Assignment 3: Critical Thinking Questions

Better Essays
Critical Thinking Task #3 Question 1 addresses the thoughts and feelings of Larry Jackson, who is an attorney. He is a defense attorney specifically for those who “lack the resources” to defend themselves. Larry Jackson has the persona of a “for the people” attorney. Regardless of their actions and past, Larry is going to defend them accordingly and to the best of his abilities. Larry is against drug testing for welfare recipients. Why? Welfare participants would have to pay for their tests out of their welfare money, and getting tested isn’t necessarily cheap. He claims that making them pay for their tests is criminalizing, when these people aren’t criminals. comparing welfare recipients to criminals doesn’t justify whether they should…show more content…
But, considering you are receiving government aid that is supplemented to you by taxpayer’s dollars, Larry should consider being more open. As a taxpayer, I would feel better knowing that those receiving benefits were housed, insured, well fed, and actively seeking employment. Given that they are essentially handed these things that many Americans have to work so hard for, the least they can do is submit a drug test every once in awhile so they can maintain their benefits that they hold so dearly to them. Question 2 addresses the thoughts and opinions of Russell Mendelson. Russell supports drug testing for welfare participants. Unlike Larry, he does not believe that drug testing is criminalizing. Instead, he believes that it should be standard. One can consider him a libertarian, since he is in it secure the liberties of Americans. Russell is under the impression that all recipients of welfare benefits are bad. In his mind, all of them buy drugs versus supporting which is actually wrong. Statistics mentioned previously prove that less than 1% of those who receive benefits spend them at bars, strip clubs, sports bars, etc. Russell opposes government benefits, and more so government benefits to support the habits of users. Needless to say, he doesn’t agree with benefits at all, but if he had to have them in effect, he would rather there be drug testing for…show more content…
The number just isn’t enough to build a bias. Alcohol or prescription pills aren’t included in those findings, and alcohol and prescription drugs are very much something that can be abused…heavily. It is unfortunately very common for those addicted, to exchange groceries for a smaller amount of cash and use it to buy drugs, alcohol, cigarettes. I could explain for hours the ins and outs of the TANF program but in short summary, it is very political and contradicting. If I could’ve know anything prior to hearing the sides of Larry and Russell, I’d like to have read the aspe article from the U.S. Department of Human and Health Services. The information is completely factual on both opinions. In reality, drug testing would cost even more than us as taxpayers put in for TANF programs, and things of the like. It would only add to the amount we pay. The government wants to keep everyone happy, but they don’t want to raise taxes, and the people don’t want that either. It is still back and forth and not set in stone as to if they should implement drug testing. For now, things will stay as they are and politicians will argue as they always
Get Access