North Carolina finally passes background checks.. For people receiving food stamps

Page 1 of 2
#1
People seeking federal assistance in North Carolina are one step closer to being forced to undergo background checks in order to get the help they need. The North Carolina House passed HB 392 by a final vote of 106-6 on Thursday. The bill now goes to the Senate.

Introduced last week by Republicans, HB 392 mandates that all people applying for federal aid such as food assistance must undergo a background check, which the North Carolina Association of County Boards of Social Services says would likely dissuade individuals and families from seeking help because “if people think they are going to be prosecuted or arrested for even seeking our services, that’s a big concern for us.”

In other words, poor people with children who desperately need food may be too frightened to seek help. This bill targets the poor unfairly, and forcing them to have a background check is humiliating, especially when most people on welfare feel bad about needing assistance in the first place. The bill is especially outrageous when you consider that Republicans oppose strengthening background checks to buy guns, or the fact that corporations aren’t required to undergo background checks to get federal subsidies. Wall Street banks nearly crippled the economy in 2008, wiping out the finances of thousands of innocent people, yet they still receive billions in federal dollars. Big oil corporations also receive federal subsidies while at the same time poisoning our environment with toxic chemicals. Despite a devastating oil spill in the Gulf and a recent major spill in Arkansas, oil companies have no problem getting cash from the government.

I’m pretty sure Jesus didn’t require a background check before helping those in need.

Source

Couldn't have said it better myself. If Jesus was in charge of our federal government the poor would all be granted welfare unconditionally! Therefore, this law is bad.

Pit, in what ways can our politicians be more like Jesus? Open borders completely? Set up a giant free soup kitchen? Issue welfare for everyone on the North American continent? Discuss.
#2
People def should receive background checks. There are so many that are abusing the system and taking others hard earned money.
A bassist is never late, nor is he early, he arrives precisely when he means to.

The Pit operates under a pseudo-Murphy’s Law state of mind. You can make a comment and "whatever wrong assumption that can be made about it, will be made about it."
#3
Quote by guitarist5477
People def should receive background checks. There are so many that are abusing the system and taking others hard earned money.

Agree 100%.

@TS:
Jesus wouldn't condone people taking advantage of the system...
#4
Yeah, criminals don't deserve food1

...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#5


Yeah, this will solve problems.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#6
Quote by guitarist5477
People def should receive background checks. There are so many that are abusing the system and taking others hard earned money.

I'll bet the money that it costs to conduct these background checks far outweighs any money they'll save catching a few instances of fraud.

Good job, Republicans.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#7
i guess it depends on what the background check checks for

if it was drug testing or history or abusing this system id understand why they shouldt get
but it shouldnt be used to prosecute people
#8
Quote by ErikLensherr
I'll bet the money that it costs to conduct these background checks far outweighs any money they'll save catching a few instances of fraud.

Good job, Republicans.


THANKS OBAMA!
#9
Quote by supersac
i guess it depends on what the background check checks for

if it was drug testing or history or abusing this system id understand why they shouldt get
but it shouldnt be used to prosecute people


Yes, anyone who's ever been caught with drugs shouldn't be allowed food. Damn leeches!
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#10
I feel that there are a lot more people that use this legitimately than not. People take advantage of every system sooner or later, but I think the fact that some people are starving outweighs all of that.


Quote by ErikLensherr
I'll bet the money that it costs to conduct these background checks far outweighs any money they'll save catching a few instances of fraud.

Good job, Republicans.


And this.
It's a process, not an event.
#11
Quality unbiased article you got there.
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
█████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████
██████████████████████████
██████████████████████████


LET'S GO BUCKS
#12
Great. This worked so well the first time.
Quote by Ian_the_fox
You're not girly enough of a boy for me, and you're not man enough to take the top. So like, sorry bitch but you ain't mine! Sorry.
#13
Considering the fact that in this country there have been multiple instances of food being thrown in the trash instead of letting hungry people get it for free, I'm no longer shocked by what shitty things people will do to the poor.
#14
Quote by Todd Hart
Yeah, criminals don't deserve food1


No one's saying that, but why should people who abuse welfare (having a job where they earn a several thousand a month and still receive food stamps, due to an oversight in the system [and the fact that they never told anyone that they got a better job]) be on food stamps?
#15
Quote by Mack56
Considering the fact that in this country there have been multiple instances of food being thrown in the trash instead of letting hungry people get it for free, I'm no longer shocked by what shitty things people will do to the poor.


I agree. How dare they make sure our tax dollars aren't being stolen.
#16
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
No one's saying that, but why should people who abuse welfare (having a job where they earn a several thousand a month and still receive food stamps, due to an oversight in the system [and the fact that they never told anyone that they got a better job]) be on food stamps?


How will fishing about in someone's legal records help you find out whether they're over the income level?
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#17
This will surely reduce crime! Take that, criminal scum!
Quote by Sliide90027
But as a bigoted lemming, you have so cry an Alinslyite slur revealing you lack of reason and sense.


