Gov. Gavin Newsom issues executive order for removal of homeless encampments in California
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, buoyed by a recent US Supreme Court decision, issued an executive order Thursday calling on state officials to begin taking down homeless encampments.
Cynically, I take this to mean that he's given up on the possibility of a 2024 presidential run.
While this will undoubtedly be popular with Californians who don't give a shit about homeless people and just don't want to have to see it, it would almost certainly have led to some blowback in the middle of a Democratic presidential campaign, so it's safe to assume that the decision was waiting in the wings so to speak - ready to be implemented, but only when it wouldn't cause problems for his federal aspirations.
even more cynically: i don't think this will matter.
consider biden: we have 50+ years of documentation including videos showing his vote against gay marriage; advocating against lgbtq in federal service; siding with pro-segregationists; and attacking feminist supporters in every event (esp anita hill); yet today's voters still call him the most progressive presidential candidate we've ever had despite other candidates having a MUCH more flawless records.
so unless you've suffered or are close to someone who have suffered at the hands of the candidate, you're going to ignore all the bad shit he's done and condemn those who point out his reprehensibility. that means that newsom won't have to worry about anything unless the homeless and poor somehow became a sizeable voting block.
Nothing I disagree with there. Unfortunately.
And along those same lines, it calls to mind a thing that's concerned me to some degree all along, and just that much more so since Biden dropped out.
The painfully obvious DNC/democrat establishment strategy for decades at least has been to try to maintain the flow of corporate soft money by running candidates who aren't going to upset the status quo, which is to say are not actually leftists, and to count on just being arguably somewhat less bad than the Republican to be enough to win, or at least not lose embarrassingly badly.
And as far as that goes, Trump provides them with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, since it would be nearly impossible for the DNC/dem establishment to put up a candidate who's worse, and more to the point, the threat that Trump and his plutocratic backers and christofascist coattail-riders pose is so blatant snd severe that an awful lot of overt malfeasance on the part of the dem candidate - much more than has already been the case - would be overlooked.
I see it in myself. Even as aware as I am and as much as I loathe the establishment scum and their cynical and entirely self-serving manipulation, Trump and his handlers and followers are such an existential threat that I see no reasonable choice other than to vote for whoever ends up running against him.
But I hate it, and the more I think about it, the more I hate it, and it makes me concerned not just for who that might be (it could be much worse than Harris) but of what they might do after the election, presuming they win. We could even potentially end up trading the threat of one autocracy for the reality of another, just arguably somewhat less bad, one.
The bipartisan lock is firm. We need a Parliament and MANY parties.
Honestly this won't have any impact. If enough people actually cared about the homeless for it to have a negative impact on electibility then the homelessness issues would already be solved.
Idk, feels like another one of his centrist moves cause he wants to look good for presidential run. Screw what the state wants gotta be able to appeal to republicans :(
I don't think this would have much of an effect. Even your average democrat these days doesn't give a fuck about homeless people. Even if they do it's probably very low on there list of concerns, even progressives would probably care more about his Gaza stance than this. No one can imagine they could be homeless until they are.
Gavin you need to provide them some place to go!
Agree 100%. Look up the “housing first model” and donate to non profits that do this:
Far too many states handle homelessness very poorly.
They got the hottest desert or the ocean. Reminds me, if you're homeless and were not homeless before, where did you live?
The most plausible answer is that you were a regular person living a regular life as a regular citizen. But hey, can't pay to live somewhere? Fuck you! You're out right?
And that folks is who these homeless people are....it's you all in the future.
This country would have shanty towns like Africa if we allowed people to build and keep them. We dont even give then that dignity here
In North Korea, homeless are swept into some dark corner, away from liberal eyes. Wait a year or two before the abhorrent conditions literally kill them. Throw the body in a furnace and make room for the next group of people who couldn’t afford another $200/mo rent increase.
