Homelessness in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RussBot (talk | contribs) at 16:24, 29 May 2006 (Robot-assisted fixing link to disambiguation page (you can help!) Native Americans). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|March 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.

A homeless man naps in Santa Monica, California.

Introduction

What is homelessness?

Seemingly a simple question, what classifies as “homelessness” can actually be quite ambiguous. For example: Are two people, one who has no where to go after being released from prison and one who chooses to reside in the forest of a state park, equally “homeless?” Or what about someone who has lived on the streets for so long that s/he cannot “properly” function within mainstream society; does such an individual fall under the same category as a family that fails to meet rent one month out of the year and finds themselves evicted? Or lastly, should people that do not have a conventional place of residence and yet do not identify with being “homeless” still be deemed as such? (Such instances have prompted some to use the term “houseless” as an alternative.)

There is no simple answer to the dilemma of what is homelessness just as there is no simple cause for why people become homeless. As equally diverse as the causes are the lives of those who experience homelessness. Homelessness is a complex social phenomenon that means different things to different people. However, since the vast majority of people experiencing homelessness do not want to be, for the intensive purposes of this entry consider homelessness as a situation to be prevented, escaped, and ultimately, ended.

Definition

Defining homelessness is an extension of the above-mentioned dilemma, and as such, it is a contested topic. There is no single agreed-upon definition. According to federal legislation,[1] a person considered “homeless” is defined as:

  1. an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence;
  2. and an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is--
    1. a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
    2. an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or
    3. a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.

Critics argue that such a definition does not account for all of those who are in-effect homeless, and therefore excludes many needy individuals from certain federal assistance programs who do not meet eligibility requirements. Proponents of an expanded definition of homelessness cite certain at-risk living situations that they want included:

  • Multiple families (or individuals) doubling or tripling up in insufficient living space. One of many documented incidents reports 25 individuals sharing a single house.[2]
  • Weekly “rental” of economy motel rooms. With a growing lack of affordable housing across the country, low-wage earners are increasingly residing in cheap (and often ill-maintained) motels.[3]
  • Individuals living in their automobiles. Often the vehicles used in such a manner do not even operate but simply provide shelter from the elements.
  • Exclusive “couch-suffers.” Instead of sleeping on the streets or in a shelter, otherwise homeless persons are forced to rely on the hospitality of willing friends or family for a place to sleep. Patience for such arrangements often runs dry, and many soon find themselves without a place to stay.

Finally, there is discrepancy over which defined segments of the homeless population are most in need. The federal government is currently promoting a 10-year plan approach to end homelessness that stipulates funding must target those who are “chronically” homeless—defined as, “An unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been continuously homeless for a year or has had at least four (4) episodes of homelessness in the past three (3) years.”[4] Many direct service providers are concerned that such a definition will exclude the majority of those who experience homelessness from receiving needed services (more on this later).

Statistics and Demographics

Completely accurate and comprehensive statistics are difficult to acquire for any social study, but especially so when measuring the ambiguous, hidden, and erratic reality of homelessness. All figures given are estimates. In addition, these estimates represent overall national averages; the proportions of specific homeless communities can vary substantially depending on local geography.

Total Number
  • An estimated 3.5 million people experience homelessness in a given year (1% of the entire U.S. population or 10% of its poor), and about 842,000 people on any given day.[5]
Familial composition[6]
  • 40% are families with children—the fastest growing segment.
  • 41% are single males.
  • 14% are single females.
  • 5% are minors unaccompanied by adults.

1.37 million (or 39%) of the total homeless population are children under the age of 18 (4).

