Trump's order on homelessness gets it all wrong, and here's why
Forcibly clear the streets.
On Thursday, he signed an executive order to address 'endemic vagrancy' and end 'crime and disorder on our streets.' He called for the use of 'civil commitments' to get those who suffer from mental illness or addiction into 'humane treatment.'
This comes after last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling making it legal for cities to punish people for being homeless, even if they have nowhere to go.
There's some truth in what he says, and California's record on housing and homelessness is ripe for criticism. I've watched too many people suffer from addiction and mental illness and asked why the help is so slow to arrive. But I also know there are no simple answers for either crisis, and bluster is no substitute for desperately needed resources.
Like a lot of what Trump does, this is another case of grandstanding. In the meantime, the Washington Post reported Thursday that the 'Trump administration has slashed more than $1 billion in COVID-era grants administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and is proposing to slash hundreds of millions more in agency grants.'
As it happens, I was in the middle of a column on the latest Los Angeles homeless count when news of Trump's executive order broke. I had just spent time with two homeless women to hear about their predicaments, and none of what Trump is proposing comes close to addressing their needs, which are tragically commonplace.
Namely, they're living in poverty and can't afford a place to live.
In his executive order, Trump said that 'nearly two-thirds of homeless individuals report having used hard drugs … in their lifetimes. An equally large share of homeless individuals reported suffering from mental health conditions.'
I don't know where he got those numbers, but truth and accuracy are not hallmarks of this administration.
No doubt, addiction and mental illness are significant factors, and more intervention is needed.
But that's more complicated than he thinks, especially given the practical and legal issues surrounding coercive treatment — and it's not going to solve the problem.
When the latest homeless count in Los Angeles was released, a slight decline from a year ago was regarded by many as a positive sign. But when Eli Veitzer of Jewish Family Service L.A. dug into the numbers, he found something both unsurprising and deeply disturbing.
The number of homeless people 65 and older hadn't gone down. It had surged, in both the city and county of Los Angeles.
'This isn't new this year. It's a trend over the last couple of years,' said Veitzer, whose nonprofit provides meals, housing assistance and various other services to clients. 'It's meaningful, and it's real, and these people are at the highest risk of mortality while they're on the streets.'
The numbers from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority showed a 3.4% decrease in the total homeless population in the city, but a 17.6% increase among those 65 and older. The county numbers showed a 3.99% decrease overall, but an 8.59% increase in the 65 and older group.
In the city, the increase over two years was from 3,427 in 2023 to 4,680 this year — up 37%.
Reliable research has shown that among older adults who become homeless, the primary reason is the combination of poverty and high housing costs, rather than mental illness or addiction.
'They or their spouse lost their job, they or their spouse got sick, their marriage broke up or their spouse or parent died,' Dr. Margot Kushel of UC San Francisco's Homelessness and Housing Initiative was telling me several hours before Trump's executive order was issued.
Her team's landmark study, released two years ago (and covered by my colleague Anita Chabria), found that nearly half the state's homeless residents were 50 and older, and that participants in the study reported a median monthly household income of $960.
'The results … confirm that far too many Californians experience homelessness because they cannot afford housing,' Kushel said at the time.
Among the older population, Veitzer said, the jump in homelessness comes against the backdrop of federal and local budget cuts that will make it harder to reverse the trend. And harder for nonprofits, which rely in part on public funding, to keep providing group meals, home-delivered meals, transportation, social services and housing support.
'Every provider I've talked to in the city of L.A. is cutting meal programs,' Veitzer said. 'We're going to have to close two of our 13 meal sites, and last year we closed three. We used to have 16, and now we're down to 11.'
On Wednesday, I went to one of the sites that's still up and running on Santa Monica Boulevard, just west of the 405, and met Jane Jefferies, 69. She told me she's been camping in her vehicle since February when living with her brother became impossible for various reasons. She now pulls into a Safe Parking L.A. lot each night to bed down.
Jefferies said she collects about $1,400 a month in Social Security, which isn't enough to get her into an apartment. At the senior center, she uses her own equipment to make buttons that she sells on the Venice boardwalk, where she can make up to $200 on a good weekend.
