the government. Let’s not stop there. Congress, the President, and all the other politicians are receiving money from the government. Let’s put them at the front of the line. Based on what a lot of these folks are doing, they must be on drugs. Let’s get them to the front of the line just ahead of the bankers.

It makes you wonder, which group will have more people fail the tests. Those getting food stamps so they can eat or those in politics and running big businesses that tend to not worry about their next meal. I bet the results might surprise us.

A Substantiated Stat: Homelessness in Hamilton County

Bradley Jones

I often see people throw out statements on Facebook and other social platforms that sound good, but leave me wondering if they are true. They throw these statements into the conversation to support their stance on a topic. Many times when I ask for the source of these claims, things tend to go silent.

Some numbers shouldn’t be casually toss around. This was the case this past week when a person tossed out a statement regarding the number of homeless people in Hamilton County. If there is one homeless person there is too many. Regardless of how many there are, tossing around unsubstantiated comment about the number of homeless in order to support other arguments borders on tacky.

On the positive side, the comment did prompt me to take a look at what information I could find on the number of homeless in Hamilton County. If homelessness truly had increased as this person stated, then that would be a serious issue.

What I quickly learned is that there are numbers available that can give you an idea of the level homelessness. These numbers come from the Indiana Housing & Community Development Authority (ihcda.in.gov). They provide a snapshot of the number of homeless on a given point in time. While this number can change on a daily basis, the number does provide a snapshot into the situation.

The IHCDA Point-in-Time (PiT) report breaks out numbers by regions. Hamilton County (Indiana) is actually Region 8 in their reporting. In looking at the reports, it is easy to compare 1/29/2014 to 1/29/2015 to see if homeless did increase in Hamilton County.

What you will find from the numbers is that homeless actually appears to have dropped:

2014 2015
Number of Households 20 7
Number of persons under 18 1 5
Number of persons 18-24 4 0
Number of persons over 24 21 8

 

As can be seen by these statistics, the number of households did not drastically increase, but istead, it is less than half of what was seen in 2014. The number of individuals also dropped in half going from totals of 26 down to 13. Unfortunately, the impact on children jumped up on this date in 2015.

If you are in a different county in Indiana, you might be interested in the numbers for your area. You can find the stats at

www.indianabos.org

If you click on the Continuum of Care tab, you’ll be able to find the PiT information for all regions of Indiana.

Conclusion

To summarize this blog post, you should now throw out statements on social media that you cannot substantiate, especially when they are on topics as substantial as homelessness. There is definitely homelessness in Indiana and in Hamilton County. Fortunately, based on Point-in-Time data, it appears that 2015 could be better than 2014 as far as the number of homeless. I say this cautiously, however, because the PiT numbers don’t take into consideration every situation, nor do they show what is happening day-by-day. Of course, I stand by my earlier statement, one homeless person is too many.

The HSE Referendum: Love it or Hate it, There is Only One Way to Vote

Bradley Jones

If I’ve already paid for something, then it is unfair to ask me to pay for it again.

With the HSE referendums, those of us in the HSE school district are being asked to pay for many of the basic elements of our kids’ educations a second time. We are being asked to contribute more money when we’ve already contributed well above average. It was stated that there is a belief that HSE families live in gold plated houses and drive in luxury cars. Unfortunately that is not even close to being true. I’ve been told that the Indiana legislators believe it is fair to have HSE families contribute an above average amount to the school system and then receive less than enough money to pay their own teachers. While some people in the Fishers area might be able to dig in and pay yet again, there are many that simply can’t. They are living paycheck to paycheck just like many others in the state.

A Bit on Referendums

The issue around referendums starts with the standard state allocations, allocations decided upon by state legislators.

Let’s be clear, the HSE school system doesn’t need to get an allocation proportional to what the HSE (Fishers area) community has contributed. Nobody is asking for that even though many would consider that fair in a capitalistic society. Rather, HSE simply needs an equal allocation.

The state allocation is made up of base foundation and complexity grant numbers. This total mount would currently equate to an average of $5,877 per student if distributed equally. HSE currently gets around $5,176 per student, where some of the other communities are getting over $7,000. That’s nearly a $2,000 per student difference. Just a few hundred dollars can equate to millions when totaled.

If the state legislators would simply give an equal allocation of funds, the $5877 per student, then HSE would not need to create a referendum. The roughly $700 difference per student would cover the gap needed to pay for the things being requested.

Consider what is being asked for with this request of an equal distribution. It is not an allocation of money to be spent on extravagant features. Rather most of this money would go to core educational and administrative costs.