Ethnicity[7]
Health-concerns[8]
Backgrounds[9]
  • 23% are veterans (compared to 13% of general population).
  • 25% were physically or [sexual abuse|sexually abused] as children.
  • 27% were in foster care or similar institutions as children.
  • 21% were homeless at some point during their childhood.
  • 54% were incarcerated at some point in their lives.
Education[10]
  • 38% have less than a High School diploma.
  • 34% have a High School diploma or equivalent (G.E.D.).
  • 28% have more than a High School education.
Employment[11]
  • 44% report having worked in the past week.
  • 13% have regular jobs.
  • 50% receive less than $300 per month as income.
Location[12]
  • 71% reside in central cities.
  • 21% are in suburbs.
  • 9% are in rural areas.
Duration[13]
  • 80% of those who experience homelessness do so for less than 3 weeks. They typically have more personal, social, or economic resources to draw upon.
  • 10% are homeless for up to two months. They cite lack of available or affordable housing as responsible for the delay.
  • 10% are so called “chronic” and remain without housing for extended periods of time on a frequent basis. They typically struggle with mental illness, substance abuse, or both.

Historical Background

1980s

Although homelessness has existed in this country since its inception, most experts in the field generally agree that modern homelessness began in the United States in the 1980s. During Ronald Reagan’s duel-term presidency (1981-1989) a variety of drastic budget reductions are credited with undermining many urban populations, most notably those of poor and minority demographics. In 1980 federal dollars accounted for 22% of big city budgets, but by 1989 the same such aid composed only 6% of urban revenue (part of larger 60% decrease in federal spending to support local governments).[14] It is largely (although not exclusively) in these urban areas that homelessness became widespread and reached unprecedented numbers. Critics of Reagan identify several main policy shifts as fundamental in the sharp rise of homelessness.

Most notable were cuts to federal low-income housing programs. In his first year of office Reagan halved the budget for public housing and Section 8 (the government’s housing voucher subsidization program). Between the years of 1980 and 1989 HUD’s budget authority was reduced from $74 billion to $19 billion.[15] Such changes resulted in an inadequate supply of affordable housing to meet the growing demand of low-income populations. In 1970 there were 300,000 more low-cost rental units (6.5 million) than low-income renter households (6.2 million). By 1985 the number of low-cost units had fallen to 5.6 million, and the number of low-income renter households had grown to 8.9 million, a disparity of 3.3 million units[16]

The 1980s also saw a continuing trend of deinstitutionalizing mental-health hospitals. It is believed that a large percentage of these released patients ended up in the homeless system. Furthermore, Reagan was responsible for huge cuts in both welfare and income taxes. Many accredit such actions as widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

In response to the ensuing homelessness crisis of the 1980s, concerned citizens across the country demanded that the federal government provide assistance. After many years of advocacy and numerous revisions, Reagan signed into law the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act in 1987—this remains the only piece of federal legislation that allocates funding to the direct service of homeless people.

1990s

The McKinney-Vento Act paved the way for service providers in the coming years. During the 1990s homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other supportive services sprouted up in cities and towns across the nation. However, despite these efforts and the dramatic economic growth marked by this decade, homeless numbers remained stubbornly high. It became increasingly apparent that simply providing services to alleviate the symptoms of homelessness (i.e. shelter beds, hot meals, psychiatric counseling, etc.), although needed, were not successful at solving the root causes of homelessness. However, critics claim that Bill Clinton’s 1996 welfare reforms increased the number of families entering homelessness.[citation needed] At any rate, policies set into motion in the 1980s were never adequately reversed during the Bush Senior or Clinton administrations and disparities between rich and poor continued to widen; conditions, therefore, remained ripe for becoming homeless.[citation needed]

2000s

The Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH), the federal branch responsible for overseeing homeless policy that was created under the McKinney-Vento Act, is now attempting a new approach to combat homelessness. For the first time, government officials are calling for an end to homelessness. To accomplish this goal ICH has adopted a strategy largely devised by the National Alliance to End Homelessness (one of many homeless advocacy organizations), which centers on the production and implementation of local 10-year plans to end chronic homelessness. The idea is to get all of the necessary parties—local/state governmental agencies, businesses, non-profit organizations, service providers, faith-based entities, and homeless (or formally so) individuals—working in collaboration to devise and implement a 10-year plan for their respective community.

