President Obama's Federal Strategic Plan to End Homelessness (updated)

[ProSense]

June 2010: National Alliance to End Homelessness Responds to the Federal Strategic Plan to End Homelessness

<...>

“We welcome this first-ever, comprehensive federal commitment to end homelessness. The plan has a timeframe and clear, measurable national goals; these will help to drive an organized and committed federal response,” said Nan Roman, President of the National Alliance to End Homelessness.

link

The Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness (PDF)

On June 22, 2010, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) unveiled the nation’s first‐ever comprehensive federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness. Opening Doors: The Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness serves as a roadmap for joint action by the 19 USICH member agencies. The Plan is focused on four key goals:

• Finish the job of ending chronic homelessness in five years;
  
  
• Prevent and end homelessness among Veterans in five years;
  
  
• Prevent and end homelessness for families, youth, and children in ten years; and
  
  
• Set a path to ending all types of homelessness.

<...>

The President's 2012 budget provides $2.5 billion in funding:

Fund the Strategic Plan to End Homelessness. The Budget includes over $2.5 billion in HUD funds to make progress toward the goals of the Federal Strategic Plan to End Homelessness, which was released by the President in June 2010...

Updated to add: Interagency Council on Homelessness

[handmade34]

1. sign me up

when do I start work?? we can do it

[ProSense]

2. Kick!

This is important.

[laconicsax]

3. So the plan is to end homelessness by ending homelessness?

That document is a bit light on details, namely what the specifics of any of the plans are, how they'll be implemented, etc.

[lonestarnot]

4. Is he going to confiscate McMansions and hand them out?

[ProSense]

8. I don't think anyone cares.

He's do whatever he plans to do.

[lonestarnot]

65. Yes people do care damn it!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Straight Story]

6. Simple, require them to purchase a home ;) (nt)

[ProSense]

7. Such compassion for the homeless. n/t

[The Straight Story]

9. I was paraphrasing Obama: Forcing Uninsured to Buy Insurance Is Like Forcing Homeless to Buy Homes

"Obama to DeGeneres on Why He Opposed Individual Mandate: Forcing Uninsured to Buy Insurance Is Like Forcing Homeless to Buy Homes"

http://inquisitionnews.amplify.com/2011/02/03/obama-forcing-uninsured-to-buy-insurance-is-like-forcing-homeless-to-buy-homes/

[ProSense]

10. That obviously isn't the plan. n/t

[The Straight Story]

11. I am still not sure what the plan is. More conferences? Like no one has studied it before?

Having a 'goal' to end it? Let me guess, someone is saying "We will end homelessness within X years by bringing the economy up and studying the problem some more....here, take some money to study this as it is something we have never seen before" ?

I read the PDF - Is there a specific plan? Not one that says "we will do it!" I mean something with details, step by step, on how it is to be done?

[girl gone mad]

12. Why not?

Since he ultimately decided it was a good idea to force the uninsured to buy insurance.

[ProSense]

13. No

working American expects to get health care free, though some will qualify for subsidies and it should be affordable to all.

Do you think the homeless should be forced to buy a home?

[laconicsax]

14. It obviously wasn't the plan with HCR either...

[ProSense]

16. The plan with HCR

was to save lives.

<...>

We still have over 30 million Americans who cannot see a doctor when they are sick. According to this Harvard study, adjusting for gender, race, smoking, weight, and just about everything else that you can think of, in any given year, the uninsured are 40% more likely to die than the insured are. That results in 44,789 additional deaths in America each year. All of which are avoidable.

<...>

Do you think that we should solve this problem? I do.

And the Democratic Party does. Which is why we passed health care reform. And why we brought the wrath of lobbyists and their sewer money down on our heads in the last election – over $65 million by the Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s “American Crossroads” alone.

link

[laconicsax]

20. So was the President lying when he said that he was against mandates?

He campaigned against HCR mandates in the primaries and used the analogy of homelessness to explain why mandates were a bad idea.

[ProSense]

21. Have no idea, but the OP is about homelessness.

I'll be happy to discuss the mandate in a thread about health care.

[laconicsax]

23. What a weak dodge.

Obama campaigned against Clinton's HCR mandate proposal saying, "you could end homelessness by mandating that everyone buy a house." The argument was that the homeless aren't homeless by choose, but because they can't afford to buy a house.