For example, HSE currently ranks among the lowest in what it pays its teachers. When you look at teachers with experience, the pay gap for teachers in HSE quickly increases to as much as $10,000. HSE teachers don’t make $10,000 more, but rather $10,000 less. The same is true with the pay for substitute teachers. Schools like IPS have the funds to pay as much as 15% higher for substitute teachers. I don’t have numbers for the class sizes of schools within the districts getting the highest allocations, but my understanding is that the average class sizes are also smaller.

beginning salaries  "top

The HSE Referendum: Paying Twice

The HSE Referendum is asking HSE families that have contributed above average amounts to the state fund to pay yet again to fix the above issues that were mentioned along with a few others. Alternatively, a simple adjustment to giving HSE an equal amount of the allocations would resolve the gap and allow the school system to come closer to the wages and class sizes of these other districts. Rather than paying again, we simply need the legislators to fix the allocations.

How do you get legislators to fix the allocation? The initial thought would be to vote “no” to the referendum to make a point to the state and to the school board. After all, it’s the suburbs that provide the draw to get businesses to come to Indiana. Voting “no” to the referendum would be a first step to force a change. The second step would be to vote against any legislator that isn’t supporting our school systems. This includes our own district’s.

Unfortunately, the school board and the state have put HSE schools into a tough position. The ramifications of what could happen during the time it takes to force changes could (would) negatively impact the operations of the schools. The result would potentially result in a very negative impact on our kids. The risk of that damage outweighs the short term gain of forcing the politicians to make the needed changes. The end result is that we have to vote ‘Yes’ to the referendum, but we don’t have to vote yes to keep the current legislators that aren’t supporting our district.

Why the Yes Vote on the HSE Referendum?

When it comes to the Hamilton Southeastern School’s referendum, I was not happy when I saw that the approach to creating it was not “what do we need money for” but rather “what can we ask or tell our community we want in order to get a referendum passed.” This was the common discussion at a few HSE School Board meetings last year. Topics such as moving book fees into referendum or shifting pay-to-play fees for sports were the things tossed into the early discussion by the school board. Also included were reducing class sizes and increasing teacher salaries, but those topics didn’t get any more attention than parental fees. In fact, those topics were considered a bit taboo since they were promised with the last referendum and then didn’t happen.

In the end, the referendum does include things that are important for the school system. This includes money for increasing salaries for our teachers (which as I mentioned are among the lower salaries in Indiana), as well as for hiring over 40 new teaching positions. These new teachers would drop average class sizes by about 2 students. That is not much and raises other issues, but it is still a move in the right direction.

adjusted class sizes

The referendum that would be approved would have a majority of the money (around $2.3 million) going to hiring or to fixing teacher salaries. There is also an allocation to bring in assistant principals in the elementary schools to provide needed administrative help. Other suggested allocations for the revenue would include nearly a million dollars to hire World Language Teachers and provide academic and mental health counseling. There are a couple of line items to also increase supply budgets and a mere $100,000 is allocated to reduce participation fees. The increased supply budget would hopefully eliminate the need for the schools to continue rationing paper near the end of the semesters.

referendum recommendations

As you can see by the Referendum Recommendations in the figure, most of these requests are important. Most of these expenses are to simply help our schools do what they need to do to educate our kids and keep our districts at the level they need to be to keep our communities strong and to draw others to our community. We can’t continue to have our experienced teachers leaving because they can get $5,000 to $10,000 more in nearby districts. At a minimum, we should be able to pay equal rates to other Indiana schools.

Why We Can’t Wait

Your thought might be that we could vote “No” and simply hold tight another year or two while we force the hands of the school board and the state legislators. We could put off hiring these new positions for a year while making a point by voting down the referendum.

Unfortunately, the school board has taking an all-or-none approach to asking for more money. Worse, HSE schools has a current referendum that is expiring. A 10 cent 7-year referendum was done in 2009 will end. While this existing referendum has added roughly $330 per student with the intent to reduce class sizes and fix salaries, we know that this did not happen. Rather, that referendum ended up being redirected to pay things like maintenance personnel, maintenance supplies and utility bills. In short, it pays for the daily operation of our schools.

current referendum

The renewal of this ten cent referendum has been combined with the asking for an additional .1275 cents. If we don’t pass the new referendum, we not only won’t get money to fund the new initiatives such as adding new teachers, but we also lose money that was paying for maintenance and utilities. The annual money coming in from the 2009 referendum goes away if it the new referendum doesn’t pass.

The net result of the new referendum not passing is that the school district will lose about $7 million from its budget. The stated impact of this loss is that instead of hiring the new positions in 2016-17, HSE would instead be dropping around 50 positions next fall (this year). It was also stated that another 50 positions would likely need to be eliminated in 2017-18. The net result of losing around 100 positions would be felt in class sizes and in other areas. With many classes already stretched, the impact could be catastrophic not only on the class sizes but on the toll it would take on teachers, both those that are let go and those that remain. The ripple would be a huge impact to our families as well.

But it doesn’t end there…

What is worse, is that once this referendum is put in place, we will most likely be put into a similar position in 7 years. At that time, we will need to vote to keep the .2275 fees or face laying off up to 140 positions. If we don’t get the state legislation to fix the allocations, then referendums will keep increasing until we break the district.

