City Journal Audio: "Who We Are – Homelessness Crisis"
Host: Rafael Mangual (B)
Guest: Stephen Eide (A), Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, Contributing Editor at City Journal
Date: February 25, 2026
Episode Overview
This episode of the City Journal podcast centers on the roots, realities, and policy failures surrounding homelessness in America, with a special focus on New York City. Host Rafael Mangual interviews Stephen Eide, an expert on homelessness, mental illness, and their relation to urban policy and public safety. Their conversation is wide-ranging, touching upon the evolution of homelessness as a concept, the limitations of "housing first" strategies, the structural and personal causes of homelessness, the role and limits of government and law enforcement, and how public policy has failed to address or even properly frame these challenges.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
Stephen Eide’s Background: How He Came to Study Homelessness
[01:16]
- Eide’s academic background is in political philosophy and the history of political thought.
- An early interest in mental health led him to view questions such as when behavior is defined as mental illness versus a moral or social issue as reflective of American values.
- Eide’s practical engagement with urban policy began in Western Massachusetts, then NYC — initially in fiscal policy before focusing on homelessness, drawn by its encapsulation of government failure.
-
"Homelessness...seems to encapsulate government dysfunction, government failure. Nobody wants this. Everybody agrees it shouldn't exist...It keeps existing. Why is it that government lets us down?" — Eide [03:32]
The Terminology of Homelessness: Origins & Impacts
[04:03 – 07:38]
-
The term "homelessness" wasn't commonly used before the 1980s; its adoption was a deliberate activist move to reframe the problem and promote subsidized housing as the solution.
-
Older terms (e.g., "vagrant," "bum") were seen as stigmatizing; activists pushed "homeless" and now even "unhoused" as preferred terms framing the problem as lack of housing.
-
This framing tends to obscure the behavioral and social aspects (addiction, mental illness) deeply entwined with street homelessness.
"If you already define the problem as homelessness, you've already won an important victory...you're already on the way to convincing people that housing...is the policy solution..." — Eide [06:12]
Rethinking the Causes: It’s Not Just Housing
[07:39 – 13:22]
-
The subset of people living on the street differs markedly from larger groups experiencing poverty, unemployment, or inequality.
-
Family and social supports act as safety nets; those on the streets often lack these due to personal challenges (addiction, mental illness, alienation).
-
Eide notes that historical loss of low-quality, affordable housing contributed, but the absence of family/social fallback mechanisms is often the immediate cause.
-
Example: Mississippi has high poverty but low homelessness, attributed to more available cheap housing and different social dynamics.
"People don't become homeless when they run out of housing. They become homeless when they run out of family and supports..." — Eide [11:25]
The Limits of "Housing First" and Shelter Policy
[13:22 – 18:56]
-
Not all individuals can or want to live in provided housing or shelters; many have challenges (addiction, severe mental illness) that make communal living untenable or are unwilling to accept shelter rules (no drugs, lack of privacy).
-
Eide and Mangual critique the assumption that simply providing housing solves the problem — some homeless choose the street over shelters due to personal limitations or preferences.
"Being housed...is not just a passive experience...All housing is shared in a way...if you think of housing as just...something that happens to you...you might de-emphasize the need for behavioral change that's going to be ultimately more important..." — Eide [15:46]
Government, Law Enforcement, and Social Supports: Striking the Right Balance
[18:56 – 22:00]
-
Eide details the shift from families/private sector managing difficult cases to complex government systems attempting to do so through shelters and social programs.
-
Activists push for minimizing law enforcement's role, but most Americans expect police involvement in crises.
-
Social services and housing programs work for some, but those with the most severe behavioral issues still end up cycling through law enforcement and hospitals.
-
Community mental health systems can’t always handle the most severely ill, leading to over-reliance on police.
"If you force those programs to take people who are too troubled for them, it's not going to work...those programs' integrity will just kind of break down." — Eide [20:27]
Street-Level Realities: The Necessity and Limits of Force
[22:00 – 27:13]
-
Certain crises, especially involving violent or acutely psychotic individuals, are unmanageable without the capability for forceful intervention.
-
De-involvement of police is unrealistic; many such calls stem from failures of non-police systems.
-
The “revolving door” phenomena — repeated police and hospital contacts with little lasting impact — is tied to insufficient mental health infrastructure and a lack of options for long-term stabilization.
"Nearly always [a police crisis call]...is because of some failure on the part of non police systems...Making services available to them...didn't work and then things get worse. Ultimately, yes, coercion has to be part of the mix." — Eide [24:43]
Institutionalization, Family, and the Challenge of Civil Commitment
[27:13 – 33:17]
-
Modern policy places the onus of caring for the mentally ill on families, with government playing a diminished direct role compared to the “asylum era.”
-
Civil commitment is now difficult, requiring family initiation; this is a heavy burden and families may delay until a crisis occurs.
-
Calls for easier access to temporary (weeks-to-months) stabilization to relieve families and prevent tragedies.