Rather than channeling funds into direct services that seemingly sustain homeless lifestyles, these result-oriented plans are designed to focus efforts and funds on the creation of permanent supportive housing (PSH) for the most troubled and difficult, “chronic” homeless population. Considering that it is actually cheaper to house someone than it is to fund the otherwise needed myriad services, this approach is touted as being a cost-effective solution.[17]

Many service providers applaud the government’s focus on ending homelessness, as opposed to managing it, and realize the necessity of incorporating all sectors of society in order to accomplish such a goal. However, critics express concern that the majority of the homeless population, who are not considered “chronic,” will be neglected; if federal funds are stipulated only for this 10% demographic—although no doubt deserving—what will become of the other 90%? These concerns are exacerbated by a failure to receive sufficient additional allocations while already struggling with budgets spread extremely thin.

Presently, no plan has been in effect for a full 10-years so achievement is difficult to gauge; the best indications reveal mixed success. Although many cities have seen chronic numbers dip, it is unclear whether or not homelessness as a whole is decreasing. The hope is that necessary modifications can be made to existing plans, and that newly devised plans can implement the strategies that work and avoid the ones that don’t.

Causes

Homelessness is considered a byproduct of poverty. In the simplest terms, a household becomes homeless when its provider(s) can no longer pay for housing, and this phenomenon happens overwhelmingly among the poorest of the nation. Therefore, experts in the field see a direct correlation between recent increases in poverty levels and increases in homelessness. In an attempt to understand why some people in poverty experience homelessness, and why some don’t, both structural and personal dynamics must be considered.

Structural factors

Employment Opportunities
Two different aspects of the current job market are seen as integral to causing homelessness:
  1. The job opportunities are dwindling for those on the low end of the employment spectrum in terms of wages, skills, and education.[18] Workers in this category are disproportionately displaced from their jobs, have a harder time securing long-tenured employment, and have significantly less resources and support to fall back on in times of unemployment.[19]
  2. Decreases in the purchasing power of low wages. The real (inflation-adjusted) value of the current federal minimum wage is 28% less than it was in 1979,[20] and it has not increased from its present rate of $5.15 per hour in almost 10 years.
Housing Opportunities
There are three aspects of the current housing market that are as equally pivotal in causing homelessness:
  1. Housing costs, particularly for rental housing which disproportionately affect lower income households, are rising drastically. In the five years 1999 through 2004, rental price of primary residences rose by 19% and the consumer price index (CPI-U) rose by only 13%[21]--the price of housing, in other words, is outpacing the rate of inflation. There is not a single jurisdiction in the country where a person working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year at the prevailing minimum wage can afford a one-bedroom apartment.[22] Aside from just low wage earners, many workers cannot afford to live where they work, and even in moderately priced communities housing costs continually require a larger portion of a household’s annual income.[23]
  2. Although residential construction has been robust in recent years, the development of low-income housing is grossly inadequate. In 2003 there was a supply deficiency of 1.7 million units of housing to meet the demand of 7.7 million extremely low income (ELI) renting households.[24]
  3. Government housing-assistance programs are massively over-burdened. Currently, only one-fourth of all eligible families receive any federal housing assistance due to program funding constraints,[25] and the average wait for Section 8 vouchers is 35 months.[26]
Health Care Opportunities
In 2004, 45.8 million Americans (or 15.7% of the population) were without heath insurance, which was an increase from the year before, and was disproportionately represented by poor households.[27] The U.S. spends 16% of its GDP on health care, more than any other industrialized nation, and those countries provide health insurance to all of their citizens.[28]
  1. Heath care costs are skyrocketing. In 2004, total national health expenditures rose 7.9 percent—over three times the rate of inflation—and since 2000, employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 73%.[29]
  2. People working low wage jobs, even if they work full-time, are less likely to be provided with health insurance. For example, Wal-Mart--the largest employer in the nation--does not provide health coverage for over half of its employees, who on average earn $8.23 an hour.[30]
  3. Without health insurance and under increasing medical costs, unexpected health emergencies or serious chronic illnesses can quickly overburden the resources of poor households.

