Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The government must do more for older Americans facing homelessness

Man spreading bags and blankets over cardboard boxes

A homeless man spreads his belongings at Cadman Plaza in New York City.

Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images

Murphy is vice president of communications for the National Alliance to End Homelessness and a public voices fellow of The OpEd Project, in partnership with the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative. Stevens is a program and policy analyst for the National Alliance to End Homelessness.

As Donald Trump and President Joe Biden continue their 2024 campaigns, Americans are asking difficult questions about aging: What does it mean when each nominee is over the age of 75? How will the impacts of aging affect their abilities to serve?

Meanwhile, those on the frontlines of America’s homelessness crisis are facing the aging question not from the perspective of the powerful and well-connected, but from the perspective of those with the fewest protections.


Older adults are the fastest growing age demographic of people experiencing homelessness. The latest federal data indicates that over 138,000 adults aged 55 and older were experiencing homelessness on a given night in 2023. Almost half were living on the streets or in locations not meant for human habitation.

As a society, this shift should force us all to reconsider our assumptions about who becomes homeless and why.

Stereotypes and misinformation are pernicious forces working against the efforts to end homelessness. Despite clear evidence that a prolonged nationwide affordable housing crisis is the primary driver of homelessness, many find it easier to embrace oversimplified narratives about addiction and mental illness. Despite proof that the nation’s social safety net insufficiently serves the nation’s most vulnerable, we insist on narratives that personal decisions are the cause of homelessness. Despite our nation’s history of racist housing policies, many deny that racial inequities cause Black and Brown people to disproportionately experience homelessness.

How do we reconcile those stereotypes against a wave of homeless older adults, a population we should honor and protect?

To start, we must come to understand their experiences.

On one hand, there is a cohort of people that is growing old on the streets. They have cycled in and out of homelessness for years, struggling to access consistent employment and housing. Their experiences have prematurely aged them, bringing the onset of chronic diseases that often go untreated to the point of medical crisis.

But there is an equally alarming trend of people who are becoming homeless for the first time in their older years.

Many have been financially insecure and precariously housed throughout their lives. Some have lost a partner or spouse, leaving them without needed income. Others have had their finances ravaged by health care costs, financial scams, predatory lending and the increasingly high costs of meeting their most basic needs. They are all suffering the effects of a frayed social safety net and rental market that is out of reach.

Unfortunately, their public benefits just don’t go far enough today: Although Social Security benefits increased by 8.7 percent in 2022, increases rarely topped 3 percent in the previous 30 years. Similarly, Supplemental Security Income has lagged far behind the cost of living, offering a mere average benefit of $552.29 in 2023. Meanwhile, health care costs force low-income Medicare patients to spend more of their limited income on premiums and other costs.

And, of course, the cost of housing has increased for decades. These costs — particularly crushing since the Covid-19 pandemic — left older adults with fewer affordable units, and less income to pay for rent. A new analysis confirms that the nation is short 7.3 million units of affordable and available housing for the lowest income renters.

Without immediate action, these forces will drive more and more of our elders into a homelessness system that cannot adequately care for them. Fortunately, our leaders can take action.

As a first step, Congress must ensure that all seniors have a place to live, with the supports to age in place. The best investment Congress can make is to expand the Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8 Housing) Program, which currently only serves about one quarter of the people in need of housing assistance. Similarly, investments in rental assistance programs would keep older adults (and other low-income Americans) in their homes.

Likewise, federal leaders must increase their support for housing programs that serve elders. Three important programs include the Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly program, the USDA 515 Rural Rental Housing program, and the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program. These programs were not consistently supported in the most recent federal budget; they will all need robust funding in the future if we intend to stem the flow of elders into homelessness.

Efforts will be even more successful if federal leaders also support programs that address the poverty rate among older adults, as well as programs that provide in-home support like home and community-based services.

Unfortunately, it isn’t enough to just stop the flow. Leaders must also commit the resources to ensure that homeless systems can meet the needs of an aging population. That includes investments in nursing home offerings and long term, respite, and in-home care. Medicaid expansion states are well positioned to fund these efforts. They must also support states in developing or expanding housing-related supports and services for Medicaid-eligible people with disabilities and older adults who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

No matter which presidential candidate wins the 2024 campaign, it is certain that each of them will be comfortably housed. Without urgent action, our nation is unable to make any such guarantee for similarly aged Americans.

Read More

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less
Texas redistricting maps

Two bills have been introduced to Congress that aim to ban mid-decade redistricting on the federal level and contain provisions making an exception for mid-decade redistricting.

Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images

Congress Bill Spotlight: Anti-Rigging Act, Banning Mid-Decade Redistricting As Texas and California Are Attempting

Trump claims Republicans are “entitled” to five more Texas House seats.

Context: in the news

In August, the Republican-controlled Texas state legislature approved a rare “mid-decade” redistricting for U.S. House seats, with President Donald Trump’s encouragement.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independent Madness- or How the Cheshire Cat Can Slay the Gerrymander

The Cheshire Cat (John Tenniel) Devouring the Gerrymander (Elkanah Tisdale )

Independent Madness- or How the Cheshire Cat Can Slay the Gerrymander

America has a long, if erratic, history of expanding its democratic franchise. Over the last two centuries, “representation” grew to embrace former slaves, women, and eighteen-year-olds, while barriers to voting like literacy tests and outright intimidation declined. Except, that is, for one key group, Independents and Third-party voters- half the electorate- who still struggle to gain ballot access and exercise their authentic democratic voice.

Let’s be realistic: most third parties aren't deluding themselves about winning a single-member election, even if they had equal ballot access. “Independents” – that sprawling, 40-percent-strong coalition of diverse policy positions, people, and gripes – are too diffuse to coalesce around a single candidate. So gerrymanderers assume they will reluctantly vote for one of the two main parties. Relegating Independents to mere footnotes in the general election outcome, since they’re also systematically shut out of party primaries, where 9 out of 10 elections are determined.

Keep ReadingShow less