Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Seniors Face Unfair Rents and Homelessness. They Need Rent Control

Opinion

Seniors Face Unfair Rents and Homelessness. They Need Rent Control

Large group of houses shape made from US currency.

Getty images

From mobile home parks in Maine to modest apartments in California, seniors desperately need rent control to protect themselves against skyrocketing rents charged by predatory landlords. Our grandparents, parents, aunts, and uncles, many of whom live on fixed incomes, face serious, life-altering consequences if politicians don’t protect them. They need rent control now.

One of the most alarming housing stories over the years is that more and more seniors in the United States have been pushed into homelessness due to unfair, excessive rents. In fact, the U.S. Government Accountability Office noted in 2025 that “about 20 percent of those experiencing homelessness (or one in five) were older adults, ages 55 and up.”


In California, CalMatters reported that seniors had become the fastest-growing population of the homeless. Not only that, the number of seniors who sought homelessness services increased by a whopping 84 percent – more than any other age group. In 2024, Capitol Weekly described that trend as a “silent crisis,” noting that 25 percent of California’s homeless population is aged 55 or older.

It’s totally unacceptable, especially if our politicians don’t help our seniors.

In 2025, LAist reported that Los Angeles, the largest city in California, saw a shocking spike in homelessness among seniors of 36 percent between 2022 and 2024. And The Guardian found that more than 3,000 of the 11,500 people who died while unhoused in L.A. County between 2014 and 2023 were 60 and older.

It’s outrageous, but not surprising: Eviction Lab, the prestigious think tank at Princeton University, found that unaffordable rents are linked to higher mortality rates. Seniors on fixed incomes are especially vulnerable.

There have also been numerous reports over the years about the plight of seniors who live in mobile home parks in Maine and other states. Once an affordable way to live for fixed-income seniors, corporate landlords have bought up mobile home parks and suddenly charged outrageous rent hikes – or what Manufactured Housing Action, a nationwide advocacy group, termed as “rent-gouging grandma.”

Over and over again, the real estate industry sees our grandparents and parents not as human beings, but merely as vehicles for their outsized profits.

But, with all this bad news, there is an urgent solution: rent control. It is the only tool that will quickly rein in predatory landlords and stabilize rents for our older loved ones.

In fact, rent control, going back to World War I, has been widely used in America to protect our most vulnerable residents. With seniors facing life-threatening homelessness, politicians should quickly establish rent regulations again.

At the same time, elected leaders must go further and implement a sensible, multi-pronged strategy for the housing affordability and homelessness crises called the “3 Ps”: protect tenants through rent control and other protections; preserve existing affordable housing, not demolish it to make way for expensive luxury housing; and produce new affordable and homeless housing using such concepts as adaptive reuse and prefabricated housing.

It’s an approach that emphasizes helping the people who need it most: the poor, middle, and working-class, which includes millions of seniors.

Seniors need help now, not later. Their lives are literally on the line. They can’t wait any longer for politicians to do the right thing. And if the politicians don’t act, that will speak volumes about their lack of concern for older Americans. Our grandparents and parents deserve much more respect.

Patrick Range McDonald is the award-winning advocacy journalist for Housing Is A Human Right, the housing advocacy division of AIDS Healthcare Foundation.


Read More

Congress at sunset

America's national debt is projected to reach $45 trillion by 2029. Explore Congress's constitutional "Power of the Purse," federal spending, appropriations, and the policies contributing to rising deficits.

Bill Clark/Getty Images

Congress Must Enforce the Power of the Purse as Debt Soars

“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law” (Appropriations Clause, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, U.S. Constitution). Congress’s “Power of the Purse” means the President cannot spend money or authorize expenditures unless Congress has passed a specific law funding it (Congress.gov).

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the total federal debt held by Americans is on track to hit $40 trillion by the end of 2026. Currently, every resident in America carries a $122,642 share of this debt.

Keep ReadingShow less
​A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes.

A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes in the Houch neighborhood, after being displaced for weeks by war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia that has displaced 1.2 million Lebanese, on April 28, 2026, in Tyre, Lebanon.

Scott Peterson / Getty Images

Please Don't Feed the Warmongers

I was recently catching up with an old friend from my Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps days who told me about some young sailors he knew in Bahrain tasked with intercepting hostile drones. Critically, as highly disciplined professionals, they have become extraordinarily good at it. My friend and I, with over twenty years of active duty service as military officers between us, discussed the extent to which their competence and vigilance are keeping them, and other Americans deployed in the area, alive, all while their leadership in Washington treats war with an increasingly terrifying callousness.

As brave servicemembers risk their lives on the front lines, Trump brags about how much money he’s making as president. It is true that for those invested in the types of industries that thrive during armed conflict, this war in Iran is a windfall. Trump himself invested between $9.7 million and $24.3 million in arms manufacturers and Pentagon contractors in 2025. Why would he end the war?

Keep ReadingShow less
A father voting, with his young son standing by him, watching him.

Citizens cast their vote during the 2026 presidential runoff in Colombia on June 21, 2026 in Barranquilla, Colombia. Ivan Cepeda, candidate for the Pacto Historico party and Abelardo de la Espriella, candidate for the Salvación Nacional, face in a tight runoff to rule Colombia from 2026 to 2030.

Leonardo Castañeda/Getty Images

Colombia’s Election Matters—Especially to Ecuador and the U.S.

In a closely fought election on June 21, conservative outsider Abelardo De La Espriella prevailed over Iván Cepeda, an ally of current leftist president, Gustavo Petro. Central to the electorate’s choice were distinct policy proposals to fight criminality and the drug cartels, who control large swaths of Colombian territory. The policies president-elect De La Espriella will bring to the fight against these issues matter greatly, not only to Colombia, but to neighboring Ecuador and the United States.

Earlier in March, Ecuadorian President Noboa, desperate to gain traction in his own drug war, announced a partnership with the U.S. to conduct joint operations against drug cartels. The partnership quickly went awry. A New York Times investigation of the first strike indicates that what the joint militaries considered a drug camp was in fact a dairy farm, with no drug connection. Then, on March 17, Colombia accused Ecuador of bombing within its territory with U.S. involvement. These incidents resulted in U.S. lawmakers calling for a suspension of joint operations on May 13. Very quickly, the U.S. partnership has reopened the scars of the Plan Colombia era of the early 2000s, where an overly militaristic approach to the drug war funded by the U.S. resulted in human rights abuses and false positives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult grandson teaching his grandfather to use laptop, close-up.

Social Security faces a funding crisis by 2032 that could cut retirement benefits by 22%. Learn what's driving the shortfall and how it could be fixed.

Westend61 / Getty Images

Social Security Faces a 2032 Crisis with Deep Benefit Cuts Ahead

A financial tsunami of giant proportions is heading our way. And it is due to arrive in about six years. Policymakers have known about this tsunami for some time, but in June, we found out the Big Wave is taller than anyone knew.

That’s when the Social Security Trustees released their latest report on the financial health of the popular Social Security retirement program. According to the trustees’ report, the outlook is not good – Social Security’s solvency is in danger. By 2032, the Social Security fund will fall short by about $2.5 trillion of the money needed to pay the 52 million American retirees their full retirement benefits. Previously, it was thought that the tsunami would make landfall in 2034, but the finances are deteriorating faster than expected. If no presidential and congressional intervention is mounted, retirees will take about a 22 percent haircut, meaning any senior beneficiary who was receiving $3000 per month will see that chopped to about $2300 per month, a loss of about $8000 per year.

Keep ReadingShow less