### The Housing Crisis and the Shift in Government Policy
Rachelle Ellison’s story encapsulates the struggles faced by countless individuals experiencing homelessness. For 17 years, she navigated the difficult life of being chronically homeless in Washington, DC, often finding herself entrenched in cycles of incarceration and hospitalization. Her fortunes began to change when she secured an apartment in 2008 through a non-profit organization that provided her with a rental voucher, alongside mental health treatment and supportive services. Ellison remarked, “Once I got the housing stabilization and the foundation underneath my feet, I was able to work on myself.” This turning point in her life highlighted the positive impact that stable housing can have on individuals with mental health struggles and substance abuse issues.
Ellison’s experience is emblematic of the Housing First model, an approach that strives to place chronically homeless individuals into permanent housing without preconditions such as sobriety or treatment compliance. Following their placement in housing, participants can then access the necessary support services for issues like drug dependence or mental health. For more than two decades, Housing First has seen bipartisan support as an effective means of addressing homelessness. However, the approach faced significant threats under the Trump administration, which sought to reduce funding for Housing First and pivot towards policies demanding sobriety or work requirements.
This shift in federal policy is drastic and unprecedented, reversing trends established since the George W. Bush administration, which had embraced the idea of providing housing combined with supportive services as the primary strategy to combat homelessness. Critics of the Trump administration’s proposed changes—most notably researchers and advocates—express grave concern over their long-term effects on people struggling with housing insecurity.
Ellison successfully entered treatment for her substance abuse and mental health disorders once she was in stable housing. Having battled significant challenges, including a history of childhood abuse, she found renewed hope and determination after securing a roof over her head. “I had to fail quite a few times, and then finally I got tired, and I had a roof over my head,” she stated. Following her recovery, she became a passionate advocate for homelessness, proclaiming that “Housing First actually saved my life.”
The Housing First initiative gained traction in the early 2000s as it transitioned away from previous treatment-first models, which mandated sobriety before individuals could access housing. Several studies have demonstrated that Housing First programs yield greater stability and lower long-term costs for society by reducing the burden on emergency services. Notably, the Department of Veterans Affairs recorded a 55% decrease in homelessness among veterans since adopting the model in 2009.
However, a recent executive order by the Trump administration has sought to dismantle the principles of Housing First. By mandating that federal agencies cease funding for programs that do not enforce treatment as a precondition for housing, the administration aims to revert to ineffective transitional housing models of the 1990s. Experts such as Dennis Culhane from the University of Pennsylvania caution that this regression will lead to further evictions among those needing extensive support.
Moreover, the Trump administration’s proposals include civil commitment laws aimed at forcibly removing individuals who cannot care for themselves or pose a risk to public safety. Critics fear this shift will drive vulnerable populations into institutional settings, which are already plagued by a shortage of mental health resources. With funding cuts to Medicaid and mental health services, the execution of these plans could prove disastrous.
Lara Pukatch, chief advocacy officer at Miriam’s Kitchen, a nonprofit serving the homeless population in DC, criticized the executive order for its failure to address the root causes of homelessness and mental health needs. “What we’re seeing is a total lack of investment in solutions we do know work,” she remarked.
Homelessness in America is deeply rooted in decades of policy failures, including the de-institutionalization movement initiated in the 1950s. A combination of insufficient housing resources and an underfunded mental health care system culminated in what is now a crisis marked by mass street homelessness. Evidence from the 1980s and 1990s indicated that the treatment-first models led to noncompliance and recurrent homelessness, driving departments to reconsider effective strategies.
In the years following the establishment of the Housing First approach during George W. Bush’s administration, there was a concerted effort, continued under Obama, to recognize chronic homelessness as a systemic issue. Despite initial support, the Trump administration’s framing of Housing First as a failed initiative reflects a broader political shift aiming to reshape homelessness policy entirely.
Currently, proponents of Housing First argue that the crux of the issue lies not within the approach itself but in the lack of adequate funding and resources. While both Republican-led states and conservative think tanks push to redirect funds toward requirement-based programs, advocates maintain that funding gaps severely limit the potential for Recovery-focused housing solutions.
Ellison voiced her concerns about the detrimental impact the new executive order would have on homeless individuals, predicting that it would exacerbate the situation, leading to increased rates of homelessness. “Housing is
