Federal efforts to fight homelessness: yet more erosion of states rights?

A little article in the 26th issue of the Economist weekly newspaper for 2010 covered the first-ever comprehensive U.S. federal plan to prevent and end homelessness. The article mentioned that the number of homeless families has increased by 30% over the past two years, and that there are more homeless Vietnam veterans then there were U.S. soldiers who died in the war itself. These are eye-grabbing stats. Half way into the brief article, it was mentioned, in an off-hand fashion, that dealing with homelessness is normally a matter for states. I’m a strong believer that the strength of America comes from strong states rights. Indeed the Economist itself has cited the effectiveness of having 50 public policy labs trying to get the best solutions to our problems. If that’s true, then why do the feds need to step in? In the case of homelessness, I believe that a federally coordinated approach has a higher chance of success than simply saying, “dealing with homelessness is a states issue.”

The Economist article seems to have been culled from the report itself, which can be downloaded from <http://www.usich.gov/PDF/OpeningDoors_2010_FSPPreventEndHomeless.pdf>. I took a quick peek to assess the level of sincerity of the Administration with respect to not overstepping states rights and responsibilities. Here is an excerpt from BHO’s foreword to the report that supports my belief that his efforts here are on the right track.

...preventing and ending homelessness is not just a Federal issue or responsibility. It also will require the skill and talents of people outside of Washington - where the best ideas are most often found. Tremendous work is going on at the State and local level - where States, local governments, nonprofits, faith-based and community organizations, and the private and philanthropic sectors are responsible for some of the best thinking, innovation, and evidencebased approaches to ending homelessness. These State and local stakeholders must be active partners with the Federal Government, and their work will inform and guide our efforts at the national level.

Another sidebar comes from the much maligned Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Homelessness cannot be solved by a single agency or organization, by a single level of government, or by a single sector. Everyone should be reminded of the intricacies of homelessness as a policy area, and remember that preventing and ending homelessness will take real coordination, collaboration, and a constant exchange of ideas.

Again, I think this approach is reasonable and worthy of support. Finally, if you are the sort that feels homeless people deserve being homeless because they are lazy, consider this statement from the Executive Summary of the report.

Indeed, for many persons living in poverty, the lack of stable housing leads to costly cycling through crisis-driven systems like foster care, emergency rooms, psychiatric hospitals, emergency domestic violence shelters, detox centers, and jails.

No-one can dispute that crisis-driven remedies, while consistent with the Christian principle of helping those less fortunate, are more expensive than preventative measures with the same aim in the long term. Therefore, whatever your political allegiance, Christian infused self-interested reason dictates that the it's cheaper for all of us to support results-based efforts to reduce homelessness.

Technorati Tags:edburns