For years, Oregon’s leaders have sought to address the crisis of homelessness with a compassionate approach. At least since the pandemic, funds — largely contributed by the federal government — have helped cities, including Bend and Redmond, vastly build out shelter capacity and expand wraparound services and treatment, all in an effort to ultimately move more people into permanent housing. But of course, this is an uphill battle, because at the root of much of the increase in homelessness is a lack of affordable housing. As a Pew Charitable Trust report put it in 2023, “homelessness rises when rents rise.” So if a wraparound service has no place to refer its clients who are seeking low-income housing, it becomes difficult to move the needle.
People in Central Oregon, where housing costs have skyrocketed in the past decade, know this intimately. State and local governments have made numerous efforts to foster the construction of affordable housing wherever possible, believing that having a safe, affordable place to live can lower health care costs, decrease likelihood of addiction and so much more.
But that butts up against a new executive order from the Trump administration, whose actions this week seem to fly in the face of best practice and research into addressing homelessness in the United States. The order, titled “Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets,” aims to put people with mental illness into institutions as a way of addressing the homelessness crisis. Contending that most people experiencing homelessness are addicted to drugs, have a mental illness or both, the executive order states, “Shifting homeless individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment through the appropriate use of civil commitment will restore public order.” OK, sure. We don’t support the let’s “lock them up…” theory but if this is the new federal program… who’s paying to ensure success?
The order directs federal agencies to take money away from “housing first” programs, along with harm-reduction programs that aid those experiencing addiction, and instead, put money toward local governments that make criminals of people sleeping outside or using drugs. It’s not yet clear how states — the entities that manage institutions like the Oregon State Hospital ¬— might benefit from these orders.
Oregon is already grappling with these very real issues and aiming to do it in a humane way.
For example, during this year’s legislative session, Oregon lawmakers passed a bill that makes it easier to force someone into mental health treatment.
“…additional treatment capacity is critical to support Oregonians in need of mental health and substance use disorder treatment and has committed increased funding to support additional treatment capacity,” reads the language of HB 2005, which Gov. Tina Kotek signed into law last week. Passing a bill like that took several tries among various legislative sessions, and came with a long list of caveats that aim to protect people’s autonomy and avoid the mass forced institutionalization we saw in the middle of the last century. It was less of a blunt instrument and more of a carefully crafted compromise.
If the President’s executive order is truly aimed at addressing this issue, then it might be a helpful tool to bring more funds into a system of behavioral health and addiction services that has consistently been in need of more support. Even with last year’s legislative effort that effectively re-criminalized drug use, mandated treatment for those arrested for drug crimes and funded more treatment beds, more money is needed for treatment. Another bill that expanded behavioral health programs, HB 2059, was also signed by the Governor this month, but that doesn’t mean everything is hunky-dory. As the National Alliance on Mental Illness points out, “This executive order comes at a time when significant cuts are being made to mental health services nationwide.”
Sure, it would be wonderful to see more funds coming into states like Oregon, and cities with high housing costs like Bend, to actually address the root causes of homelessness – lack of affordable housing among them. But right now, with other helpful programs, including harm reduction and housing first, on the chopping block, and Medicaid cuts looming from the passage of Congress’ “One Big Beautiful Bill,” and $1 billion in grants cut for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the promise of funds to “end crime and disorder” all just seem like a Trumpian way of robbing Peter and then not paying Paul.
This article appears in Source Weekly July 31, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Oregon homeless response has been ineffective, wasteful, and abusing the funding with little to show. Rinse, repeat, and throw more money at ineffective programs. In many instances it’s the addiction that leads to the homeless problems. Not the other way around, as was stated. Perhaps upsetting the funding will drive meaningful discussion and new ideas to address the problem. More of the same hasn’t worked to date.
I agree with Abscam. Homelessness is not primarily caused by a lack of affordable housing. While affordable housing is a legitimate concern for many working families, the majority of the individuals living on our streets, in forests like China Hat, and on public lands are struggling with untreated mental illness and addiction. Simply providing them with housing will not address the root causes or ensure they can maintain stable living conditions.
Those who truly want and need affordable housing are more likely to achieve that goal with some effort, especially given the number of support programs already available in our community. I see wonderful success stories all the time reported on our local news stations. We should not conflate their needs with those experiencing chronic homelessness due to behavioral health and addiction issues.
Unfortunately, the low-barrier housing initiatives promoted by our city council often worsen the situation. Allowing people to live in squalor on public lands and on our streets, often with animals they can’t care for, is neither compassionate nor humane. And it’s costing taxpayers a fortune and creating dangerous situations in our community.
Many view the homelessness services sector as altruistic, with mobile showers and water bottles offered as acts of kindness. But in reality, these services often create a revolving door system that fails to address the underlying issues or offer real upward mobility.
Its important to recognize that homelessness has become a multibillion dollar industry in the U.S.. It generates over $21 billion annually and supports more than 160,000 jobs. A truly compassionate and effective strategy must focus on longterm behavioral health and addiction recovery with wrap around social services, not just housing.