Trump pushing for crackdown on homeless camps in California: report

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/460742-trump-pushing-for-crackdown-on-homeless-camps-in-california-report

 

Look, I am a Los Angeles resident. I have lived here since 2008, and I have seen homelessness get out of control. I have been in the same neighborhood on the Westside for 9 years, and it's a neighborhood that up until 4 years ago I never saw a homeless encampment in. Now I have a guy in a van living across the street from my condo. A nice enough guy, keeps to himself, but nevertheless a guy in a van. And we don't have it bad -- not even 2 miles away, there is an active thieves' market for stolen bikes and you name it under the 405 overpass. There's excrement in the street, needles in the gutter, prostitution and disease. And I live in a safe, "good" neighborhood!

 

You don't have to tell me that what is going on here in California in relation to homelessness is messed up (I would use stronger language but #familyfriendlyVJ) and unsustainable. But running roughshod over the Tenth Amendment is NOT the way to do this. I would have the same reaction to a Democratic administration doing this. We have certain powers that are reserved to the states, and amongst those are the "police powers" -- the health, welfare and safety stuff. This is 100% police powers at issue here, reserved to the state of California. California needs to fix this. It can get help from the federal government to do so. What we do not need is the feds coming in and doing it for us directly. I won't reach for the sobriquet "death camps" that my non-fiance has called the proposed fed camps for homeless, but really. REALLY. I listen to and read stories about the camps at the border right now, and it gives me pause to consider what a Homeless Trumpcamp would look like.  

 

I'm asking my friends on both sides of the aisle (and all the other sides that feed into the aisles): please consider what something like this does for setting a precedent. Even if you think the outcome would be great, consider what this does to the Constitution. There are ways to get moving on homelessness that do not involve the feds coming into a state and taking over operations that are reserved to the states. Imagine Obama sending in the feds to start running the lunch programs DIRECTLY in Tennessee, literally setting the menus (not just nutritional requirements to conform with) and saying nope, no pizza ever for you, Timmy, only salads, we have an obesity epidemic, you know. 

 

Thank you for listening to maven's TED Talk on the Tenth Amendment. I will be leaving work early today to go home and start drinking hard, gonna pour one out for the Tenth, yo.

[Dashinka 24,494]

In this, I agree with you, this is a state and local issue, let those politicos handle this mess, no need for the feds to get involved, or the rest of the country to pay for it.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

In this, I agree with you, this is a state and local issue, let those politicos handle this mess, no need for the feds to get involved, or the rest of the country to pay for it.

I would agree with you about it being a state and local matter up until Harder to started asking for Federal money to fix the homeless crisis. 

 

Didn't LA and LA County just pass H and HHH which was to help with this matter?

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

why dont we house them in the detention centers for illegals. AC, 3 squares, Xbox, legal representation. 

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

10 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I would agree with you about it being a state and local matter up until Harder to started asking for Federal money to fix the homeless crisis. 

 

Didn't LA and LA County just pass H and HHH which was to help with this matter?

Yes, and the money is not being handled well. I voted for the tax increases, and the waste is ridiculous. Some guidance from the federal government would be useful, public/private partnerships would be useful. 

 

I work in commercial real estate law. I know up close and personal how restrictive some of the more spurious environmental controls are on new builds -- often, controls are implemented only to serve wealthy individuals and interests. We need relaxing here and there on an ad hoc basis in order to construct safe and plentiful housing for the homeless for those who can be housed independently. We also need to think hard about how to help those who cannot -- addicts need help, the mentally ill need assistance. What we have isn't working, and it needs some bold ideas. The feds coming in and wresting away local control to set up camps isn't one of them.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Seems to me like CA has pretty much taxed themselves into this pickle.  I agree that the feds need to stay out of it.  I think CA lawmakers need to solve this on their own, with their own tax dollars.  Not federal monies.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

1 minute ago, ALFKAD said:

Seems to me like CA has pretty much taxed themselves into this pickle.  I agree that the feds need to stay out of it.  I think CA lawmakers need to solve this on their own, with their own tax dollars.  Not federal monies.

What would you say about the feds (HUD, HHS, Interior) working with/providing guidance to California? Help can come in ways that aren't only a handout.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

17 minutes ago, elmcitymaven said:

Yes, and the money is not being handled well. I voted for the tax increases, and the waste is ridiculous. Some guidance from the federal government would be useful, public/private partnerships would be useful. 

 

I work in commercial real estate law. I know up close and personal how restrictive some of the more spurious environmental controls are on new builds -- often, controls are implemented only to serve wealthy individuals and interests. We need relaxing here and there on an ad hoc basis in order to construct safe and plentiful housing for the homeless for those who can be housed independently. We also need to think hard about how to help those who cannot -- addicts need help, the mentally ill need assistance. What we have isn't working, and it needs some bold ideas. The feds coming in and wresting away local control to set up camps isn't one of them.

