Slashdot Mirror


Gov't Proposes Massive Homeless Tracking System

Chris Hoofnagle writes "The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development is proposing a massive system of tracking for homeless people and others who are served by shelters and care centers. The system will track people by their SSN, and will collect health (HIV, pregnancy) and mental information. Secret Service and national security agents can gain access to the database by just asking for it! EPIC has released a fact sheet on HMIS, and the public can comment on the guidelines until September 22, 2003, but no electronic comments are being accepted."

38 of 808 comments (clear)

  1. No, we need to track politicians, dammit! by corebreech · · Score: 5, Funny

    WozNet suppositories for everybody on Capitol Hill!

    1. Re:No, we need to track politicians, dammit! by Uruk · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, we don't need to track politicians. We already know where all of the crack houses, bordellos, cheap motels, and liquor stores are. On the off chance that they're actually in session, we also already know where the Capitol is, thanks.

      --
      -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
  2. Not to be cruel, but... by SoVi3t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Couldn't this money be spent in a better way? Better shelters, lower income housing, etc. We don't need to track them. We need to help remotivate them, and get them back into society.

    --
    Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
    1. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Funny
      You rotten Communist!

      Don't you think that if we had known who the penniless homeless were, we could have prevented the massive attack on 09/11/01? They are begging for spare change, and using it to buy AIRLINE TICKETS!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Bonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish I had mod points for the above.

      20-25 percent of homeless people are seriously mentally ill.

      http://www.nrchmi.com/facts/facts_question_3.asp

      They're sick, get sicker, and cause more problems for everyone around them, including other homeless, because they can't really get treatment for their diseases.

      If we're spending money to try and improve the situation of the homeless, making more free mental and medical help available will do a hell of a lot more than a tracking system.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    3. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Magic+Thread · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Only for homeless, right?
      Sure, it's only for the homeless... for now. Don't count on it staying that way.
    4. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by gantzm · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're not homeless, they're residentially displaced.

      Somebody should the track the Politically Correct crowd, they're the ones to watch out for.

      --


      Excessive forking causes un-wanted children.
    5. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Frymaster · · Score: 4, Funny
      The point of the tracking system is to prevent fraud.

      then we should have mandatory tracking for all major ceos! the enron debacle came in at about $4 billion... that's a lot of food stamps.

    6. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by SoVi3t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      .....perhaps I assume they're unmotivated and not involved in society because they're homeless, not working or putting any money into the economy (unless you count the bottle of wine they buy every once a week). I have NOTHING against homeless people. I was homeless for a short period of time when I was younger, and it opened my eyes. There are more than enough ways for homeless people to get back into society. There are shelters, welfare, care programs, and so much more. It does take awhile, but you can get back on your feet. You just have to work for it.

      --
      Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
    7. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Dragon218 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair, some of those lockdown mental institutions were cruel and unusual. The closing down of those were a good move, but not providing something else (i.e. assisted living, community houses, employment help) was just ignorant.

      You have to remember, the United States has a saftey net... it's called prison, and it's only getting worse.

      --

      "It's the little touches that make a future solid enough to be destroyed" --William S. Bourroughs
    8. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Luscious868 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      20-25 percent of homeless people are seriously mentally ill.

      ...

      They're sick, get sicker, and cause more problems for everyone around them, including other homeless, because they can't really get treatment for their diseases.

      Ah, but therein lies the problem. We can only forcefully medicate people that are either a danger to themselves or others. If a person is neither a danger to himself nor to those around him, but is mentally ill and homeless and we can not force them to take medication. There will always be a percentage of the homeless who are mentally ill and choose to continue living that way and there is nothing that anyone can do about it.

      If we're spending money to try and improve the situation of the homeless, making more free mental and medical help available will do a hell of a lot more than a tracking system.

      I totally agree. While there will always be those that don't want help, the money would be much better spent helping those who want help rather than trying to track them. This just seems like a complete and total waste of tax dollars in addition to a total invasion of privacy. I wonder how many people might refuse to even go into a shelter if something like this was instituted.

    9. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "20-25 percent of homeless people are seriously mentally ill."

      But they aren't proposing tracking the diagnosed mentally ill. They are proposing tracking the *homeless* which includes a lot more than just "mentally ill" people. There are plenty of people who are homeless by choice. I know quite a few who live nomadic lives. And they are by no means mentally ill or incompetent.