Personal Factors

  • Untreated mental illness can cause individuals to become paranoid, anxious, or depressed, making it difficult or impossible to maintain employment, pay bills, or keep supportive social relationships.
  • Substance abuse can drain financial resources, cause job or housing lose, and erode supportive social relationships.
  • Co-occurring disorders. Individuals with co-occurring mental illnesses and substance use disorders are among the most susceptible to the above mentioned loses.
  • Many people (especially women and often with children) who flee from domestic violence often times must quickly adapt to massive life changes. Many find it extremely difficult to secure a new place of residence and/or a job.
  • Institutional release. Most individuals being discharged from prison have few resources to “get back on their feet” and have eroded personal contacts that may provide support. Youths who “age out” of systems such as foster care often find themselves without needed support networks.

Other Factors

Lastly, it should be mentioned that some people find themselves homeless due to unexpected extenuating circumstances:

  • Natural disasters: Many people loose their homes to any variety of natural catastrophes including but not limited to: floods, forest fires, storms, and earthquakes. In 2005 hurricanes Katrina and Rita displaced over 1 million Americans. Tornadoes destroyed entire towns in Tennessee in 2006.
  • Unexpected emergencies: A variety of people find themselves unable to cope with any number of the following sudden tragedies: being laid off from a long-term place of employment; losing their place of residence to an accidental fire; serious bodily injuries; discovery of terminal illnesses or diseases; loss of family member(s). These situations usually result not only in significant monetary expenses, but also in severe psychological and emotional hardships.

Summary

In summary, there are a variety of ways that individuals become homeless and many of them occur simultaneously. Economically speaking, the job, housing, and health care markets in this country pose formidable challenges to people without many resources. Politically speaking, dramatic reductions in federally supported housing over the past 25 years coupled with the current reductions in safety net programs leave poor households susceptible to homelessness. Individually speaking, people who have substance abuse problems, mental health issues, are in violent relationships, or have just been released from an institution dramatically increase their likelihood of experiencing homelessness.

Solutions

Fighting Poverty

If homelessness is inextricably linked to poverty, then without alleviation of the most crippling aspects of poverty, homelessness can never be effectively ended. In particular, three main concerns are the focus of both governmental and non-governmental (NGO) efforts to end homelessness:

More Affordable Housing

Homeless individuals report a lack of affordable housing as the number one reason for becoming homeless.[31] This inadequacy must be remedied in order to get people off the streets and out of shelters. Many non-profit organizations are in operation to serve this need—for example, the National Low Income Housing Coalition—but most lack the funding necessary to create enough housing. Several proposed policy measures are designed to secure such funding, such as the National Housing Trust Fund, but these have not been signed into law.

Livable Wages

Homeless individuals report a lack of adequate pay as the number two reason for becoming homeless.[32] As housing costs have continued to rise and the value of wages has either declined or remained stagnate, the poor are increasingly unable to afford whatever housing is available. Many campaigns promote a living wage that would increase pay to an amount purported to cover living expenses. Since the cost of living (especially that of housing) varies widely from area-to-area there is discrepancy over how much wages should be increased. One campaign, the Universal Living Wage, offers a unique formula that indexes the base wage of a particular locality with its respective cost of housing.

Comprehensive Health Care

Homeless individuals report mental illness as being the number three reason for becoming or staying homeless.[33] Such illnesses are often closely linked with the fourth reason—substance abuse—and therefore it is generally accepted that both of these issues should be treated simultaneously. Although many medical, psychiatric, and counseling services exist to address these needs, it is commonly believed that without the support of reliable and stable housing such treatments remain ineffective. Furthermore, in the absence of a universal health-care plan, many of those in need cannot afford such services. Legislation such as the Brining America Home Act, if enacted, would provide comprehensive and available treatment for all.