Since he obviously thought that his reasoning against a mandate was invalid, why wouldn't he consider it as a 'solution' to homelessness. The "plan" you posted has zero details, so why not a mandate?

[ProSense]

25. This is still not a thread about health care.

You want to have a long discussion about an off-the-cuff remark that has nothing to do with addressing homelessness.

Do you think that the homeless should be mandated to buy a house?

[laconicsax]

60. You're right, this is a thread about homelessness.

The question of whether or not the President will attempt to "solve" homelessness with a mandate is a valid one. He likened a mandate to buy insurance as a solution to universal health coverage to a mandate to buy a house as a solution to homelessness.

He decided on a mandate to purchase insurance as a solution to universal health coverage, so why wouldn't he consider a mandate to buy a house as a solution to homelessness?

[Ignis]

67. But this sub-thread certainly is about HCR.

Sorry, but you don't get to decide what others will discuss in a thread simply because you're the OP.

[sabrina 1]

17. And then he went ahead and forced them to buy insurance!

At least but Bush you knew he probably had no clue what he was doing or why. But Obama KNOWS what is right, articulates it better than most, and then does the wrong thing. Which is worse than simply being ignorant. Has he ever explained why he back-pedaled on Mandated Insurance?

[ProSense]

19. "At least but Bush you knew he probably had no clue what he was doing or why."

Health care mandate, homelessness, no difference. This is simply bizarre.

[sabrina 1]

22. It was Obama who made the connection between homelessness

and HC. 'Mandating insurance would be like telling the homeless to buy a house'.

Why did he say that when he clearly didn't mean it?

[ProSense]

26. What's your point?

You want him to mandate that the homeless buy a home because the health care law contains a mandate?

[girl gone mad]

28. It makes the same amount of sense.

He can "solve" homelessness the same way he "solved" lack of access to health care.

[sabrina 1]

33. No, but I'd like him to make sure that IF the homeless find

homes, they don't freeze in the winter or die of heat in the summer. However, slashing LIHEAP is not the way to do that, is it?

And you didn't answer the question, which is very relevant now to every promise made. When someone does a complete turnaround on several issues, such as Offshore drilling, mandated insurance etc. it would be very, very foolish to assume that the next time they make a promise they will keep it. Especially if that person is a politician. It's called being a good citizen. Holding politicians accountable, not ignoring wrongdoing simply because they belong to OUR party, right?

[Autumn]

50. Well he said a LOT of things

he clearly didn't mean.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

15. Nancy Reagan had a plan to end homelessness

When she saw a homeless person she would say "Just get a house".

[ProSense]

18. You're right

this is a stupid idea. Why on earth did the President take up this RW issue?

President Obama announces initiative to end homelessness.

WTF?

[sabrina 1]

24. You don't get it, do you? Once someone loses the trust of the people

who supported them, who worked hard to get them elected, they can't regain it by making more promises after breaking so many already.

Have you counted the number of broken promises? The complete turnarounds on so many important issues?

How do you accomplish this ability to keep ignoring the broken promises and then act surprised when people who once supported him, no longer trust him when he makes more promises? We all remember going to the WH site and seeing all those exciting promises, and then we watched them be broken over and over again. So, there's another promise on the WH official website. Now it gets a yawn. Wake everyone up when it happens.

I don't think HE cares since the people he has lost are people the WH is not interested in. They have said so. They intend to go after DIFFERENT voters they say. So, if they don't want the voters who put them in power anymore, why do you care so much?

[ProSense]

27. I get it, you don't support the President

Now what does that have to do with the issue? You are making your case for why you don't support the President.

[sabrina 1]

37. Exactly as I thought, you don't get it.

'you don't support the president'. What does that mean?? Are citizens supposed to blindly support a politician, in your view, no matter what they do? I am a Democrat, NOT a republican who supported Bush no matter what he did. We castigated them for their blind support. Sorry, I don't do blind support.

Here's what I support. First the Constitution, the country, the people, the principles and the platform of the Democratic party that in my view best represent the first three. But when a politician, especially a democrat, isn't acting on behalf of the people who elected him/her, of course I do not support that. That would mean being a Republican. Blind support, no criticism, attack anyone who points out when the politician strays from the principles of the Democratic Party.

