The United States has a homeless problem, but we have an even bigger homeless policy problem. It’s a problem at the federal level—HUD spends nearly $10 billion annually to create bad incentives that reward poverty—and at the state and local levels. This week featured two very different state approaches to homelessness.
In Oregon, state lawmakers wanted to give homeless people the right to camp on public property and sue for up to $1,000 if their tents were disturbed. To some this may be an extreme example, but unfortunately it is typical of homelessness policy, which is largely controlled by a national activist movement. This movement of thousands of service providers is unaccountable and has failed to meaningfully improve conditions for the homeless while simultaneously taking more and more money from taxpayers. In some cases, these groups have become urban political machines in their own right, with incentives to see more homeless people on the streets because it means more public resources for them. States like Oregon are happy to play along.
However, the state of Georgia is not. On Wednesday, Gov. Brian Kemp signed SB 62 into law, which will upend the status quo of homelessness policy in the Peach State. The law, passed with bipartisan support, is based on model legislation developed at the Cicero Institute, which I founded.
Georgia and other states are part of a growing revolution in homelessness policy, as policymakers declare independence from failed approaches — and from the activists and bureaucrats who have brought anarchy to so many of our major cities. Individual states may lack the ability to fix all the flawed incentives imposed by Washington DC, but they can make a difference in their own states.
Our model legislation has several key pillars, each of which departs from the prevailing – and failing – wisdom of what some call the homeless industrial complex.
First, states should not fund “Housing First” – the policy of providing homeless people with “free” permanent housing without any requirement for treatment or sobriety. Studies show that it takes between ten and 20 housing units to get a chronically homeless person off the streets. It should come as no surprise that some people become “homeless” to take advantage of the benefits of offering homeless people free housing, no questions asked. Due to widespread mental health and addiction problems, many return to homelessness even after being given a house.
In San Francisco, “permanent supportive housing” is one such failed program. In one case, the city found that a quarter of those who received free housing died within a few years, many of them from overdoses. The federal government and states like California support this nonsense, but other states should make different decisions. For example, they can provide funding for treatment and emergency shelter.
Second, camping should not be allowed on sidewalks and in public parks — let alone protected and encouraged, as Oregon lawmakers intend to do. These camps, where drugs and violence are on the rise, are dangerous to the public and deadly to the homeless themselves. It is unreasonable to allow them to grow. Instead, states should require people to obtain services, shelter, or safer alternatives. If necessary, states can set up sanctioned and monitored camps with the necessary services – outside of public spaces.
Third, states should tie funding for NGO service providers to results. In many cases, homeless “charities” are politically engaged activist organizations that bully executives into making money through contracts. In extreme cases, they use money intended to help the homeless to fund protests against new legislative approaches like ours.
When my friend and former colleague Judge Glock, director of research at the Manhattan Institute and still an associate at Cicero, was testifying in Kansas, dozens of activists showed up to make a scene in the committee room. The activists have a direct financial interest in current politics: if lawmakers adopt accountability models, they could be out of a job.
The public expects transparency, accountability and results from these groups; Our legislation requires this. Under SB 62, homelessness service providers funded with state or local money in Georgia will be subject to a performance audit to tie funding to outcomes.
Nowadays it is mainly the red states that are taking action against the activists. But even in deep blue Denver, voters had to choose from a bevy of Democratic mayoral candidates, almost all of whom favored criminal charges for homeless people who deny available housing. Both candidates in the city’s June runoff election support forcible evacuation of encampments, and 54 percent of Denver voters say they support a proposal to arrest those who refuse shelter.
This is a big change – especially on the left side. When the public is faced with such a visible and obvious crisis, not everyone follows the party line. In our own city of Austin, left-wing voters rebuked the even more left-wing city council and mayor over homelessness. After lawmakers repealed the city’s longstanding camping ban and invited homeless people to camp downtown, voters voted by nearly 20 percentage points to reinstate the ban in 2021.
The number of homeless people in Portland, Oregon has increased by over 50 percent since 2019. Meanwhile, the city’s overall population has declined. While the homeless are pouring in, the residents are fleeing – because of bad policies.
It’s not always easy for elected politicians to stand up to the homeless industry. Many prefer to play along rather than be publicly vilified as cruel or heartless. However, things are different in Georgia: SB 62 passed with support from members of both parties. Last year, Missouri also passed legislation based on the Cicero model of accountability. And Texas and Tennessee have banned road camping statewide.
These states reject the irresponsible, broken Oregon model. They reject the Marxist idea that American capitalism causes homelessness and that only far-left activism can fix the problem. Instead, they usher in a new era in homelessness policy where accountability is paramount. You won’t be the last to do this.
Photo: pstivers68/iStock
