Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

California Needs More Homeless Shelters, Especially in the Face of Climate-Driven Disasters

California Needs More Homeless Shelters, Especially in the Face of Climate-Driven Disasters

Firefighters hosing down a structure during a local wildfire in Southern California.

Getty Images//Studio One-One

As a native Californian and a passionate homeless advocate, my heart shattered when I witnessed the devasting wildfires that ravaged the state I call home. For those already vulnerable, facing homelessness or housing insecurity, the wildfires are a cruel reminder of how fragile stability can be. The Los Angeles fires have forced evacuations of more than 200,000 people, displacing families and individuals from the only place they consider home. Shelters quickly filled to capacity, and resources that were already strained became nearly nonexistent. The lack of a solid foundation can turn a natural disaster into an inescapable cycle of hardship and despair.

California's homelessness crisis is multifaceted and severely impacts individuals and families across the state. With 181,399 unhoused individuals, of whom 68% are unsheltered, it is clear that the current resources available are grossly inadequate. This situation not only showcases a systemic failure to provide necessary support but also amplifies the vulnerability of these individuals, especially in the face of natural disasters such as the wildfires.


The nearly 71,131 emergency and transitional beds fall significantly short of meeting the needs of those experiencing homelessness. These facilities are often overwhelmed, lacking the capacity to accommodate the surge of individuals who may seek refuge during emergencies. Additionally, many of these shelters may not be equipped with the resources, infrastructure, or care needed for individuals with unique requirements, such as those dealing with mental health issues, substance use disorders, or families with children. This shortfall can lead to dire outcomes for those affected, as they have nowhere safe to go during times of crisis.

Moreover, the availability of beds in jails— 83,000 across 125 facilities —further emphasizes a troubling trend in California's approach to homelessness. Instead of providing supportive housing and resources that could help stabilize individuals, the state often resorts to criminalizing those in vulnerable situations. This approach not only fails to address the root causes of homelessness but also exacerbates the problem, pushing individuals deeper into a cycle of poverty, trauma, and incarceration.

The focus on punitive measures instead of preventive solutions not only strains the judicial system but also neglects the comprehensive care that the unhoused need. Investing in mental health services, addiction recovery programs, job training, and accessible housing solutions is imperative for reversing these harmful trends.

Furthermore, the interplay between homelessness and natural disasters cannot be overlooked. As climate change continues contributing to increasing frequency and intensity of wildfires, floods, and other disasters, the unhoused population is disproportionately affected. Many do not have access to transportation and may be unable to evacuate in a timely manner, putting their lives at greater risk.

In a state as affluent and innovative as California, it is unacceptable that so many of our residents live without a secure roof over their heads, especially during times of crisis. We owe it to ourselves and each other to foster resilience not just in our communities but within the very systems that must protect the most vulnerable among us. One where safety, stability, and dignity are not privileges, but rights for every individual, regardless of their circumstances.

During the worst of the fires, the sight of crows flying to safety served as a poignant metaphor, highlighting a community yearning for a way out. While political rivalry creates inaction, the outpouring of support and compassion from neighbors demonstrates an unwavering resolve to reclaim their streets from despair. Community groups, volunteers, and local organizations are stepping in where the city falls short, providing food, shelter, and a listening ear to those in need.

In this moment of crisis, the people of California are becoming the forerunners of change by putting community first. As crows take flight to escape danger, so too do community members rise to the challenge, pushing for solutions that foster dignity and hope. The way Californians put each other first was a breathtaking scene and a beautiful reminder that when government fails to protect its most vulnerable, it is the love for our community that can pave the way toward lasting change.

Asha Wasuge is a fierce professional advocate for the unhoused population and a Public Voices Fellow in Domestic Violence and Economic Security with the OpEd Project.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Political outrage is rising—but dismissing the other side’s anger deepens division. Learn why taking outrage seriously can bridge America’s partisan divide.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger

Over the last several weeks, the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital to crack down on crime. While those on the right have long been aghast by rioting and disorder in our cities, pressing for greater military intervention to curtail it, progressive residents of D.C. have tirelessly protested the recent militarization of the city.

This recent flashpoint is a microcosm of the reciprocal outrage at the heart of contemporary American public life. From social media posts to street protests to everyday conversations about "the other side," we're witnessing unprecedented levels of political outrage. And as polarization has increased, we’ve stopped even considering the other political party’s concerns, responding instead with amusement and delight. Schadenfreude, or pleasure at someone else’s pain, is now more common than solidarity or empathy across party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less