Or maybe they got illegally towed and lost their job. Illegally evicted to turn the home into an AirBnB. Maybe their boss Illegally withheld pay.
The collapse of an imperial core is experienced by seeing homeless people die one by one until you’re one of them.
Ah just kidding it’s actually the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the entirety of recorded human history this happens in.
It is a feature, not a bug.
They are offering them homes right?.... right??
He's really trying to get the VP nod, huh?
He's trying but having POTUS and VP both from California? Conservatives would lose their minds.
That's not stopping him from trying.
I'm not a conservative but for a national figurehead, stacking them up based on one state is poor strategy.
He can't be Harris's VP. Two people from the same state can run on the same ticket but electors for the electorial college can't vote for two people from the same state as the elector. That means that no elector from California could vote for a Harris/Newsom ticket. Democrats cannot win in the electorial college without California.
That is not going to happen
Here it is, everyone: the most progressive state in the union.
Homelessness is very often an addiction problem. They should be directing these individuals toward treatment.
I believe homelessness is very often a LACK OF A HOUSE PROBLEM! We can argue about statistics and prevention all we want but lumping addiction with homelessness just distracts from the problem and vilifies. Homeless people need a home.... if they also have an addiction, they are an addict and need treatment, that treatment isn't going to be effective without a home.
Not voting for a party that normalises this, and homelessness.
NO HOME NO VOTE
Your vote can go right here then 🗑️
I know damn well you aren’t implying that a Republican has a solution to this problem.
I like how people act like not voting is some mega message to people. Like guys, most of the population already doesn’t vote. You’re not sending any message when you don’t vote. You want to move California left of this guy? Go vote for the most left candidate. Vote in the primaries for the most left candidate. You get where you want to go with solutions to the problems you have by voting, not by not voting.
Apparently the piece of shit was a Republican all along.
Nnxbnxbxxx
They talk nicer, but in reality
Personal possessions, including medicines and necessary medical devices, are routinely thrown away. It's a quotidian event that Leilani Farha, the United Nations special rapporteur on adequate housing, described as a "cruelty" that she hasn't seen in other impoverished corners of the world.
"'The idea that a government would deny people those services ... when they have nowhere else to go suggests a kind of cruelty that is unsurpassed," Farha told Business Insider. "It's an attempt to erase people. Worse than erase — I can only use the word annihilate. It is a denial of someone's humanity.'"
...
Under international human rights law, governments are required "to apply the maximum of available resources to upgrading informal settlements" like slums, shanty towns, and homeless encampments.
"The struggle in the south is to legalize and regularize encampments," she said. "Here, the struggle is simply to be able to create an encampment. In the south, there's sort of a blind eye that has turned. Once an informal settlement is created, it's established. Whereas here, they can't create them."
In the Bay Area, Farha talked to many people who were temporarily living in an encampment before they were ordered to move by city officials during a "tent sweep."
"It's damaging because they always have to move," she says. "They're treated like nonentities. Sometimes they say (belongings are) put in storage, but more often they'll dump everyone's possessions into one Dumpster. It's horrible. It's not dignified. The people have nowhere to go. It's illogical. It's tragic."
Nice words don't change the fact that we're violating international law and abusing vulnerable people, they actually make it a lot worse because a lot more people would recognize what we're doing and be horrified if moderate Dems didn't do this propagandizing bullshit.
The article noticeably omits any mention of housing waiting to receive these people, leading me to believe there is none.
I remember when he was mayor. He was a walking scandal who used women and treated his job like it was owed to him. He rode the success of Willie Brown and grew up with money so he has no idea what hard work actually is. The worst part is that he's the old money part of California that votes blue but is waiting for their Sinema Moment to sell out to a big enough paycheck. He's always been a secret conservative.
He's one of Pelosi's acolytes, so yeah, just another right-wing democrat.
Correct...
Gavin Newsom’s keeping it all in the family
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2019/01/gavin-newsoms-keeping-it-all-in-the-family/