I didn't vote for them because I voted absentee ballot for NC back in 2016. But even then I knew it was a farce at best because these are the same people that brought the crazy train to insolvency.  

 

LA and CA don't want any new bold ideas or oversight. Because that means that they can't give their buddies the contracts 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, elmcitymaven said:

What would you say about the feds (HUD, HHS, Interior) working with/providing guidance to California? Help can come in ways that aren't only a handout.

In the form of advice or recommendations?  I doubt any of your liberal leaders would listen.  They seem to think they know best.  Have illustrated this for decades.  One of the main reasons I would never live in CA again.

 

But boy, they sure do love blocking Trump every chance they get, eh?  They should just move all the homeless to the sanctuary cities they love to talk about...

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

3 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I didn't vote for them because I voted absentee ballot for NC back in 2016. But even then I knew it was a farce at best because these are the same people that brought the crazy train to insolvency.  

 

LA and CA don't want any new bold ideas or oversight. Because that means that they can't give their buddies the contracts 

 

Just now, ALFKAD said:

In the form of advice or recommendations?  I doubt any of your liberal leaders would listen.  They seem to think they know best.  Have illustrated this for decades.  One of the main reasons I would never live in CA again.

 

But boy, they sure do love blocking Trump every chance they get, eh?  They should just move all the homeless to the sanctuary cities they love to talk about...

You know, it doesn't do much good to completely dismiss us out here. I am a pinko red diaper baby, and I am open to hearing new ideas. I am not alone. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 minutes ago, elmcitymaven said:

 

You know, it doesn't do much good to completely dismiss us out here. I am a pinko red diaper baby, and I am open to hearing new ideas. I am not alone. 

Leave the state.  Go somewhere these problems are not so prominent.  There is a HUGE country outside of LA.  I left, never looked back, never want to go back (though I DO have to visit San Fran a coupla times next month.  Yech!).

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

26 minutes ago, elmcitymaven said:

What would you say about the feds (HUD, HHS, Interior) working with/providing guidance to California? Help can come in ways that aren't only a handout.

I can go with that IF they used some of that 20+ billion in surplus funds they have stashed away in those two bank accounts. 

 

Not to mention the cities need to actually start adhering to the full text of the Idaho agreement which means letting them sleep their overnight but then making them move on in the morning time. Just like what Culver City and Pasadena does. When you head West on Colorado through Pasadena, you don't start seeing tents until you hit Eagle Rock. Which is part of Los Angeles 

Edited September 10, 2019 by Cyberfx1024

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

16 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

Leave the state.  Go somewhere these problems are not so prominent.  There is a HUGE country outside of LA.  I left, never looked back, never want to go back (though I DO have to visit San Fran a coupla times next month.  Yech!).

Some of us like it here!  Also my work and my boy's work (when he gets back to it -- he was laid off last year and has been recuperating from a motorcycle accident as well) are both very California-centric. The five year plan takes us out of LA and either up to northern Cali, or to the PNW. But it will take some work and planning. I get itchy feet after I've been somewhere for 12 years, and I've been in the LA area for 11, so... it would be sooner if I could. I need to build up expertise in my area of law, then I'm good to go. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 hours ago, elmcitymaven said:

Some of us like it here!  Also my work and my boy's work (when he gets back to it -- he was laid off last year and has been recuperating from a motorcycle accident as well) are both very California-centric. The five year plan takes us out of LA and either up to northern Cali, or to the PNW. But it will take some work and planning. I get itchy feet after I've been somewhere for 12 years, and I've been in the LA area for 11, so... it would be sooner if I could. I need to build up expertise in my area of law, then I'm good to go. 

Yeah, gotta move when it serves you best.  And you're not me, so it may not be like this for you, but I have never regretted leaving (wasn't my choice to leave at the time,  but now I see if for the blessing it was) and will never live there again.  Santa Monica, LA, Pasadena, San Fran... you can have them.

 

Once you move up and out, your $$$ will go a lot farther, too. (Just for Steele, that last line was!)

[Steeleballz 7,550]

38 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

Yeah, gotta move when it serves you best.  And you're not me, so it may not be like this for you, but I have never regretted leaving (wasn't my choice to leave at the time,  but now I see if for the blessing it was) and will never live there again.  Santa Monica, LA, Pasadena, San Fran... you can have them.

 

Once you move up and out, your $$$ will go a lot farther, too. (Just for Steele, that last line was!)

 

    Me? You know I don't like to waste, but one of the things I don't mind paying more for is location. Makes all the difference in the world.