“This used to be bad policy that emerged semi-organically at the local level. Everyone would say, oh there's a lot of visible homelessness here, rather than addressing the underlying causes of homelessness, let’s criminalize it.”
Now that it's a more overtly right-wing effort, will local Democrats like Wiener and Mandelman who've pushed similar policies reconsider, or no?
BTW, the point of criminalizing poverty is to entrench inequality.
> Now that it's a more overtly right-wing effort, will local Democrats like Wiener and Mandelman who've pushed similar policies reconsider
i have better odds of winning the lottery. (i don't buy lotto tickets)
Funny bc I just posted this below someone else's boost of this article:
"Another clue suggesting widespread coordination on this strategy: A rightwing member of the SF Board of Supervisors has been pushing this exact line - hyper-aggressive policing and an end to permanent housing funds"
We both made the same general association, but consider the more cynical take: Mandelman has already made his choice
@scott and among other things, criminalizing homelessness won't raise much by way of fines (but will increase misery) - but the upside is if they imprison people the private prison contingent will have more guests (paid for by you and me) - is that the motivation? to extract more money from taxpayers?
A community of people who are fighting against car dominance in San Francisco and beyond and also have various other interests.
"Since its founding, Cicero has churned out model legislation and research papers calling into question the need for permanent housing, instead advocating for criminalization of people sleeping outdoors. (In addition to influencing policy, Cicero uses its 501c3 status to act as a fiscal sponsor for Substack writer Bari Weiss’s unaccredited university, University of Austin.)"
Nice company SF Sup. Rafael Mandelman finds himself in; his homelessness platform is indistinguishable from this.