Probable Cause: Drug/ Alcohol Testing Elected Officials

Posted by courage On December - 28 - 2009

monopoly drunk

I work in an industry that allows for probable cause testing of employees.  Testing occurs when an employee displays actions which bosses/ management believe to be indicative of impaired behavior. Management is the arbitrator in making the decision to test, I believe most would agree that behaviors such as slurred speech and incoherent ramblings would warrant probable cause. Primarily the use of testing was permitted to curtail accidents, not only for the potentially impaired employee, also for any employee who may be working in the same area.

Should an employee be suspected of probable cause, they are brought to a secure room and company police are called.  Once the officer arrives they administer a breathalyzer to the individual.  Should this test show positive for alcohol, the individual is removed from duty and a formal hearing is  scheduled at which time the company seeks to dismiss the employee.  Now the employee can volunteer to enter treatment prior to the formal hearing, which in most cases will save their job.  Regardless of the breathalyzer reading, the employee is still mandated to have a urinalysis.  In the meantime the employee is suspended from duty until the results come back from the lab.

While Congresscritters may not create physical accidents because of their potential impairment, they have been granted by WE-THE-PEOPLE, trust that their actions are representative of the concerns and desires of those who elected them.  The accidents they may contribute to can potentially be as grave as any physical action,  it may be to the detriment of the entire country.  The position they hold is one of the greatest honors that can be bestowed on citizens of this country.  In fulfilling their position, WE-THE-PEOPLE demand they behave in a manner that displays their understanding of our granted trust.

Watch this “debate” on the Senate floor; the first order of business for both legislative branches at the start of the 2010 session, should be to institute probable cause testing which can be initiated by any 2 members of Congress when impaired behavior is suspected.   This shameful behavior by an elected official should NOT be condoned.  Members of Congress should be held to the same standards of conduct in performance of their duties as any citizen.

YouTube Preview Image

Quick update:

Throughout the day I was thinking about this post and how Senator Baucus is 68 years old.  On the floor of the Senate Baucus is noticeably slurring his words, he is experiencing trouble formulating thoughts.. evidenced by his continued repeating of words or phrases.  I noticed this odd behavior and do not see him every day like his colleagues.  Baucus supports are saying he is suffering from exhaustion,  after lengthy work drafting and supporting the health care legislation. 

I cannot help but wonder why no one in the Senate, those who are with him each and every day, did not consider that he may have been having a stroke?  It seems odd that the Attending Physician of the United States was not called to check on his well-being. The Attending Physician is responsible for the medical welfare of the members of Congress and is on call 24/7.  So the question becomes.. are Senator Baucus’s colleagues so blind that they can see obvious impairment from a potential stroke or are they aware of his inebriation and do not want to further shame this Congress?  Ha.. like that is possible.

Comments are closed.