Additonal issues

The present difficultly is to address these root issues while at the same time providing for the real and immediate needs of people experiencing homelessness. Many service providing organizations (including governmental departments) feel pulled between the need to provide shelter, food, and health-care, but also ensure that affordable housing and adequate wages are made available. Furthermore, those that provide direct service for the homeless often feel they are forced to “clean-up” the failures and shortcomings of other institutions that are not being held accountable. Most notably, people from this position assert that the discharge policies of both prisons and foster care programs often leave those exiting such institutions with no other option than homelessness. Such topics must be addressed in the fight to end homelessness.

Lastly, many critics of social policy assert that a failure to live responsibly and a lack of determination are what place and keep people in homeless situations. Such thinking is largely accredited with fueling a stigmatization of homelessness. It is not uncommon for Americans to think of homeless individuals as lazy, apathetic, immoral, irresponsible, unintelligent, or worthless. Such people typically believe it is only by choice that people are homeless and therefore they can choose not to be if they so desire. As such, there often exists considerable tension and resentment between those that are housed and those that are not. Many Americans complain about the presence of homeless people, and feel that their requests for money or support (usually via begging) are unjustified. Likewise, many homeless people feel they are ignored, despised, or even hated. Most who experience such treatment report low self-esteem, depression, and anger. It is often thought that such feelings encourage substance abuse and/or exacerbate mental-health issues, which in turn increase the difficultly of functioning within mainstream society (i.e. holding a job, paying bills, maintaining relationships). In this way, the series of events—whether substance abuse/mental illness caused, or resulted from, homelessness—is contested and inconclusive. Any attempt to truly end homelessness will have to deal with these pervasive social stigmas.

Homeless Assistance Programs

Twenty years ago there was not wide-spread homelessness in America. Tonight nearly a million people will be homeless, despite a two billion dollar a year infrastructure designed to deal with the problem. Even in the face of 1990’s economic prosperity, homeless statistics show the number of homeless has remained stubbornly high. Homelessness in America persists in part because many urban areas remain economically depressed. Housing costs are rising and wages remain the same. The most proximate cause of homelessness is poverty. The homeless spend more time in hospitals and jails but are usually reluctant to accept help and transitional housing. The following programs and policies attack the problem of homelessness, provide help to the homeless, and prevent further growth of the homeless population.

Programs

Housing

Many programs that are designed to assist the homeless population have incorporated some type of housing program for their clients. Whether it is a transitional, permanent or even emergency housing program, the assistance is often provided for a very low cost and maybe even free. Volunteers of America is an agency that believes preventing family homelessness is a critical part of their organization. Through Volunteers of America, transitional housing and emergency shelters are available to those who are in desperate need. In the United States each year, there are around 3.5million people who live their lives without shelter or a stable occupation. For 2006 alone, $28.5 billion is being allotted to homeless programs ran through HUD (Housing and Urban Development). $1 billion is being given for Section 8 housing, and $1.4 billion is being used for Homeless Assistance Grants. The two main types of housing programs provided for homeless people are:

  • Transitional
Transitional housing programs are operated with one goal in mind– to help individuals and families obtain permanent housing as quickly as possible. Transitional housing programs assist homeless for a fixed amount of time or until they are able to obtain housing on their own and function successfully in the community, or whichever comes first.
  • Permanent
For a significant number of homeless Americans with mental or physical impairments, often coupled with drug and/or alcohol use issues, long-term homelessness can only be ended by providing permanent housing coupled with intensive supportive services. Permanent housing provides a “base” for people to move out of poverty.
Substance Abuse Prevention

Without supportive services, housing is not often enough to end homelessness. Various agencies, in fact all homeless prevention agencies and programs include substance abuse recovery and prevention programs. Objectives are to provide substance abuse counseling and access to treatment centers.

Self-sufficiency

For a significant number of homeless Americans with mental or physical impairments, often coupled with drug and/or alcohol use issues, long-term homelessness can only be ended by providing permanent housing coupled with intensive supportive services.

