The solution of homelessness is not a partisan experiment | Mint

(Bloomberg -Opinion) – Just as he did during his first term, President Donald Trump has recently insisted that he – and perhaps alone – know how to solve the crisis of homelessness that has the US cities with a long amount. In an executive order issued last week, Trump asked to remove the mass removal of street camps, and suggested that the nearly 300,000 people in prison in jail or long-term institutional facilities for drug abuse or mental health treatment-whether they want to go or not. To achieve this goal, important federal funding for housing and social services would be used as leverage, only to cities and states that take a more permissible stance on involuntary commitments and drop the open air use and loop. Trump described the plan as a ‘public safety’ approach designed to end ‘endemic troublesome’ and ‘disorderly behavior’. And to be sure, it will have supporters, especially in the democratic Western states where most people who do not house sleep outside as in shelters. California, with its reputation for spicy camps in the middle-class neighborhoods, accounts for almost half of the country’s unprotected homeless population. But in the end, Trump’s plan is unlikely to fall from his vaguely declared goals. This is because his executive order misdiagnosed the problem of homelessness as a failure of strategy by Democrats, rather than as a failure of both political parties to provide constant cities and states with adequate resources. Think about what Trump suggests, draconian, even though it seems to some people, it’s not that different than many democratic mayors and governors do. Last year, dozens of elected officials from California, Oregon, Washington and Arizona Amicus submitted in a case where Grants Pass, Oregon, asked to give the US Supreme Court to give them greater authority to establish the camps from public spaces and arrest homeless people. The conservative majority of the court asked as. In response, Governor Gavin Newsom in California immediately issued an executive order in which they ordered state agencies to remove tents from state ownership and urged cities and provinces to do the same-and even threaten to withhold housing funds from jurisdictions that do not meet its claims. California was also one of the first of many democratic management statements to expand its involuntary commitment laws, making it easier to force homeless treatment for drug abuse. Newsom calls it a way to ensure that “people get the help they need and the respect they deserve.” New York now only allows the first respondents to involuntarily commit mentally ill people who cannot care for themselves. And after years of controversial debate, Oregon moves forward with similar legislation. Newsom’s spokesman, Tara Gallegos, calls Trump’s executive order an “imitation” that “even poorly carried out, is the highest form of vlei.” The partisan politics of homelessness have clearly changed. But the need for resources does not. If a more aggressive approach to cleaning camps will succeed, it will only do it if there is sufficient money for both treatment and housing for the people who live in it. Yet the Trump administration, through its one major beautiful Bill Act, will force Medicaid – the program that funds many of the services that love homeless people, many of whom are disabled, from the street and in the care. In addition, the administration has previously announced plans to cut hundreds of millions of dollars to grants used to treat addiction. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 84,000 Americans kill more than 84,000 Americans each year. Yet it is no coincidence that Fentanyl and other street drug overdoses have decreased over the past year, after a flood of grants in the Covid era during the Biden Administration. Numerous federal homelessness and affordable housing grants are also in danger-a potentially serious scenario in high cost and states. As Jesse Rabinowitz of the National Homeless Law Center put it – which reflects many civil freedoms groups – Trump’s executive order “does nothing to reduce the cost of housing or helping people end.” It is even unclear whether states, many with the shortcomings of the budget, will have the money to finance enough beds in institutional institutions – or in prison – for all the additional homeless people who want Trump off the street. He apparently does not see resources as the issue. As he says in his executive order: “The federal government and the states have spent dozens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness.” This is a fair point. According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the unhealthy population increased by 18% nationwide last year. But it is worth pointing out that in California – which spends more money on homelessness than any other state and under Newsom was more aggressive to remove the camps – the increase was only 3%. Trump must remember that no matter the strategy, the solution of the crisis of homelessness in American cities does not require the cutting of the budget. More from Bloomberg opinion: This column reflects the author’s personal views and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial or Bloomberg MP and his owners. Erika D. Smith is a Political and Policy Court for Bloomberg opinion. She is a former Los Angeles Times columnist and Sacramento Bee editorial board member. More stories like these are available on Bloomberg.com/opinion © 2025 Bloomberg LP