Frankly I find your attack 'you don't support the president' to be troubling not to mention irrational. No citizen is required, that I know of, to give blind support to any politician. I suppose I could do as you just did, and say to you 'I get it, you support the politician above all other considerations'. Just FYI, that is what your words seem to imply. You can correct me if I'm wrong.

[ProSense]

45. "'you don't support the president'. What does that mean??" It means,

in your own words: "Once someone loses the trust of the people who supported them, who worked hard to get them elected, they can't regain it by making more promises after breaking so many already."

"Are citizens supposed to blindly support a politician, in your view, no matter what they do?"

Who said that? Support isn't synonymous with disagreement.

[sabrina 1]

47. I'm puzzled. So, are you saying that no matter how

many promises on important progressive issues, a politician breaks, citizens should continue to support that person? Is a person, because that is all politicians are, they are not gods or anything, more important than issues? That's what you seem to be saying. The PERSON is what is important. Am I misunderstanding you?

A significant number of people who helped get this president elected are extremely disappointed in how he has handled the job. That's not how they wanted to feel at this stage of the game, is it? But unless they are to turn a blind eye towards some of the issues he has backtracked on, his habit of bending over backwards to please Republicans (I sure don't give a damn about Republicans, why does he?) there is no way those who thought they were voting to change the direction of this country, cannot be anything else other than disappointed and even outraged.

[ProSense]

49. What?

"So, are you saying that no matter how many promises on important progressive issues, a politician breaks, citizens should continue to support that person?"

No you're saying that. This is an OP about an initiative to end homelessness that's turned into a snark fest. Obviously, perspective factors into it.

[sabrina 1]

53. It's quite clear what I said and did not say.

So, I will leave it up to those following the thread to figure that out.

If the President is interested in ending homelessness, that is a good thing. I think everyone acknowledges that, after all he's a Democrat, we should expect nothing less from him.

What you are refusing to get is that he fooled us on many other issues that we know are issues Democrats should and do support.

Now, we are no longer 'believers'. We need to see action before getting all excited about nice words no matter how eloquently spoken.

I don't know why you are having such a hard time with this, it's pretty simple really. He's a politiician, no different we now know than any other politician. In the real world, we have learned, that means do not trust words, watch what actions are taken. Simple really.

[ProSense]

55. No,

"What you are refusing to get is that he fooled us on many other issues that we know are issues Democrats should and do support.

Now, we are no longer 'believers'. We need to see action before getting all excited about nice words no matter how eloquently spoken."

I'm not "refusing to get" to get anything. You believe "he fooled" you. That's your opinion.

Like I said, perspective factors into it.

[sabrina 1]

59. What was your perspective on Offshore Drilling?

I can supply quotes from this president as a candidate on that topic, aimed at John McCain, quotes that were exactly what was expected of a Democrat. But, as we all know, he completely betrayed those principles right before the biggest ever disaster in the Gulf, a disaster that Democrats tried to prevent for over 30 years, and had succeeded in doing, until THIS president decided that things were 'different' now, and we no longer needed to worry about offshore drilling.

Your perspective on that was what, exactly?

[ProSense]

62. "I can supply quotes from this president as a candidate on that topic" My

perspective is that I'm against drilling, big oil sucks and all the tax breaks should end. I'm not interested in what Candidate Obama said in light of what he has done.

Your perspective may differ.

Now, the thread is about the new initiative to end homelessness. Drilling and everything else you're holding against the President aren't relevant.

[Hannah Bell]

29. Bush also had a 10-year plan to end homelessness. You can see how well it worked.

[ProSense]

30. President Obama is not Bush.

Do you hope this plan succeeds?

[Hannah Bell]

32. it's not supposed to succeed. there's no fucking mystery about how to end homelessness.

[ProSense]

35. Who said it's mysterious?

"it's not supposed to succeed."

How did you come by that assessment?

[EOTE]

31. Awesome. They should call it the "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps initiative".

Maybe they can shame people into not being homeless. Perhaps billboards stating "Hey homeless people, why don't you try NOT being homeless for a change?" Then if they manage to lift themselves out of homelessness and merely into poverty, they can look forward to spending their first winter in years at home slowly freezing to death. Bravo.

[ProSense]

34. Where is anything like that remotely implied?

Is there a problem with focusing on the actual specifics of the program?