Policies

There are several policies dealing with homelessness. In 1980 the government decided to start sending funding to the homeless, but it was not until 1984 that shelters were built to accommodate and feed them. At it was shown though seventy percent required the homeless to attend a religious ceremony and spend only a couple of nights there. In the 1987 McKinney Act the problem with homelessness became known as a huge social problem. Later on, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-110) amended the program explicitly to prohibit states that receive McKinney-Vento funds from segregating homeless students from non-homeless students, except for short periods of time for health and safety emergencies or to provide temporary, special, supplementary services. The Chronic Homelessness Initiative. The Bush Administration has established a national goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10 years, by 2012. The idea of a 10-year plan to end chronic homelessness began as a part of a 10-year plan to end homelessness in general adopted by the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) in 2000. The following year, then-Secretary Martinez announced HUD’s commitment to ending chronic homelessness at the NAEH annual conference. In 2002, as a part of his FY2003 budget, President Bush made “ending chronic homelessness in the next decade a top objective.” The bi-partisan, congressionally-mandated, Millennial Housing Commission, in its Report to Congress in 2002, included ending chronic homelessness in 10 years among its principal recommendations. By 2003, the Interagency Council on Homelessness had been re-engaged12 and charged with pursuing the President’s 10-year plan. The Administration has recently undertaken some collaborative efforts to reach its goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10 years. On October 1, 2003, the Administration announced the award of over $48 million in grants aimed at serving the needs of the chronically homeless through two initiatives. The Ending Chronic Homelessness through Employment and Housing initiative was a collaborative grant offered jointly by HUD and the Department of Labor (DOL). The initiative offered $10 million from HUD and $3.5 million from DOL to help the chronically homeless in five communities gain access to employment and permanent housing. Section 8 is the core housing program that helps etremely low-income families accommodate the gap between their incomes below 30 percent of the median income for each community. The government assists homeless families by awarding grants and vouchers. Vouchers are available to the families who are most needy and they are used to pay for housing found in the private market. Currently there are policy changes in who receives vouchers and there will be a reduction in the amount of vouchers granted to the homesless population.

Target

  • Women
Due to the increase of homeless women with children, there is growing interest in providing shelter and rehabilitaion for this group of individuals. One of the primary sources of funding for women (almost always including children) is TANF-Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Funds are allocated for programs that enforce child-support, education, domestic abuse and housing most importantly.
  • Children
Unaccompanied homeless youth between the ages of 16 and 24 have been estimated to make up as much as 12 percent of the homeless population. Numerous studies of homeless youth have found experiences of physical and sexual abuse, parental drug or alcohol use, childhood homelessness, foster care, and juvenile detention. Mainstream homeless programs fail to meet the unique needs of homeless youth. Ending youth homelessness requires a coordinated effort involving a variety of services including support for youth discharged from foster care and the juvenile justice system, access to education for youth at risk of becoming homeless, and additional research to help advocates better understand the needs of homeless youth.
  • Families

Each homeless client is an adult representing a homeless household. 15 percent of these are family households (that is, the clients have one or more of their own children under age 18 with them). On average, each homeless family household includes 2.2 minor children of the client.

Criminalization and Hate Crimes

Criminalizing Homelessness

Directly related to the above-mentioned stigmatization is a growing trend in the United States towards criminalizing the state of being homeless.[34] Proponents of this approach believe that punitive measures will deter people from “choosing” to be homeless. To this end, cities across the country increasingly outlaw life-sustaining activities—such as sleeping, eating, sitting, and begging—in public spaces, and selectively enforce more neutral laws—such as those prohibiting open containers or loitering—against homeless populations.[35] Violators of such laws typically incur criminal penalties, which result in fines and/or incarceration. Many believe this trend is a manifestation of so-called NIMBYism, or Not In My Back Yard syndrome—an unofficial policy that tolerates social nuisances (like homelessness) as long as they are not visible or intrusive in a particular community.

