I was in Rutland, Vermont when the call came through on my cell phone. It was an automated message informing me that I had been chosen for a random drug test. This meant that I had to pull over, retrieve one of the drug test kits from the trunk of my car, and locate a local testing agency. Forget that I was hundreds of miles from home, I had exactly 24 hours from the time of the message to complete the test. If I failed to do so, I would be terminated.

I called the test company and found out that there were no facilities within 100 miles of me. So I drove, and I drove and I drove some more. I eventually ended up in a small clinic in a strip mall somewhere in the mountains of northern New Hampshire. There, I was subjected to having a chunk of hair cut from my head which was then sealed into a baggie and shipped off for testing.

All in all, I had driven more than 200 miles out of my way, missed nearly a full day of work and lost some hair to comply with my company's drug-testing policy. Of course it could have been worse. On another occasion, I was chosen for the random test the day after I had shaved my head. Upon arriving at the testing center I was told that the hair on both my arms and legs was insufficient to get a reasonable sample. I don't want to tell you the next place they wanted to cut from, but after a call to my human resources manager in Amarillo, Texas, we negotiated a urine sample as a compromise.

In the eight-plus years I worked for the company in question, I was subjected to a dozen random drug tests. Each was intrusive, inconvenient and not a whole lot of fun. But I took each of them because every two weeks I really enjoyed when the direct deposit arrived in my checking account.

This brings me to the latest legal controversy gaining momentum around the country — drug testing for welfare recipients.

The issue is picking up steam in states like Florida and there is even talk of federal legislation requiring the drug tests. Proponents of the testing argue that welfare should not be financing a drug habit. The idea being, if you want the government to give you free money, food stamps, etc., it is a reasonable request that you not be using illegal drugs. After all, if you can afford to purchase drugs, why are you getting public assistance in the first place?

Opponents of the legislation predictably point to the unconstitutional nature of the act. Unreasonable search they call it. An unfair targeting of the poor, they say. I've seen it called an attack on those too weak to fight back, bullying by the government and an attempt to keep poor people down.

This seems to be one of those issues where public opinion is heavily in favor of testing, yet the vocal minority may win out.

Few politicians have what it takes to stand up and take a position where they will be vilified for attacking poor people. What about the women and children, they will say?

It seems to me that the issue of drug-testing should be a non-issue. If I'm not using drugs, why should I care if I have to take a test? Test me every week if you want, they will all come back clean. Offering up a monthly urine sample in exchange for free money, subsidized rent, food stamps, heating assistance, medical and dental care, college tuition assistance and job training seems like a bargain. Where do I sign up?

Though Florida is the latest state to sign legislation requiring drug-testing for welfare applicants, it is doubtful the law will survive legal challenges. Michigan tried the same thing in the late 1990s and it was challenged and dragged through the courts for several years until it was ruled unconstitutional.

In New York state alone there are more than 3 million people receiving food stamps each month. National figures show roughly 14 percent of the country receives them. The New York state legislature raised the idea earlier this year of drug tests for welfare recipients. The Bill — S174-2011 — is still in committee. But, here is a sample from the legislation that sums it up pretty well:

Too often individuals take advantage of our public assistance program and try to pocket or use their extra funds to purchase items they are not supposed to such as drugs. Before determining that a person is eligible for any form or category of public assistance, and prior to making any distribution to such person, the social services official shall require the person seeking assistance to submit to a drug test.

One of the key arguments being circulated is the fact that it is degrading or humiliating to subject welfare recipients to a monthly drug test in exchange for their benefits. It is that logic that got me thinking back on my years of random testing. Many times I stood in a tiny bathroom with someone watching me so they could verify the sample was indeed my own. Not a whole lot of fun, as those of you who have experienced it can attest to.

But employees across the country go through drug testing every day. We do it because we need the income our job provides us. For recipients of welfare, it is a small task to perform to get the thousands of dollars in assistance the government provides. My only advice: Don't get a haircut around the first of the month.