PRAGMATIC ISSUES

 

The Trump administration has unveiled a dramatic shift in national homelessness policy: major cuts to long-term housing in favor of transitional programs tied to work requirements, addiction treatment and behavioral accountability. To the casual observer — and frankly, to many of us exhausted by decades of failure — it sounds like the first rational rethink in years. Why maintain a permanent holding pattern that doesn’t address root causes when you could build a system that actually restores people to independence?

It’s a fair question. A necessary one.

For years, America has clung to a model that often functions like a life raft with no oars. Permanent supportive housing can save lives, yes, but it rarely moves people forward. It does not heal untreated mental illness. It does not address fentanyl addiction that has hijacked entire neighborhoods. It does not rebuild job skills or provide the discipline required to keep someone stable after years on the street.

So when the Trump administration says it wants to push for “self-sufficiency,” people listen. They should. Transitional housing is one of the few models globally that consistently works — if you have the capacity to support it.

And that is precisely the problem. America doesn’t.

A Nation Proposing a System It Has No Facilities For

Transitional housing succeeds when it is built on top of a vast, well-funded and well-staffed network of services. Detox centers. Inpatient rehab. Outpatient therapy. Job-placement programs. Medical clinics. Transportation assistance. Case managers who carry manageable caseloads instead of impossible ones.

These services do not exist at scale in the United States. In some regions, they barely exist at all.

We have cities with one psychiatric bed per 10,000 people.

We have addiction programs with three-month waitlists for the first appointment.

We have case managers responsible for 75 clients each — an impossible ratio by any professional standard.

We have counties where there is not a single detox facility, forcing police and hospitals to act as makeshift treatment hubs.

Transitional housing requires treatment that is available on demand. Not in 90 days. Not after forms get processed. Not after someone hits crisis point. On demand.

Right now, America cannot provide that.

It’s not even close.

Policy Without Infrastructure Is Not Reform. It’s Negligence.

The administration wants the public to believe this is about accountability — that requiring work and recovery steps is a compassionate nudge toward independence. But accountability is a two-way structure. If the federal government demands participation, it must provide access. It must ensure that people have the tools they are being asked to use.

Instead, the government is cutting long-term housing before building the systems that transitional housing depends on. It is like dismantling an airplane mid-flight because the new jet isn’t out of the hangar yet. The ambition looks bold written on the page. In the sky, it is catastrophic.

The Guardian audience does not need a reminder of what happens when Washington announces reforms without building the scaffolding to support them. We have lived through healthcare overhauls, opioid responses, veterans’ services collapses and mental-health crises where lawmakers made the speech but never made the investment. The result is always the same: a system that fails harder than the one it replaced.

What is unfolding now is no different.

The Idea Is Not the Problem — the Capacity Is

There is nothing inherently cruel or misguided about transitional housing. In fact, when done well, it is one of the most humane approaches available. It provides structure, expectations, community and momentum. It treats people as participants in their own recovery rather than passive recipients of assistance. Many people experiencing homelessness want exactly that — purpose, routine, stability and a path forward.

But transitional housing is not simply a bed with a time limit. It is a system. A complex, interconnected network of supports that must be available every single day.

America has none of that.

Instead, we have a nation where:

• People in psychosis cycle through ERs like revolving doors
• Sobering centers are closing, not expanding
• Therapists have six-week backlogs
• Medicated detox is scarce and often unaffordable
• Shelters run out of Narcan
• Job-placement agencies cannot place people without stable mental health
• Transitional programs “graduate” people into nothing because the next step doesn’t exist

This policy is trying to build a house on quicksand — not because the model is flawed, but because the ground beneath it has never been stabilized.

Cutting Before Building: An Old American Trick

The administration is repeating a uniquely American pattern: cut first, build never, blame the outcomes on the vulnerable.

If this government truly wanted transitional housing to succeed, the first announcement would not be about slashing funding for long-term programs. It would be about a nationwide expansion of:

• Treatment beds
• Community clinics
• Mobile crisis teams
• Case-management funding
• Workforce pipelines
• Housing stabilization programs
• Transportation access
• Mental-health staffing

Only after those foundations were in place would it make sense to shift the national model. But this administration wants the headline without the homework.

The result will be predictable. People will lose housing. They will be funneled into programs that cannot accept them because those programs are already at capacity. They will bounce between shelters, hospitals and the street. Then politicians will look straight into a camera and declare the experiment a failure — not because transitional housing doesn’t work, but because they refused to build the infrastructure required to make it work.

A Good Idea Sabotaged by Bad Execution

Transitional housing could transform homelessness in America. It could shorten crisis periods. It could reduce public spending over time. It could restore autonomy to people who have been stuck in survival mode for years. It could be one of the few truly bipartisan solutions in a country allergic to compromise.

Then we need to not only think about but talk about an aging population that has no retirement funds. This one is crucial and we need

But America cannot skip to the finish line. Not when the starting blocks are missing. Not when the track hasn’t been built. Not when the runners have no shoes. This administration isn’t wrong for wanting a transition. It’s wrong for pretending the nation is prepared for one.

A brilliant idea can still collapse under incompetent execution. And unless the federal government invests in the actual systems needed to support this shift, that collapse will be swift, predictable and devastating.

Until then, transitional housing in America is not a plan. It is a wish.