Hate Crimes Against Homeless People

Many observers believe that stigmatization, criminalization, and NIMBY thinking have produced an atmosphere susceptible to hate crimes against homeless individuals. Recent years have seen a growing number of violent acts committed upon people experiencing homelessness—the rate of such documented crimes in 2005 was 30% higher than of those in 1999.[36] Perhaps most astonishing is that 75% of all perpetrators are under the age of 25. Recent homemade-style films, such as the Bumfights series (started in 2002), give testament to this trend. Although the reasons for such targeted violence are not fully know, it is generally agreed that perpetrators either feel justified in their actions, or are not worried about the possibilities of prosecution, precisely because their victims are homeless.

Responses

Critics of homeless criminalization claim that such measures do nothing to actually solve homelessness and in fact make-matters-worse. Homeless people find it harder to secure employment, housing, or federal benefits with a criminal record, and therefore penalizing the act of being homeless makes exiting such a situation much more difficult. In fact, a recent federal appeals court ruled anti-homeless laws in Los Angeles as unconstitutional, thereby asserting the illegitimacy of targeting legislation against people who do not have a house. Similarly, in response to growing reports of hate crimes, some state governments have proposed the addition of “people experiencing homelessness” to their hate-crimes statutes. Many credit the advocacy work of organizations such as the National Coalition for the Homeless—which publishes annual reports documenting both hate crimes and criminalization trends—for shedding light on these largely neglected issues.

Overview

Observers of modern homelessness often cite some of the following potential causes of homelessness:

  • The movement in the 1960s in state mental health systems to shift towards community-based treatment as opposed to long-term commitment in institutions. Unfortunately, absent local community programs, many patients ended up in the streets.
  • The failure of urban housing projects to provide safe, secure, and affordable housing to the poor.
  • The economic crises and "stagflation" of the 1970s, which caused high unemployment. Unlike European countries, US unemployment insurance does not allow unemployed insurance recipients to obtain job training/education while receiving benefits except under very limited situations.
  • The failure of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to provide effective mental health care and no "Living Wage Job Training" for many veterans, particularly those of the Vietnam War. Many VA critics think veterans are cycled through ineffective 12-step religious indoctrination and dead-end job training programs that actually keeps them on the streets homeless and in poverty.

According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the demand for emergency shelter in 270 U.S. cities increased 13% in 2001 and 25% in 2005. 22 percent of those requesting emergency shelter were turned away. With budgets squeezed dry, cities across the U.S. adopted a closed-door attitude toward the displaced. For example:

Traditionally single men have constituted the overwhelming majority of the homeless. In the 1980s there was a sharp rise in the number of homeless families in certain parts of the United States; notably New York City. Most homeless families consist of an unmarried mother and children. A significant number of homeless people are teenagers and young adults, mostly runaways or street children. A 1960 survey by Temple University of Philadelphia's poor neighborhoods found that 75% of the homeless were over 45 years old, and 87% were white. In 1986, 86% were under age 45, and 87% were minorities.

Advocates for the homeless support public funding for housing and subsidization of rent for low-income individuals and families. Critics of this approach point out that the reasons for homelessness are varied and that aid of this type will not materially improve the quality of life for persons who are homeless due to mental illness or substance abuse. Critics also note that the latter two groups tend to comprise the majority of persistent homeless persons. City Journal, a magazine published by the Manhattan Institute has visited this issue in a number of articles. A November 1997 piece by Heather Mac Donald discussed the Times Square Business Improvement District's efforts to offer counseling and housing to the homeless around Times Square, which were largely rebuffed.

Situations in specific U.S. cities

The city of San Francisco, California, due to its mild climate and its social programs that have provided cash payments for homeless individuals, is often considered the homelessness capital of the United States. The city's homeless population has been estimated at 7,000-10,000 people. It is believed that New York, which is 10 times as large in population, has only 5 times as many homeless individuals [citation needed]. On May 3, 2004 [1], San Francisco officially began an attempt to scale back the scope of its homelessness problem by changing its strategy from cash payments to the so-called "Care Not Cash" plan. At the same time, grassroots organizations within the Bay Area such as the Suitcase Clinic work to provide referrals for housing and employment to the homeless population.