“Back in the day, there was more deference given to family. There was this understanding that this is not a problem families can handle...Nowadays...it's probably going to be you.” — Eide [29:29]
Law Enforcement Fatigue and Hospital “Rinse and Repeat”
[33:17 – 37:06]
-
Police feel set up to fail: dangerous, unrewarding interactions end with only a brief hospital stay before the person is released.
-
Hospitals lack capacity for longer-term stabilization; patients are often released at the first sign of temporary compliance (“treated and streeted”).
"...You participate in the commitment of somebody. He goes to hospital, he stays there for 72 hours, he gets just stabilized enough, he...no longer meets commitment criteria. Back on the street, treated and streeted." — Eide [33:37]
Policy Contradictions: Risk Aversion, Libertarianism, and Historical Abuse
[38:26 – 45:46]
-
US policy is risk-averse about “accidentally” confining someone who might function in the community — a tendency more prominent among progressives.
-
Libertarian hesitancy to grant government the power of civil confinement of non-criminals is powerful, made stronger by abuses in the old asylum system.
-
When asylums grew too large and expensive without clear success, public faith declined, fueling deinstitutionalization.
"...You're trusting government with an awesome power to deprive people of their liberty who have not committed a crime." — Eide [39:56]
Does Treatment Work? Comparing Criminal Recidivism and Mental Illness
[42:40 – 47:30]
-
For many with serious mental illness, treatment (especially with family support) can help: medication mitigates symptoms, making life workable if not recovered.
-
Compared to chronic criminals, persistent improvement is more feasible for the mentally ill, though not guaranteed and subject to breakdowns.
-
Both host and guest stress that the US will always have a welfare state and should strive to align social services with public values, not abandon them.
"We have to affirm that treatment works...We do have to be kind of on this, understand our role here." — Eide [44:24]
De-Escalation: Disposition or Skill?
[47:30 – 52:45]
-
De-escalation is less a teachable skill and more a disposition based on patience and experience.
-
Its value is overstated in high-risk, late-stage crises; effective de-escalation (or simply waiting) requires increased personnel and resources, not less.
-
The move to replace police entirely with social workers ignores both the limitations of the latter and public expectations for restoring order.
"De-escalation...makes sense to think of...as a disposition than a training or skill...slowing down and being patient..." — Eide [50:17]
Public Perceptions, Political Pitfalls, and Advice for NYC’s New Mayor
[55:02 – 58:07]
-
Homelessness and untreated mental illness are highly visible markers of government dysfunction.
-
Any administration—especially one pushing policies like socialism—must deliver basic order and credible solutions or risk public backlash.
-
Policies that minimize enforcement or ignore public desire for order can rapidly erode political support, even if well-intentioned.
"If you can't handle that, or if people perceive it's getting worse...that's your problem...If they think that you're ignoring it, then...you don't want to be have the reputation as a socialist who doesn't care about the mentally ill. That's really going to undermine your bigger agenda." — Eide [56:53–58:05]
Notable Quotes
-
On Definitions:
"If you already define the problem as homelessness, you've already won an important victory…" — Eide [06:12]
-
On What Distinguishes the Homeless:
"People don't become homeless when they run out of housing. They become homeless when they run out of family and supports…" — Eide [11:25]
-
On Policy Failures:
"Social services and housing programs can help certain people...if you force those programs to take people who are too troubled...it's not going to work." — Eide [20:27]
-
On Police Role:
"Coercion has to be part of the mix...That's what it looks like to me." — Eide [24:53]
-
On Mental Illness vs. Crime:
"We have to affirm that treatment works...We do have to be kind of on this, understand our role here." — Eide [44:24]
Important Timestamps
- [01:16] Eide’s intellectual origins and first work on policy
- [04:03] The activist invention of "homelessness"
- [07:39] Why poverty doesn’t equate to homelessness
- [11:25] The breakdown of family/supports as the real tipping point
- [15:46] Challenges with the "housing first" approach
- [20:27] Why social programs struggle with the most afflicted
- [24:43] The necessity of law enforcement in crisis
- [29:29] How civil commitment has shifted from state to families
- [33:37] The “treated and streeted” cycle
- [39:56] The libertarian critique: Can we trust the state with civil confinement?
- [44:24] Affirming that treatment can—and does—work, at times
- [50:17] De-escalation as a disposition, not just a skill
- [56:53] Political advice: Fail on homelessness and your whole agenda risks collapse
Overall Tone and Takeaways
The conversation maintains a pragmatic, evidence-driven outlook, questioning simplistic solutions and urging more nuanced views of homelessness and public mental health. Eide and Mangual caution against policy shaped by ideological wish-casting (whether on the left or right), emphasizing the hard realities that drive intractable social issues. While sympathetic to the plight of the homeless and their families, the hosts repeatedly stress that any workable policy demands realistic acknowledgment of severe behavioral and mental health challenges and the limits of voluntary, non-coercive interventions.
End of Summary