Drug testing for California doctors?

“Because it poll-tested well for trial lawyers trying to pass a ballot initiative” may or may not count as a persuasive reason. Perennial media source Arthur Caplan, who hardly ever is found on the libertarian side of an issue, likes the idea [New York Times] Related: “Money pouring into California’s Prop 46 fight” [Legal NewsLine]


  • Random drug testing for legislators? For trial lawyers?


  • Why not for legislators? I work as an engineer at a nuclear power plant. 95+% of my time is sitting at a desk yet I am subject to random drug testing. Even if I wasn’t tested, I would still not use drugs but the libertarian in me is annoyed with the testing. If someone like me who has very little actual impact on the public is tested, legislators should definitely be tested.

  • Why Random? Why not have Doctors take a test every time they come on call or show up for work or surgery? Same with lawyers legislators. Make sure they are not under the influence when they are working.

    Remember, its for the children or some such blather.

  • Sure – legislators, judges, lawyers, teachers, government employees. Seems like a good idea to me. If not, why not?