The city of Chicago, Illinois is also noted for its number of homeless people. Visitors to the city often get a taste of big city reality when they see people begging for change on many corners. Over the years, Chicago has gained a reputation as the city with the most homeless people, rivaling Los Angeles and New York, although no statistical data has backed this up. The reputation stems primarily from the subjective number of beggars found on the streets rather than any sort of objective statistical census data.

In Denver, Colorado, Mayor John Hickenlooper has made dealing with the issues that underlie homelessness a top priority on his Mayoral agenda, speaking heavily on the issue during his first "State of the City" address in 2003. While Denver's homeless population is much lower than other major cities, the homeless residents have often suffered when without shelter during Denver's infamously cold winters.[2]

In [3] Indianapolis, Indiana, as many as 2,200 people are homeless on any given night, and as many as 15,000 individuals over the course of a year. Indianapolis is notable among cities of similar size for having only faith-based shelters, such as the century-old [4]Wheeler Mission. In 2001, Mayor Bart Peterson endorsed a 10-year [5]Blueprint to End Homelessness and made it one of his administration's top priorities. The plan's main goals are for more affordable housing units, employment opportunities, and support services. The Blueprint not withstanding, Indianapolis has criminalized aspects of homelessness, such as making panhandling a misdemeanor; and the [6]City-County Council has twice (in April, 2002, and August, 2005) denied the zoning necessary to open a new shelter for homeless women.

Near-Homeless: Disabled non-abusers have little safety net

People who are chronically sick and are neither substance abusers nor mentally impaired, must present themselves to shelters, or group living homes. Regular apartments in public senior or disabled housing may have waiting lists as long as four years and rents that equal one-third of a person's income. Millions of disabled persons in the U.S. who receive a check must live with another person or two or risk sleeping in a car. There is no "per diem" program in America to provide temporary housing. They must pay from a disability check or "sleep in the rough." A disabled person with no close relatives or friends risks dying of exposure if they are unable to find a cot in a shelter. Several advocates have suggested that unused jail cells should be provided free to any citizen, not wanted on an arrest warrant. The key would lock the cell from the inside instead of the outside, of course. "We shelter our criminals but not our unfortunates", or so the advocates are inclined to say.

References

  1. ^ Department of Housing and Urban Development: General Definition of Homeless Individual.
  2. ^ New York Times: Despite City Crackdown....
  3. ^ see Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich
  4. ^ Health and Human Services: Defining Chronic Homelessness.
  5. ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
  6. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless Who is homeless?.
  7. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless Who is homeless?.
  8. ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
  9. ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
  10. ^ Urban Institute: Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve.
  11. ^ Urban Institute: Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve.
  12. ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
  13. ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: How many are homeless? Why?.
  14. ^ Common Dreams: Urban Suffering Grew Under Reagan.
  15. ^ Common Dreams: Urban Suffering Grew Under Reagan.
  16. ^ National Housing Institute: Reagan's Legacy: Homelessness in America.
  17. ^ The New Yorker: Million-Dollar Murray.
  18. ^ Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago: Understanding and addressing the challenges of job loss for low-wage workers.
  19. ^ Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago: Understanding and addressing the challenges of job loss for low-wage workers.
  20. ^ Economic Policy Institute: Minimum Wage (figure 1).
  21. ^ zFacts: Housing Costs Rising Faster than Inflation.
  22. ^ National Low Income Housing Coalition: Facts Sheet.
  23. ^ Center for Housing Policy: Paycheck to Paycheck.
  24. ^ Center for Housing Policy: Paycheck to Paycheck.
  25. ^ Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: President's budget would slash major housing program by 30% by 2009.
  26. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: Why are people homeless?.
  27. ^ U.S. Census Bureau: Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004.
  28. ^ National Coalition on Health Care: Health Insurance Cost.
  29. ^ National Coalition on Health Care: Health Insurance Cost.
  30. ^ United Food and Commercial Workers: Wal-Martization of Health Care.
  31. ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  32. ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  33. ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  34. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  35. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  36. ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homelessness_in_the_United_States&oldid=55756322"