Sweeping up the homeless doesn't actually solve homelessness


Instead, governments should prioritize safe, affordable, dignified, and permanent housing for all.

homeless camp

Image: Pete Linforth/Pixabay

by Farrah Hassen
      OtherWords


This summer, the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass ruling made it much easier for local governments to criminalize homelessness. Since then, cities and states across the country have stepped up their harassment of people for the “crime” of not having a place to live.

Penalizing homelessness has increasingly taken the form of crackdowns on encampments — also known as “sweeps,” which have received bipartisan support. California Governor Gavin Newsom has ordered state agencies to ramp up encampment sweeps, while President-elect Donald Trump has also pledged to ban encampments and move people to “tent cities” far from public view.

Evidence shows that these sweeps are harmful and unproductive — and not to mention dehumanizing.

Housing justice advocates caution that sweeps disrupt peoples’ lives by severing their ties to case workers, medical care, and other vital services. Many unhoused people also have their personal documents and other critical belongings seized or tossed, which makes it even harder to find housing and work.

According to a ProPublica investigation, authorities in multiple cities have confiscated basic survival items like tents and blankets, as well as medical supplies like CPAP machines and insulin. Other people lost items like phones and tools that impacted their ability to work.

Teresa Stratton from Portland told ProPublica that her husband’s ashes were even taken in a sweep. “I wonder where he is,” she said. “I hope he’s not in the dump.”

Over the summer, the city of Sacramento, California forcefully evicted 48 residents — mostly women over 55 with disabilities — from a self-governed encampment known as Camp Resolution. The camp was located at a vacant lot and had been authorized by the city, which also owned the trailers where residents lived.

Sweeps, like punitive fines and arrests, don’t address the root of the problem — they just trap people in cycles of poverty and homelessness.

One of the residents who’d been at the hospital during the sweep was assured that her belongings would be kept safe. However, she told me she lost everything she’d worked so hard to acquire, including her car.

The loss of her home and community of two years, along with her possessions, was already traumatizing. But now, like most of the camp residents, she was forced back onto the streets — even though the city had promised not to sweep the lot until every resident had been placed in permanent housing.

Aside from being inhumane, the seizure of personal belongings raises serious constitutional questions — especially since sweeps often take place with little to no warning and authorities often fail to properly store belongings. Six unhoused New Yorkers recently sued the city on Fourth Amendment grounds, citing these practices.

Sweeps, like punitive fines and arrests, don’t address the root of the problem — they just trap people in cycles of poverty and homelessness. Encampments can pose challenges to local communities, but their prevalence stems from our nation’s failure to ensure the fundamental human right to housing.

People experiencing homelessness are often derided as an “eyesore” and blamed for their plight. However, government policies have allowed housing, a basic necessity for survival, to become commodified and controlled by corporations and billionaire investors for profit.

Officials justify sweeps for safety and sanitation reasons, but in the end they harm and displace people who have nowhere else to go.

Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage has remained stagnant at $7.25 since 2009 and rent is now unaffordable for half of all tenants. Alongside eroding social safety nets, these policies have resulted in a housing affordability crisis that’s left at least 653,000 people without housing nationwide.

While shelters can help some people move indoors temporarily, they aren’t a real housing solution, either.

Human rights groups report that shelters often don’t meet adequate standards of housing or accommodate people with disabilities. Many treat people like they’re incarcerated by imposing curfews and other restrictions, such as not allowing pets. Safety and privacy at shelters are also growing concerns.

Officials justify sweeps for safety and sanitation reasons, but in the end they harm and displace people who have nowhere else to go. Instead, governments should prioritize safe, affordable, dignified, and permanent housing for all, coupled with supportive services.

Anything else is sweeping the problem under the rug.


About the author:
Farrah Hassen, J.D., is a writer, policy analyst, and adjunct professor in the Department of Political Science at Cal Poly Pomona. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.




Viewpoint |
Bring back normalization with Cuba; the benefits will be well worth it


President Trump’s decision to roll back our opening with Cuba was disastrous. As he takes office again, he should reconsider.


Photo illustration: Brigitte Werner/Pixabay

by Lissa Weinmann
      OtherWords


Ten years ago, the U.S. and Cuba announced the start of normalization between our two countries. Americans and Cubans alike could see a bit of light through a crack in the wall of U.S. restrictions that, for six decades, have blocked normal interaction between close neighbors.

