Today, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed a bill into law that requires welfare recipients to pass a drug screening before they are eligible to receive payment.

Conservatives have applauded the law saying it weeds out those who are not "worthy" of welfare, but what they fail to realize is this law is not conservative in any sense of the word. Once upon a time self-identified conservatives did not believe in the concept of government social-engineering. Today, however, they seem to believe the best way to fight social-engineering is with some of their own.

Liberals, on the other hand, have responded by arguing this law interferes with the privacy rights of welfare recipients and thus is unconstitutional.

Like usual, both sides have failed to see the big picture. The overall issue here is that government should NOT have any impact on who does and does not receive welfare because government should NOT be involved in welfare! Welfare services should be controlled by private organizations (charities, churches, etc.) and these groups should decide who receives and does not receive aid.

This is just more of the same disturbing trend of statism that has gone on for the past half a century in America. Instead of debating what the government should and should not do our debates now center around who should and should not receive government funds. It is up to those of us who still cherish the concept of liberty, small government and personal freedom to point out these statist occurrences and resist. We must show our peers that issues such as whether or not you think drug addicts should receive charity are irrelevant in politics. All that is relevant is "should the government provide _____ or not." If we pose the question that way, we might like the answers we hear.