+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 4.6k Protectionism voters.

82%
Yes
17%
No
76%
Yes
14%
No
3%
Yes, but provide treatment for those testing positive
3%
No, only if they have a criminal history related to drug abuse
2%
Yes, test anyone receiving money from the government including employees and politicians
1%
No, this is a waste of time and money
2%
Yes, and immediately terminate benefits for anyone testing positive

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 4.6k Protectionism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 4.6k Protectionism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Protectionism voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9HJY34Ranswered…12mos12MO

Yes, if they have a history and are exhibiting the signs of drug abuse after an interview with a professional

 @9JXWD39answered…10mos10MO

Yes, provide treatment for those who test positive, and test everyone earning money from the government, including employees and politicians.

 @9JJBTWFanswered…10mos10MO

if they have a history of drugs, there should be a way to track spendings from the goverment point, so they can see if they are evn buying drugs

 @9HKY377answered…12mos12MO

Yes, but only if a trained employee sees the typical signs of addiction/substance abuse, and after they refer this recipient to an onsite specialist who comes to the same conclusion should they be tested (or voluntary)

 @9ZMSSFBanswered…1wk1W

Illicit class 1 drugs like heroin, meth & cocaine, yes. But not for marijuana. If marijuana is off limits there is no scientific reason that alcohol should be allowed. The only notated cognitive effect from heavy, long-term marijuana usage is impairment to the short-term memory. Alcohol negatively impacts every part of the brain. If people are allowed alcohol there is no reason they shouldn’t be allowed marijuana

 @9ZDJCJRanswered…2wks2W

Yes, provide treatment for those who test positive more than twice in 3 months and put restrictions in place to reduce access.

 @9WK97VNanswered…1mo1MO

Yes, but for those who have a history or suspected of drug abuse and if they test positive. They should be allocated treatment and help while also facing a disciplinary action to the appropriate degree.

 @9VCFLZ3answered…2mos2MO

i think drug testing should only be relevant after a certian period of time or randomly but it should not take thier welfare away but instead recieve help.