States administer most federal programs and have wiggle room to operate in most of them, and if they want to go above and beyond, they certainly can choose to do so. In any event, this is...the state being the state. Most people here seem to like that...
And as for the drug testing...the bottom line is if you don't like welfare you don't like welfare but there really hasn't been any evidence put forth that establishes this is somehow a great policy aside from just political reasons...obviously there are plenty of examples anyone could dig up...but as a whole in the scheme of the policy Florida was unable to make the argument that this is a legitimate problem:
As the district court found, the State failed to offer any factual support or to present any empirical evidence of a “concrete danger” of illegal drug use within Florida's TANF population. See (cite). The evidence in this record does not suggest that the population of TANF recipients engages in illegal drug use or that they misappropriate government funds for drugs at the expense of their own and their children's basic subsistence. The State has presented no evidence that simply because an applicant for TANF benefits is having financial problems, he is also drug addicted or prone to fraudulent and neglectful behavior.
-Lebron v. Sec. Florida DCF, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 32