In the past year, California Governor Gavin Newsom has been increasingly vocal in his criticism of how cities and counties in his state are handling the homelessness crisis.
His recent outburst during a press conference, where he announced May revisions to his proposed state budget, has drawn significant attention.
According to RedState, activist Kevin Dalton described Newsom's tirade as a "completely unhinged rant wondering how politicians get reelected that leave homeless people out on the street to die." Newsom, who in 2008 as Mayor of San Francisco, ambitiously declared a 10-year plan to eradicate homelessness in the city, now governs a state that is home to half of the nation's homeless population.
Despite his repeated assertions that "fixing" homelessness is his top priority, the problem continues to escalate, as evidenced by the increasing number of homeless people, deaths among the homeless, violent crimes committed by the homeless, and fires started by the homeless. Furthermore, the state has been unable to account for $24 billion in homeless funding.
Newsom's approach to the homelessness crisis has been likened to that of a "Jim Cramer" of homelessness, suggesting that he is ill-equipped to handle the issue. Yet, Newsom appears to believe that he can solve the problem through sheer force of will, as evidenced by his impassioned speeches and public displays of frustration. However, this approach has proven ineffective in the real world.
In his recent press conference, Newsom implored county and city leaders across the state to step aside and let him handle the issue. He expressed his frustration, stating, "As a taxpayer, not just Governor. I'm not interested in funding failure anymore. I'm not. I won't. Time to do your job. People are dying on their watch, dying on their watch. I don't know -- how do people get reelected? Look at these encampments. They're a disgrace. They've been there years and years and years and years. I've heard that same rhetoric for years. People are dying. Kids are being born."
Newsom's comments reveal a startling lack of self-awareness, given that he has held the position of either Governor or Lieutenant Governor since 2012. He seems to be oblivious to the fact that these encampments have existed for years under his watch, and that elected officials rely on state funding to address issues such as homelessness, crime and justice, and addiction.
In the same press conference, Newsom announced that his budget, which is short by the same amount the state spent on healthcare for illegal aliens while neglecting the homeless, will not fund the initiatives contained in Proposition 36. This public safety initiative, which voters approved in November, requires criminals with addiction problems to receive treatment as part of their sentencing. Given that addiction is a major contributor to homelessness, court-mandated treatment could be a valuable tool in addressing the crisis. Yet, Newsom has chosen not to fund it.
Newsom's frustration was palpable as he recounted a personal encounter with a homeless individual who died shortly after their meeting. He said, "I met a young man, literally was out there doing project homeless connect, reaching out near the 405 freeway. I found out the next day he was dead. In this -- the name of compassion. I could have helped them that night. I felt like a fraud. I felt like I let him down."
Newsom's critics argue that his failure to effectively address the homelessness crisis, despite his repeated promises to do so, indeed makes him a fraud. His outburst at the press conference, during which he used strong language to express his frustration, only served to underscore this point.
Newsom's critics argue that his approach to the homelessness crisis is misguided and ineffective. They contend that true compassion involves providing assistance to those who are unable to care for themselves, rather than allowing them to suffer on the streets. This perspective is reminiscent of the conservative belief in individual responsibility and limited government intervention. However, in this case, it is clear that government intervention is necessary to address the homelessness crisis.
Newsom's failure to effectively address the homelessness crisis, despite his repeated promises to do so, raises serious questions about his leadership and his ability to effectively govern. His critics argue that his approach to the issue is misguided and ineffective, and that his outbursts and public displays of frustration only serve to underscore his inability to effectively address the problem.
Despite his impassioned speeches and public displays of frustration, the homelessness crisis in California continues to escalate, and Newsom's promises to solve the problem remain unfulfilled.
Login