The brief opening was largely ceremonial — President Trump rolled much of it back in his first term. And only Congress can truly end the world’s longest running embargo.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio, President-elect Trump’s pick for Secretary of State, embraces the same old Cold War playbook on the issue: punish Cuba, stoke chaos and civil unrest, and hope the government collapses. As far back as JFK, U.S. officials have been trapped in this irrational family feud that empowers hardliners in both governments while holding citizens here and there hostage to a bureaucratic status quo.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. Two years of limited opening had a positive impact and was supported by a majority of Cuban Americans. Buoyed by Cuban government reforms and cash from families in the U.S., the island’s private sector boomed. Internet access increased and social media exploded with honest voices. American tourists flocked to the country.

Then Trump emphatically rolled this progress back — he even added Cuba to the list of “state sponsors of terrorism,” despite a complete lack of evidence.

Today, after a brief glimmer of hope, Cubans are suffering. Hardliners have stopped the economic reform process. Confusion plagues new leaders transitioning from the Castros’ dominance. The pandemic gutted tourism, while storms and flooding ravaged crops.

The results have been predictable: An exodus from Cuba has surpassed all migration since the imposition of the embargo in 1962. At least half a million have migrated since the end of Trump’s first term — and more are on the way. The island has lost around 10 percent of its population in recent years, a staggering total.

We need to break our addiction to this big government policy that displaces people and blocks the rest of us from engaging with our neighbors. Ending the embargo would also open doors for Cuban reformers, dissidents, human rights activists, and religious leaders alike by removing the Cuban government’s excuse for its failures.

A bipartisan majority in Congress could potentially back a full lifting of the embargo. Gulf Coast states who took the big hit in the 60s when they lost a top trading partner in Cuba could be especially delighted to renew those relations.

”In a scenario of unrestricted trade, the aggregate of food and medical exports alone could amount to $1.6 billion with 20,000 associated U.S. jobs,” former International Trade Commission Chair Paula Stern PhD found in a 2000 study presented to Congress. Those numbers could be much higher today.

There would be other benefits as well.

Companies like Roswell Park in Buffalo, who had to jump through hoops to bring a groundbreaking Cuban-developed lung cancer vaccine to people in the United States, and other health care companies would finally be able to economically partner with world-class Cuban scientists on new medical advances.

For Trump, the next steps should be obvious: Avoid bloodshed. Ease the pain. Light the way to a new era in U.S.-Cuba relations.


About the author:
Lissa Weinmann is a board member of Windham World Affairs Council. She helped found and direct Americans for Humanitarian Trade with Cuba, a coalition that helped ease the embargo’s restrictions on food sales to Cuba, and directed the National Summit on Cuba. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.




Viewpoint |
Think you are exempt, you're not - If they can take my rights, Republicans will take yours, too


The GOP’s attacks on trans people are setting a stage for a broader assault on rights we all enjoy.

Illustration: Gerd Altmann/Pixabay

by Robin S.C. Griffin
      OtherWords


Most days in my depraved, transsexual lifestyle start the same: I wake up at 5:15 a.m. to pet my cat, have some coffee, and journal a little before I get out the door.

I bike down the street to a gym where I get to see a few friends and sweat a little before putting in my time at the office. After work, I do a few chores and relax for a while. Half the time I cook dinner, half the time my wife takes care of it.

Like you, I like to listen to music, play a game, or watch a show unless I make plans with friends. I try to write in my free time and then get to bed on time to do it all again.

The simple fact is that most trans people’s lives are pretty normal — we’re human after all.

It’s a simple life, but it’s full of joy and meaning for me. I’m not Christian anymore, but it feels like I’ve managed to find the kind of life King Solomon talked about in Ecclesiastes 5:12: “Sleep is sweet to the one who works.”

The simple fact is that most trans people’s lives are pretty normal — we’re human after all. So why is attacking us the number one priority of the incoming Republican-controlled government?

Republicans recently decided to welcome Delaware Rep.-elect Sarah McBride, who will be the first openly trans member of Congress, by introducing a resolution that would ban trans women from using restrooms at the Capitol. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has spoken in support of the measure.

Days later, Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas introduced the “Defining Male and Female Act of 2024,” which seeks to prohibit the federal government from recognizing trans people and lays the groundwork for further discrimination.