But that's still not enough to cover the cost of housing, she told me, and she's given up on government help.
'All the funding has been cut, and I don't know if it's because a lot of the city and state funding is subsidized by the federal government. We all know Trump hates California,' she said.
As Veitzer put it: 'There's nowhere near enough low-income senior housing in L.A. County. Wait lists open up periodically,' with far more applicants than housing units. 'And then they close.'
His agency delivers a daily meal to Vancie Davis, 73, who lives in a van at Penmar Park in Venice. Her next-door neighbor is her son, Thomas Williamson, 51, who lives in his car.
Davis was in the front seat of the van when I arrived, hugging her dog, Heart. Her left leg was amputated below the knee two years ago because of an infection, she told me.
Davis said she and another son were living in a trailer in Oregon, but the owner shut off the utilities and changed the locks. She said she reached out to Williamson, who told her, 'I've got a van for you, so you'll have a place to live, but it's going to be rough. And it is. It's very, very rough.'
I've heard so many variations of stories like these over the years, I've lost count.
The magnitude that exists in the wealthiest nation in history is a disgrace, and a sad commentary on an economic system and public policy that have served to widen, rather than narrow, the inequity gap.
On Thursday, Trump's executive order on homelessness grabbed headlines but will do nothing for Jane Jefferies or Vancie Davis and for thousands like them. We know the interventions that can work, Kushel said, but with deep cuts in the works, we're moving in the wrong direction.
Davis' son Thomas told Times photographer Genaro Molina about another person who lives in a vehicle and has been a neighbor of theirs in the parking lot.
She wasn't there Wednesday, but we'll check back.
It's a 91-year-old woman.
steve.lopez@latimes.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Crisis of trust': Epstein furore to hurt Republicans
The uproar over disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is undermining public trust in the Trump administration, as well as Republican hopes of retaining control of Congress in the 2026 mid-term elections, two congressmen say. Republican Representative Thomas Massie and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna, who want the House of Representatives to vote on their bipartisan resolution requiring full release of the government's Epstein files, said the lack of transparency is reinforcing public perceptions that the rich and powerful live beyond the reach of the judicial system. "This is going to hurt Republicans in the mid-terms. The voters will be apathetic if we don't hold the rich and powerful accountable," Massie, a hardline conservative from Kentucky, told NBC's Meet the Press program. Republicans hope to add to their current 219-212 House majority - with four seats currently vacant - and 53-47 Senate majority in November 2026, although the US political cycle traditionally punishes the party of the sitting president during midterm elections. The Washington Post reported that Trump was increasingly frustrated with his administration's handling of the furore around Epstein. Even so, the president was hesitant to make personnel changes to avoid creating a "bigger spectacle" as his top officials underestimated the outrage from Trump's own base over the issue, the newspaper reported, citing unnamed sources. Khanna said Attorney General Pam Bondi triggered "a crisis of trust" by saying there was no list of Epstein clients after previously implying that one existed. The change in position unleashed a tsunami of calls for her resignation from Trump's MAGA base. "This is about trust in government," the California Democrat told Meet the Press. "This is about being a reform agent of transparency." President Donald Trump has been frustrated by continued questions about his administration's handling of investigative files related to Epstein's criminal charges and 2019 death by suicide in prison. Massie and Khanna believe they can win enough support from fellow lawmakers to force a vote on their resolution when Congress returns from its summer recess in September. But they face opposition from Republican leaders including House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent lawmakers home a day early to stymie Democratic efforts to force a vote before the break. Johnson, who also appeared on NBC's Meet the Press, said he favours a non-binding alternative resolution that calls for release of "credible" evidence, but which he said would better protect victims including minors. "The Massie and Khanna discharge petition is reckless in the way that it is drafted and presented," Johnson said. "It does not adequately include those protections." Massie dismissed Johnson's claim as "a straw man" excuse. "Ro and I carefully crafted this legislation so that the victims' names will be redacted," he said. "They're hiding behind that." Trump has tried and failed so far to distract attention from the Epstein controversy six months into his second term. On Saturday, Trump repeated his claims without evidence that 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris and other Democrats should be prosecuted over payment for endorsements from celebrities including Oprah Winfrey, Beyonce and the Reverend Al Sharpton. Last week he accused former president Barack Obama of "treason" over how his administration treated intelligence about Russian interference in US elections nine years ago, drawing a rebuke from an Obama spokesperson. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028


