Background Checks for Michigan Tax Break Recipients

Governor Jennifer Granhom ordered criminal and credit background checks for all business tax break recipients in the state of Michigan.

Last Tuesday, one such individual was scheduled to receive $9.1 million abatement, that person was a convicted embezzler.

The program called for is a "business integrity verification program." It calls for requiring tax credit applicants to answer an integrity questionnaire and agree to a civil, criminal, and credit background check in order to receive tax credits.

"We are fighting hard for every company investment that help us diversify our economy and create jobs for Michigan citizens, and this incident is wholly inconsistent with the work we're doing and the integrity of our whole process," Granholm stated.

Read more...

Driving Record in Shambles

45 License Suspensions

29 Warrants on Record

The Hazel Police pulled over Mary Ayers on Friday with an astounding number of infractions on her driving record. Police Chief David Niedermeier said, "She thumbed her nose at the system for many years, and I would anticipate that she will continue to do so."

Ayers is thought to have been driving without a license for at least 15 years. She has many traffic violations in other cities.

Ayers was arrested for the outstanding warrants and held while Hazel Park police impounded the 1999 Jeep she was driving. The plates were registered to a 1991 Pontiac Grand Am that hasn't been listed as stolen, but regardless, the plates didn't match.

Read more...

Welfare Applications to Include Drug Tests

The Nebraska government has a new bill in Legislature seeking to approve a measure to require all applicants for welfare to undergo mandatory drug testing to receive it. 22 other states attempted to pass the bill last year, but were unable to due to concerns about privacy and cost.

Sen. Charlie Janssen's bill requires Nebraska's Department of Health and Human Services to develop a plan to test welfare recipients and applicants for drugs. A positive results would mean a loss of benefits for one year.

Janssen said, "When a taxpayer gives assistance to somebody, it's assistance so they can get back up on their feet. It's kind of a slap in the face to the tax payers when they say, 'We're going to get up on our feet while we're doing drugs."

In 1999, Congress authorized states to implement drug testing for welfare, but Michigan is the only state to implement it only to have it thrown out be a federal judge for allowing for random drug testing, violating constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

Read more...

Medical Marijuana in the Workplace

In April 2008, Michigan deemed medical marijuana a legal right, and since then about 5,100 people have registered as users with just over 1,000 denied applications. The prescriptions are for pain relief among people who are chronically and terminally ill. Michigan isn't alone, 13 states across the county have legalized marijuana for medicinal use.

What happens when a medical marijuana user tests positive for a drug test? In an article for freep.com, Kathleen Gray investigates.

In states where employees have tested positive for drug use but were medicinal users, the law has consistently sided with the employer.

Michigan's laws aren't clear cut. One section states that the user cannot be "subject arrest...or denied any right or privilege including...disciplinary action by a business," yet another portion states "nothing in the act shall be construed to require an employer to accommodate the ingestion of marijuana in any workplace or any employee working while under the influence of marijuana."

Executive director of the Institute for a Drug Free Workplace, Mark de Bernardo states, "Marijuana is a dangerous drug that detrimentally affects the workplace. It has impacts on health care costs, productivity, accidents, and employee turnover."

It seems that users are not protected by this law from losing their job. Should a positive test come back, as it would for any prescription drug, an MRO should deem that a prescription in fact justifies the use, it seems it is up to the employer whether or not they would like to take the risk of having a pot smoker in their workplace.

Read more...