No Matter Who Is At Fault, A Tent Is Not A Home.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters Condemns Trump Administration’s Attack on Homelessness Programs
By Charles Jackson
Congresswoman Maxine Waters has delivered a forceful rebuke of the Trump administration over its latest confrontation with Los Angeles and the agencies attempting to address one of the region’s most persistent humanitarian problems: homelessness.
Waters, who represents California’s 43rd Congressional District and serves as the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, praised a federal court decision temporarily preventing the administration from suspending the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority from federal homelessness grant programs.
At stake is approximately $241 million in federal funding, along with additional near-term funding supporting programs that provide services to more than 11,000 people.
For Waters, however, the dispute goes well beyond dollars.
Los Angeles County continues to face a staggering homelessness crisis, with
nearly 73,000 people experiencing homelessness on any given night. They are individuals and families already living at society’s most vulnerable edge. Removing services designed to help them, Waters argues, does nothing to solve homelessness. It risks making an already desperate situation considerably worse.
Her criticism of the administration is unmistakable.
Rather than joining Los Angeles officials in confronting the shortage of affordable housing and the complicated causes of homelessness, Waters contends that the federal government has chosen confrontation. Suspending funding would threaten services without providing a meaningful alternative for the thousands of people depending upon them.
That is what makes the policy particularly troubling.
Government certainly has the right—and the responsibility—to demand accountability for taxpayer money. Homelessness programs should be expected to demonstrate results, operate efficiently and correct failures when they occur.
But accountability and abandonment are not the same thing.
Taking money away from programs serving people who have nowhere else to go does not magically produce housing. It does not lower rents, create shelter beds, expand mental-health treatment or provide permanent supportive housing.
It simply removes resources.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter’s intervention temporarily stopped that from happening, a decision Waters welcomed as an important reprieve. Yet she cautioned against confusing a courtroom victory with a solution to homelessness itself.
The larger problem remains.
Americans need affordable housing, stable communities and a federal housing policy capable of recognizing homelessness as something more complicated than people sleeping on sidewalks.
Waters has advocated increased federal investment through her Ending Homelessness Act and has also pointed to bipartisan congressional efforts on housing as evidence that lawmakers with significant political differences can still work toward practical solutions.
Her message is ultimately a simple one: Government cannot claim to be
fighting homelessness while simultaneously weakening the programs responsible for helping homeless people find their way back into housing.
The court may have protected these programs for the moment.
But the people sleeping in tents, automobiles, shelters and on sidewalks tonight cannot live on temporary court orders.
They need somewhere to live.
=====================
Ms. Waters’ full text
https://iqconnect.house.gov/iqextranet/view_newsletter.aspx?id=107826&c=CA43MW

A couple of days ago two things happened. First, I got into an intense debate with a young man, concerning A.I., SIRI, GALAXY, CLAUDE, CHATGTP, GEMINI, GROK, etc. I flexed on him and accused him of having inferior knowledge on the subject because I have worked in the technology field since the 1980s, and then I fell back on his lack of experience because I have twelve years of age on him.
What began as a supposedly nonpartisan national celebration appears to have taken a sharp detour into campaign-country.
During his first term, Trump successfully lobbied FIFA and secured the winning joint “United Bid” for the U.S., Canada, and Mexico to host the 2026 World Cup.The FIFA World Cup 2026 is officially underway in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Major city centers across the U.S. are hosting, and “watch parties” are circling the venues and perhaps portions of the world.
This might be worse than I thought. Not only is AI going to take all of our jobs but AI is also going to waste all of our time.
By comparison, China’s power consumption ratio is 51% while the US ratio is a mere 17%. So the big guy’s got me there… Sorta.
hosted a telephone town hall for residents of California’s 43rd Congressional District. The event followed a familiar and increasingly important format in modern civic life: structured, accessible, and designed to reach a broad audience across a large and diverse community.
to replicate the intensity or spontaneity of live, in-person gatherings. Instead, they serve a different purpose: scale and accessibility.
For many residents, especially seniors or those balancing work and family responsibilities, this may be the most realistic way to connect with their representative.
able to speak—sharing concerns about housing affordability, economic opportunity, healthcare access, and public safety. These are not new issues in the district, but they remain urgent, and the town hall provided a platform for them to be voiced directly.
The 43rd District operates within the broader framework of Los Angeles County, a region often described as aligned with sanctuary policies. This context shapes many of the conversations around public safety, immigration, and community trust.
writer of this article, have attended several of Congresswoman Waters’ live town halls, and that perspective is important. Those settings often allow for a different kind of energy—sometimes more assertive, sometimes more interactive, but always more immediate.
Nonviolent protest, silent marches, and sit-ins were not just acts of resistance; they were also acts of presence. They created space for voices to be seen and felt, even without extended dialogue.
On March 12, 2026, Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social that “the United States is the largest oil producer in the world, by far, so when oil prices go up, ‘we’ make a lot of money.” The statement came as gasoline prices in the United States climbed above roughly $3.60 per gallon following the escalation of the war involving Iran and disruptions to global oil shipping routes.
Oil Production vs. Public Benefit in the United States
Economists frequently note that because oil is traded on a global market, American consumers still pay global prices even if the country produces large amounts of oil domestically. If companies can sell oil at higher prices abroad, they will do so, leaving U.S. consumers exposed to the same market forces affecting other countries.
the country’s public
In the American system, oil revenue primarily strengthens corporate profits and government tax receipts, while consumers continue to pay global energy prices. In the UAE’s model, oil income is used more directly to finance public benefits for citizens.
became president of South Africa. And of course, Rev. Jackson helped to secure the release of U.S. hostages around the world, but the one that stands out to me is when he went to Syria and negotiated the release of U.S. Navy Lt. Robert. Goodman Jr.
“He” moves forward with his “MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY, AMERICA” threat. In the middle of a war, he threatens to do nothing for the next nine months, forcing the Constitution to bend to his will, changing voting laws in the middle of the stream, ahead of existing law, hoping to end the established practice of mail-in voting, amidst any other changes that he can institute as a means of complicating the upcoming midterm elections. That “he is certain”, will spell the end of his reign of terror.