Do you think this is a good initiative?

[JuniperLea]

36. Positive action from Obama doesn't fit the meme of some...

Doesn't matter what he does, really. Pathetically.

[EOTE]

39. And Obama had so much positive action for the poor so far.

You know, like increasing their taxes while cutting the taxes of the top 1% of income earners. And like halving the money going toward heating assistance. Yeah, for some reason the meme exists that Obama just doesn't give a damn about the poor. I can't for the life of me figure out why that is.

[blindpig]

51. That's not action, that's words.

The administration talks a good game but the actions or lack thereof tell a very different story.

Still, the drowning will grab any reed.

[EOTE]

38. I think it's likely to be complete bullshit like all his other talk of assisting the poor.

When the Obama administration leaks something that's damaging to the poor community, the consensus around here is to wait for the official word. The word will come out, it will be verified to be true, and then a segment of the DU will bend over backward trying to make excuses for it. Whenever a program to benefit the poor and needy is floated about, people will get super excited about it, then a few weeks later, it will turn out the program isn't "pragmatic" and "sacrifices need to be made". Of course, the tax cuts for the top 1% of income earners need to be paid for somehow.

[Bobbie Jo]

40. Oh bullshit. I owe my new job to this initiative.

I was just hired to implement an outreach program for homeless youth.

Honestly, I don't know why I bother with this place anymore. Have at it.

[EOTE]

41. And how is that proof the program is working?

A number of people now have jobs due to the stimulus program, that doesn't mean it's not woefully inadequate. If you're going to suggest the fact that you have a job is proof that the program is working and sufficient, does that mean when poor people start freezing to death we can use that as a definitive sign that cutting LIHEAP was a stupid fucking idea and also murderous?

[Bobbie Jo]

43. I'll let you know after it starts next month

Would you prefer monthly or quarterly reports?

Meanwhile.....please continue on with the rage du jour. I'm sure by the time I find my way back, there will be a new fixation.

Productive as it is.....

[EOTE]

44. Yep, I'll just take this administration's word for it.

Because they've truly shown over the past 2 years how much they care for the middle and lower classes.

[Bobbie Jo]

46. Yeah...that's what I thought.

Carry on.

[LiberalAndProud]

52. Please do.

Seriously, I would love to hear to specifics of the program. Outreach is a nice concept, but not definitively descriptive of your role or the ultimate outcome.

Best of luck!

[Bobbie Jo]

57. Thank you.

....and I will.

I work for a youth shelter, and this is a new initiative. I'm anxious to get started.

[sufrommich]

42. I'll file the reactions to this OP under "some DUers are now

officially addicted to bashing Obama".

[sabrina 1]

54. Here's how I would file it:

DUers used to take everything the president said at face value and trusted him implicitly to follow through on what he promised.

DUers have learned a hard lesson. Never trust the word of any politician, watch what they do.

Filed under 'growing up politically'.

[JuniperLea]

58. Was it growing up politically...

When all the outrage over cuts to SS spilled over last week? And those of us who said we would wait until the budget actually came out to become outraged... and we had our heads handed to us anyway... but we were right all along? Is that growing up?

[TheKentuckian]

61. Yup, the outrage may be the cause of the omission from the budget

and the absence from the budget does not say that cuts are off the table.

In my opinion the outrage meter still hasn't been raised to the proper level. No politician should breathe a word about cuts for generations and generations for fear of being crucified while being tarred and feathered.

[JuniperLea]

64. Oh please...

They didn't rewrite the massive budget... and no one said the cuts are off the table.

I'd walk back that "tarred and feathered" comment if I were you... just saying.

[TheKentuckian]

66. Walk it back for what? That is a minimum level of fear a politician should have about cutting Social

Security.

It would seem the walk back would be more in the area of crucifixion but I'm comfortable with that too.

[JuniperLea]

56. Officially...

Without regard to the issues, the facts... no regard whatsoever.

How the %@*# did we get to this sorry state?

[Scurrilous]

48. Thanks.

:thumbsup:

[lunatica]

63. What's the homeless situation in Socialist countries?

Everyone acts as if problems are all brand spanking new and no one has fixed them ever. Jesus! The USA is so egocentric! If we don't do it, it simply hasn't ever been done.