The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Here are the trade deals Trump has made ahead of Aug. 1 tariffs
After months of delays, President Trump's long-awaited global tariffs are slated to take effect at the end of this week. Trump on April 2 announced 'reciprocal' tariffs on dozens of other countries, using trade deficits to help calculate the tariff rate. But a week later, he lowered those rates to 10 percent for three months as markets reacted negatively, allowing time for countries to negotiate. As the 90-day window was nearing its end earlier this month, Trump sent letters to countries informing them of the new 'reciprocal' rate that, he said, would take effect Aug. 1. The White House has managed to secure some significant trade deals since the president's unprecedented sweeping tariffs were first announced in the spring. Trump on Sunday announced a trade deal with the European Union, setting tariffs at 15 percent for European goods, including automobiles — lower than the 30 percent rate Trump had threatened to impose on the EU next month. The EU will purchase $750 billion worth of energy from the U.S. as part of the deal, Trump announced, and agreed to invest in the U.S. $600 billion more than the current investments for other goods. Trump similarly reached a deal last week with Japan, setting a 15 percent tariff on Japanese goods — lower than lower the 25 percent tariff Trump had threatened to impose. Also in that deal, Trump said Japan would invest $550 billion in projects in the U.S. and would open its markets to U.S. automobiles, rice and other agricultural products. The Philippines agreed to a trade deal with the United States that would lower U.S. tariffs on its exports to from 20 percent to 19 percent, Trump announced last week. Trump had originally set a 17 percent duty on imports from the Philippines in April before warning that figure would rise to 20 percent last month. An agreement with Indonesia would also set a tariff rate of 19 percent on its imports. Trump announced an agreement with the United Kingdom in early May, in what is considered the first major deal struck since the president announced his sweeping tariffs in April. That agreement set the tariff rate at 10 percent, down from 25 percent. The U.K. is allowed to export 100,000 cars to the U.S. at a 10-percent tariff rate, as opposed to the 25-percent rate announced March 26, marking a win for the British car industry. Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer are expected to talk about the implementation of that deal when they meet Monday in Scotland. The US and China announced in late May the contours of a deal to stave off a trade war between the two countries temporarily. The U.S. reduced its tariff rate from 145 percent to 30 percent, and China reduced its rate from 125 percent to 10 percent. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng are set to hold talks Monday for the third time this year, with The Associated Press reporting that China is expected to press for the U.S. to remove its 20 percent tariff related to fentanyl. Both countries have an additional 10 percent baseline tariff in place. The White House sent dozens of letters this month informing countries of what they should expect their tariff rate to be, come Aug. 1. Trump has insisted he would not further extend the tariff deadline, but Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday that the president would be open to continuing discussions even after the tariffs are in place. For countries that have yet to secure a deal with the U.S., here are the tariff rates set to take effect on Aug. 1: Canada: 35 percent Mexico: 30 percent South Korea: 25 percent South Africa: 30 percent Kazakhstan: 25 percent Laos: 40 percent Malaysia: 25 percent Myanmar: 40 percent Tunisia: 25 percent Bosnia and Herzegovina: 30 percent Bangladesh: 35 percent Serbia: 35 percent Cambodia: 36 percent Thailand: 36 percent Libya: 30 percent Iraq: 30 percent Algeria: 30 percent Moldova: 25 percent Brunei: 25 percent Sri Lanka: 30 percent Brazil: 50 percent

Epoch Times
28 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Kentucky Church Brings Pandemic-Era Legal Dispute to Supreme Court
A Kentucky church is asking the Supreme Court to decide if the state government must pay its legal expenses from a challenge to COVID-19-era restrictions on church attendance. The church is arguing that its constitutional rights were violated when it was denied attorney's fees in its lawsuit, after the same court awarded those fees to litigants in another lawsuit based on the same facts.