In Conclusion

The belief is that people living in Hamilton County can afford to pay twice. While there are many that can afford to pay more, not everyone can. There are several people who commented to the school board at the listening tour that they struggle to find the money to pay the fees for the kids. Many families in HSE are living paycheck to paycheck. They simply don’t have the funds to cover the cost.

It is our legislators that put the HSE school board and parents into this position. By adjusting the state allocations to be more even, they could resolve the difference between what is needed by HSE. It would be interesting to vote “no” and see what business like IKEA think of the results. But unfortunately, we can’t take that risk with our school system and our kids’ educations. While I can’t risk voting no for the HSE referendum, I can vote no to re-electing our local legislators who didn’t help keep us out of this position.

Poverty in Fishers, Indiana

Bradley Jones

Poverty is real. Poverty, however, doesn’t impact most people, but for those it does cross paths with, life is tough. One of the questions that most people can’t answer is, what is the level of poverty where you live?

I am fortunate to be able to live in a nice suburb of Indianapolis where you don’t see (or at least notice) homeless people nor is it clear that there are people living in actual poverty. In my area here aren’t people panhandling, nor are there people sleeping on the sidewalks. That is generally what you’d find in the bigger city of Indianapolis.

The reason you don’t see it is because the poverty rate in Fishers was a mere 1.8% in 2013 as compared to the state level of 9.5%. It is important to note, however, that 4.3% of children are in poverty in Fishers, versus the state level of 21.8%.
As a comparison, the poverty level in Indianapolis is 11.9%, which is above the state average as most would expect; however, it might not be as far above as many people would guess. The number of people with income below the 50% poverty level is 5.8%. Unfortunately 30.6% of children are below the poverty level. Of the families in poverty, 61.4% are ran by a female with no husband. Only 23.4% are families ran by a married couple.

I spent some time in high school in Danville, Illinois. It is a town of just over 32,000 people on the border of Illinois. Its demographics are a far cry different from those of Fishers. What is more unfortunate is that although Indianapolis’ poverty numbers look horrible relative to Fishers, Danville, Illinois’ numbers look bad compared to Indianapolis’.

Danville’s poverty level in 2013 was 18.1%, which equates to more than one out of six residents. That’s almost twice the Illinois state level of 10.7%, and as a percentage is 66% greater than Indianapolis’. Worse, nearly half of these people in poverty (8.5%) have an income level that is less than 50% of the poverty level income. When you look at kids, the number of children below the poverty level is 47.7% in Danville, which is over twice the 20.4% Illinois state average.

When it comes to poor families in Danville most (72.4%) are a females running a house with no husband present. Another 18% are families with a married-couple leading the household.

I’m blessed to be able to live in a city like Fishers. While the poverty level is small, it is not non-existent.
The percentages reported are based on a poverty income level. The average family needs a lot more to live on than is provided by the minimum poverty levels. While the numbers in Fishers are low, they are definitely not to be ignored – especially as the city grows. There are a number of the over 28 food pantries in Hamilton County that are in or around Fishers. These pantries will tell you that while the statistics might sound low, a few percent of 80,000+ people equates to thousands in need.

In Indianapolis, the number of people in need is greater than 100,000. In Danville, Illinois it is over around 10,000. When you start adding all the towns together, the number of people in need gets daunting. Having said that, helping the local food pantries, missions, and other organizations can go a long way to help keep these numbers in check or to even help reduce them. I’m on the board for the rescue mission in Danville. The day they are no longer needed will be a great day. In the meantime, we will do what we can to help.

# # #

My numbers come from city-data.com. You can find the numbers for your city at the site as well as find additional details and break-downs for the three I’ve mentioned.

 

2/21/2016 – UPDATE

Today at the church I attend, the sermon included a discussion on Bloomington, Indiana. It was stated that Bloomington is the most impacted city in Indiana when it comes to poverty. This surprised me. I would have guessed Gary or some of the other more industrial areas of the state. While Gary’s rate is high, Bloomington’s is definitely higher at 29.6%. That’s almost one in 3, versus Gary’s 25.8%, or roughly 1 in 4.

  • http://www.city-data.com/poverty/poverty-Bloomington-Indiana.html
  • http://www.city-data.com/poverty/poverty-Gary-Indiana.html

Perspective: Getting it Right

Bradley Jones

As we listen to the news and see various reports of incidents, it is important to remember that people see things differently. This past year there was a MEME that showed the dress that was seen as two different colors. In truth it was one dress that was specific colors, but the image could be seen differently based on the colors around it.

Similarly – the following picture shows a train. Many people see it going into the tunnel. Others see it coming out of the tunnel. If you look at it, you can actually manipulate (with your mind!) which direction it is going. It is a matter of perspective.

Just like the train’s direction and the color of a dress, before you jump on the bandwagon for a story you read in the news or hear others talk about, make sure you are seeing it from all possible perspectives before speaking out!