Quote by MusicLord16
BOB 1. ur 20 and two u like evil things and idk if u worship the devil
#18
Quote by Todd Hart
How will fishing about in someone's legal records help you find out whether they're over the income level?

Background checks can be anything from what you described to looking at their bank statements.

Of course, then it becomes a privacy issue. So...hmm...I'd be against it on the privacy level.
#19
Long story short: The background checks will cost more money than they will be saving.

The same argument ended the idea of drug testing for unemployment here in NY.

Edit: It DOES seem like a good idea though. Don't get me wrong.
#20
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Background checks can be anything from what you described to looking at their bank statements.

Of course, then it becomes a privacy issue. So...hmm...I'd be against it on the privacy level.

I second that!
#21
Background checking for what?

What are we looking for? What is going to constitute not receiving state assistance?

Are we talking about drug tests? Ok, well that's fine, so long as the state provides 100% free rehab services with mandatory (and once again free) room and board.

Are you looking for criminal records? Ok, well how are you going to justify not provided assistance to former convicts who have served their time? If you know someone needs money for food. And you know they've robbed a convenience store in the past, and you're going to not provide assistance, we might as well just give them a black ski mask and a schedule of when cops won't be patrolling the area.

Point is, this is stupid.
BOOM-SHAKALAKALAKA-BOOM-SHAKALAKUNGA
#22
While I'm not in favor of this, isn't it standard practice for employers to run background checks on prospective employees in the US? In some positions I've heard it's even mandatory. Maybe nitpicking, but if that is the case, then this bill doesn't unfairly target the poor, because everyone else goes through the same "humiliation".

I think the key issues as addressed are the privacy of all involved, and the children of those with outstanding warrants. That being said, if a person has an outstanding warrant, shouldn't they have the responsibility to pay their debt to society as part of receiving their rights in what society's responsibility is to them?

A big deal that they didn't address however (and the main reason this should be struck down in my opinion) is that this is another step, and even more processing time, keeping desperate people from receiving the help they need.
#23
I'm for survival of the fittest and castration. Make people after leaving the standard school system take a aptitude/standard test. Baised on the results depends on if you are likely to become a contributor to society or not. If you pass you may live and do what you want but if you fail, we prevent them from polluting society with fowl offspring. It is true to a point that people are products of their enviorments but people have to be the one to make the change not the government. The multiple generations sucking on the system is never going to change. Its all they know and they are poor but they are fine with doing nothing and just getting by. This is what needs to change. Peoples reliance of other to provide what is needed when they can easily provide for themselves but they are too lazy and would perfer the easy way out.

Or have work farms and make people applying for assistance work for the assistance they are getting.
#24
Quote by Grif22
While I'm not in favor of this, isn't it standard practice for employers to run background checks on prospective employees in the US? In some positions I've heard it's even mandatory. Maybe nitpicking, but if that is the case, then this bill doesn't unfairly target the poor, because everyone else goes through the same "humiliation".

I think the key issues as addressed are the privacy of all involved, and the children of those with outstanding warrants. That being said, if a person has an outstanding warrant, shouldn't they have the responsibility to pay their debt to society as part of receiving their rights in what society's responsibility is to them?

A big deal that they didn't address however (and the main reason this should be struck down in my opinion) is that this is another step, and even more processing time, keeping desperate people from receiving the help they need.

Yep. That seems to be the general direction in which this country has been headed. In stead of outlawing or cutting a resource off, they're just gonna make it tougher and tougher for the average Joe to receive any assistance and/or rights. It seems assistance AND rights are diminishing at the same time.
#25
Quote by Grif22
While I'm not in favor of this, isn't it standard practice for employers to run background checks on prospective employees in the US? In some positions I've heard it's even mandatory. Maybe nitpicking, but if that is the case, then this bill doesn't unfairly target the poor, because everyone else goes through the same "humiliation".

I think the key issues as addressed are the privacy of all involved, and the children of those with outstanding warrants. That being said, if a person has an outstanding warrant, shouldn't they have the responsibility to pay their debt to society as part of receiving their rights in what society's responsibility is to them?

A big deal that they didn't address however (and the main reason this should be struck down in my opinion) is that this is another step, and even more processing time, keeping desperate people from receiving the help they need.

Government isn't a business.

Drug tests for employment are stupid.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#26
Quote by Dimarzio45
Yep. That seems to be the general direction in which this country has been headed. In stead of outlawing or cutting a resource off, they're just gonna make it tougher and tougher for the average Joe to receive any assistance and/or rights. It seems assistance AND rights are diminishing at the same time.

see: Voter ID laws

Some businesses do background checks, but once again what are they looking for and why does it matter?