There’s a lot going wrong in our world. So why are Republicans chasing down trans people?

These cruelties come on top of a wave of anti-trans laws in statehouses across the country, a wave which continues to build in GOP-controlled states.

All this in a country where most families can’t afford surprise expenses of a few hundred dollars, where people call an Uber to the emergency room so they aren’t bankrupted by the ambulance bill, and where many workers would have to toil for decades to earn what their CEO makes in a day.

Not to mention 2024 is on track to be the hottest year in recorded human history, leaving a wake of climate-driven disasters across the country.

There’s a lot going wrong in our world. So why are Republicans chasing down trans people?

Attacks on trans people are broadly unpopular outside Trump’s base, and we make up a small fraction of the population. Policies that make our lives better and safer — or even just leave us alone — come at essentially no cost to everyone else.

The fact of the matter is that Republicans are warming up for their bigger goals. If they can wipe away two decades of progress for trans people in a few short months, they’ll have a playbook for overturning gay marriage by the end of the year.

If they can convince you to look the other way while they invade the medical history of trans people, maybe you won’t notice when they use the same authority to let insurance companies deny you coverage for a preexisting health condition.

They don’t care how normal my life is — or yours. The point is to crush anyone they don’t like and to reward their wealthy backers. I can’t say where they’ll stop, but I share Solomon’s cynicism from the back half of Ecclesiastes 5:12: “But the satiation of a wealthy man will not permit him to sleep.”


About the author:
Robin S.C. Griffin is a development associate at the Institute for Policy Studies. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.




3 Spartans deliver double-digits in 14-point win over Bago at State Farm basketball tournament

NORMAL - The St. Joseph-Ogden's boys basketball team snagged their first win at the annual State Farm Holiday Classic on Thursday, handing Winnebago a 56-42 loss. The Spartans (5-3) manufactured a 32-23 lead after the first two periods, stretching their advantage in the second half by 14 points in the remaining 20 seconds.

St. Joseph-Ogden's Coy Taylor
Coy Taylor goes up for a shot during the Spartans' Toyota of Danville Classic game against Charleston. Taylor was instrumental in SJO's win over Winnebago. The senior went 4-for-4 in the first quarter to give his team a three-point lead over the Indians.
Photo: Sentinel/Clark Brooks
Coy Taylor led SJO's scoring effort with 19 points. Tanner Siems added another 14 points and Collin Thomey chipped in 10. The trio, frequent visitors to the free throw line, made 12 of their 17 attempts. Taylor went 6-for-7.

The Spartans advance to the Small School Boys bracket quarterfinals to face Tri-Valley at 4:30 PM on Friday. The Trojans advanced after knocking off Rock Falls, 58-40.



SJO girls fall in opener at State Farm Holiday Classic, Erickson leads scoring effort

NORMAL - Two minutes and 41 seconds into the first quarter of the St. Joseph-Ogden girls' first game at the State Farm Holiday Classic, the Spartans took a one-point lead over Bishop-McNamara (9-4). For the next 46 seconds, the Spartans enjoyed their only advantage in the 41-29 loss to the Lady Irish in their tournament opener at Normal Community High School.

Katie Erickson looks for an open teammate during SJO's Country Financial Shootout game. The senior led the Spartan scoring effort in their first game at the State Farm basketball tournament.

Photo: Sentinel/Clark Brooks

Katie Erickson led the hardwood effort with three treys for nine points. Kayla Osterbur finished with seven points, Timera Blackburn-Kelley contributed four points, and Addison Brooks was held to just three points for SJO.

Down 24-12 at the half, the Spartans pulled it together, matching McNamara point for point with 17 second-half points. Despite a much improved defensive effort, the first-half drought proved too much.

Moving to the consolation bracket, Erickson & Company have a day to regroup. The Spartans return to tournament action tomorrow at Bloomington High School to face the loser between Eureka and Normal U-High at 2 PM. The Lady Irish advance to face the winner from that game at 9 PM at BHS.

Bishop McNamara duo Jaide Burse and Trinity Davis combined for 16 points, scoring eight each. Leigha Brown rounded out the top three contributors with six points to advance to the quarterfinals.




More Sentinel Stories



Photo Galleries


January 4, 2025
42 Photos
December 14, 2024
39 Photos
December 7, 2024
27 Photos