Trump aims at the first housing strategy

Trump’s administration has turned its locations into something called the Council of Governance for the lack of housing, a small group working in a policy called housing first. Movement refers to the New York Times as Trump’s targeting for the service homeless signifies a sharp shift in policy. This is true, but the change does not really come with an alternative. And there is the program and the politics, but then there is the ideological shade of the phrase, “first housing”. This broader and political statement is a side of a national debate that loses the point. The problem we call a lack of roof will not be resolved by law enforcement or the starting belt, nor will it end when everyone gets an apartment key.

Policy called housing has emerged for the first time in the last two decades as a mandate to provide immediate shelter and housing for people who live unusual without demands. Politics has never been exactly a reduction in damage, which is a more radical approach that includes interventions such as providing clean needles for drug or “wet housing” injection, facilities in which people who leave the roads can drink alcohol. The idea of ​​housing first is practical: addiction and mental health issues are decisive, but they cannot be addressed if a person lives in the streets.

People who support organizations work argue that groups such as youth and veteran They have responded very well, while those who are critical to the lack of widespread success of the programs. Just look out of the window of any building in the city center in any big city, they could say, and you will see that the problem has only worsened. While supporters tend to be liberal and conservative critics, sorting is not exactly symmetrical. The Times article points out that politics once had bilateral support and many homeless supporters are equally frustrated as conservative critics in lack of success. And the apartment key does not solve the chronic problems most people face and end up on the streets.

We’ve seen the new Trump administration at work. It’s just a matter of time before housing first as a policy will be a thing of the past. But one thing is certain, what we call a lack of roof is complicated. It’s not just a housing problem. I wrote a little behind the stable argument that the problem that is visible on the streets of the city and even in the rural communities is largely associated with cheap and mechanical road medicines. In a post called Cheap drugsI took a closer look at Sam Quinones’ book The least of usA time on how drugs have made a long problem of people living out and on the streets much worse, exacerbating underlying mental health and financial problems. I think he’s right.

But even if we immediately disable the supply of these drugs, today, today, these serious mental health problems will insist. And there are other medicines available on the streets. The problem of mental health does not respond well to law enforcement. The idea of ​​mass imposing on drug suppliers is unlikely to give a viable solution unless there is treatment. Housing critics first often see problems on the road as personal responsibility and morals rather than marginal substitution rates. People choose to use drugs even with the risk of running law enforcement and living in an improvised shelter.

And the shelter system also reads the problem. Ironically, many if not most people on the road are not deprived of shelters. They have scenes, abandoned houses and other improvised living situations. Their shelter system offers the same thing, but with the loss of their personal autonomy, it often exposes them to the shelter and limits to whom they can bring with them, including spouses and pets.

I cannot say that I will mourn the loss of the Council of Governance for the lack of housing. There is one in every state and city, a group often pulled along with politicians who declare an “emergency”. None of these efforts succeeded. As road problems gain the momentum every year, and much more, and more money is spent, it is time for federal, state and local government ignore voices on the left that suggest that road problems are purely economical and on the right who want to keep people “responsible”.

Instead, we need better ideas that use human capital on the road. When people build camps, it is a sign of spontaneous order not lawlessness. We should build people’s survival skills, support recovery with their speed and support people who can never recover, but who could suffer less than better access to improvised shelter and consistent cases. Is that what the Trump administration will follow? I doubt it. But the clearance of the first mantra of the house can open the space for more innovative ideas locally.