Working as a teller at a bank is one place where it DOES make sense to check people's criminal record or even credit (You don't want someone crazy in debt or who has a history of robbing banks dealing with a bunch of money every day).
BOOM-SHAKALAKALAKA-BOOM-SHAKALAKUNGA
#27
Government shouldn't be ran like a business. But, here in America, it is ran like one.
#28
Quote by snipelfritz
see: Voter ID laws

Some businesses do background checks, but once again what are they looking for and why does it matter?

Working as a teller at a bank is one place where it DOES make sense to check people's criminal record or even credit (You don't want someone crazy in debt or who has a history of robbing banks dealing with a bunch of money every day).

I hear that.

But I don't see why someone "crazy in debt" doesn't have the right to work at a bank...
#29
My asshole side says yes, there should be backround checks for people getting help from the government... but my logical and human side says their children have nothing to do with their decisions and shouldn't be held accountable by being denied family assistance and starving. Developing a growing contempt for successful people as a result of being denied assistance is all this will do - it's completely counter-productive.
Uncle aciD

&

The deadbeatS


Do What Your Love Tells You
#30
Damn it, no more munchies.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all
#31
Quote by Grif22
While I'm not in favor of this, isn't it standard practice for employers to run background checks on prospective employees in the US? In some positions I've heard it's even mandatory. Maybe nitpicking, but if that is the case, then this bill doesn't unfairly target the poor, because everyone else goes through the same "humiliation".


Except a job isn't a public safety net to go to when all else has failed.

I think the key issues as addressed are the privacy of all involved, and the children of those with outstanding warrants. That being said, if a person has an outstanding warrant, shouldn't they have the responsibility to pay their debt to society as part of receiving their rights in what society's responsibility is to them?

A big deal that they didn't address however (and the main reason this should be struck down in my opinion) is that this is another step, and even more processing time, keeping desperate people from receiving the help they need.

No the key issue is that they're attempting to put qualifications on basic welfare. The implication being that they'll withhold welfare from people who fail this background check. So those with a 'bad' history (which may keep employers from hiring them) may be unable to receive assistance when they need it most.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#32
Quote by ErikLensherr
I'll bet the money that it costs to conduct these background checks far outweighs any money they'll save catching a few instances of fraud.

Good job, Republicans.



I'd be okay giving my money to a legit person doing their job then a person who abuses the system. So I agree with "Good job, Republicans" verbatim
A bassist is never late, nor is he early, he arrives precisely when he means to.

The Pit operates under a pseudo-Murphy’s Law state of mind. You can make a comment and "whatever wrong assumption that can be made about it, will be made about it."
#34
Quote by Lemoninfluence
No the key issue is that they're attempting to put qualifications on basic welfare. The implication being that they'll withhold welfare from people who fail this background check. So those with a 'bad' history (which may keep employers from hiring them) may be unable to receive assistance when they need it most.


This^^^ It goes right against the whole reason welfare assistance exists. Again, counter-productive.
Uncle aciD

&

The deadbeatS


Do What Your Love Tells You
#35
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
No one's saying that, but why should people who abuse welfare (having a job where they earn a several thousand a month and still receive food stamps, due to an oversight in the system [and the fact that they never told anyone that they got a better job]) be on food stamps?

They shouldn't. Those people are an unavoidable evil in a system that assures that people who NEED foodstamps will get them without question, and they are in a vast, negligible minority.

This shouldn't even be a discussion, tbh.
#36
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Background checks can be anything from what you described to looking at their bank statements.

Of course, then it becomes a privacy issue. So...hmm...I'd be against it on the privacy level.

When you get a job, you fill out this thing called a W-4. It's a form that this organization called the Internal Revenue Service uses to determine how much money is withheld for federal income tax. The Department of Human Services has access to this information.

It already a pain in the ass to get and keep food stamps. Do you even know how the process works?
#37
North Carolinian here. You'd be surprised what people buy with foodstamps. I'm all for background checks. I had a friend who ate dinner at my house every day because his mother who was on welfare and foodstamps always wasted them and never had a meal on the table for him.
Quote by barden1069
A "tubescreamer" is a person paid by a guitarist to stand behind the amp and scream at the tubes. This terrifies the tubes into overdriving and delivers a thick, harmonic-rich tone.
#38
And how would a background have prevented that?

Why didn't your parents call CPS? Or file a fraud claim?
Last edited by MakinLattes at Apr 14, 2013,
#39
“if people think they are going to be prosecuted or arrested for even seeking our services, that’s a big concern for us.”


People don't get arrested for shit they already served time for. Does the author realize how a background check works?
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#40
Quote by MakinLattes
When you get a job, you fill out this thing called a W-4. It's a form that this organization called the Internal Revenue Service uses to determine how much money is withheld for federal income tax. The Department of Human Services has access to this information.

It already a pain in the ass to get and keep food stamps. Do you even know how the process works?

How was that relevant to what Crazysam said?
Page 1 of 2