      To suggest that they are not entitled to the same rights as anyone else is downright unamerican.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    10. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by MoggyMania · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not just some of them, but actually the overwhelming majority. The support forums I run for cognitive disabilities have a number of people that were locked up in mental hospitals by idiots that misdiagnosed them as mentally ill -- and the one thing they *all* agree on is that the hospitals are full of cruel/unusual punishments. They also all said that they would rather be homeless (though most aren't) or dead before sent back to such places. The tales they've told about how they were treated literally make "One Flew Over A Coocoo's Nest" look like Disneyland. On top of that, there's a great deal of misinformation *within* the psychiatric industry. Common "treatments" for some things involve nothing more than physically punishing the person for showing any signs that she/he is different, and rewarding showing no sign of discomfort when exposed to physically painful stimuli. Ironically the aversives inevitably give rise to genuine mental illness in the form of severe depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. I agree, there should be a structured, *humane* safety net available -- one not based on forcing everybody into a one-size-fits all mold of blind obedience. Right now there's a sick duality: either you get almost no help at all, or you're basically abused. Also, a common problem for people with treatable mental illnesses (bipolar, schizophrenia,etc) is that they are stuck on various forms of financial assistance because they can't afford the medications. If they could afford the drugs, they could work, but because they can't afford them, they can't work.

    11. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by robogun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good point... many of the homeless are quite content, unlike us wage slaves. Simply because we apply our values to their lifestyle, find it lacking, and wring our hands constantly over it, does not make it wrong.

      There have been beggars since the earliest city states sprung up out of the Mesopotamian mud and it will never be cured.

      My feeling is, if someone elects to "drop out" of society, he has the freedom to do so. Well, until this system is implemented, anyway.

    12. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You were young, healthy, relatively well educated, and in an upturn economy. How many of those characteristics apply to the average homeless person?

      And that's ignoring the problems of mental health. Which are not minor by any means. E.g., I would personally estimate that many (not most, nor even close to most, but many) suffer from depression. I know that some suffer from advanced schizophrenia. etc.

      Another group of them need, more than anything, a safe place to call a permanent address. (It might be only a lock-box.) Access to some safe place to store a change or two of clothes. Access to a shower and a washer/dryer. The basic minimum that one needs to hold down a job. Or to get one.

      Other groups need other things. Few of them really need to be tracked. That's for somebody else's benefit. You have to really *trust* the government before you would feel that something like that was for your own benefit. And strangely enough, I don't think I know anybody who trusts the government that much. I've been employed by the govt. for 30 years, and I don't trust it that much.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    13. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Politburo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What?! You mean the government will give me a number and keep track of how much money I make, how many kids I have, and what money they are giving me?

      Idiot. We're not next, we were first.

    14. Re:Not to be cruel, but... by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not exactly homeless, but have come close.
      I too have supposedly "refused to cooperate with treatment programs."

      Treatment programs that kept me locked up in a prison-like mental ward. Treatment programs that had lazy doctors put me on many psych drugs all at once to make me "manageable."
      Manageable, as in too fucked up to complain that the drugs had me too fucked up. As in too fucked up to complain that I had been imprisoned against my will for the "crime" of being depressed.

      These drugs fucked me up so much that they made me crave ANY kind of stimulation to let me know I was still alive - cutting my own flesh, doing any illegal drugs I could get my hands on, fucking anything that moved, running around naked in public.

      The drugs changed me from a depressed but sane person into a fucking LUNATIC. And no amount of complaining helped, I was told I would have to be on the drugs for the rest of my life because I was "bipolar" - this, determined after a 5 minute interview.

      I finally got into a position where I could get off the drugs on my own, and of course am now NOT running around like a fucking maniac, NOT cutting myself, NOT doing illegal drugs, and not only have no desire to do so, the very thought repulses me.

      They MADE me fucking nuts and made me suicidal by pumping me full of shit just to keep me from interrupting their coffee breaks.

      Some times the treatment is worse than the disease.
      I saw many, many chronic mental patients whose underlying problem was FAR worse than mine, and I saw the shitty treatment they received, how they got no respect, were treated as subhuman.

      People "choose to refuse treatment" NOT because being homeless and hungry is FUN, it's just better than the hellhole that most free institutionalized care is.

      --
      This space available.
  3. Works for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now if only we could track spammers this way.

  4. Why do we kill Kenny? Because he's poor. by rdewald · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, the bottom line here is if you want government benefits you have to give up some privacy in order to get them. Why don't we just ear-tag the homeless with RFID's and track their migration like an endangered species?

    There are a significant portion of the hard-core homeless that will simply stay off-grid, that's why they're homeless in the first place, they decline to participate. Now, these people won't be able to stay anonymous and get fed or get medical care from the government. My suspicion is that the govt. knows this well and is anticipating a reduction in cost while being able to issue press releases about the decline in the numbers of homeless as they stop coming to the clinics and kitchens.

    This is analogous to the reports in the declining unemployment rate reflected in lower numbers of people collecting unemployment insurance. It doesn't count the people that have given up, or have turned to the black/gray market for a living.

    --
    The best way to do is to be.
  5. Sounds like a good plan. by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fine with me. So long as you also provide the list to Habitat for Humanity

  6. May be bad, but also good. by isa-kuruption · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I understand how Privacy Advocates might go to arms over this, I think there are benefits to the people who are tracked.

    As I recall, there have been instances in the past where mentally handicapped have been confused by cops as criminals and shot or wrongly imprisoned. To be able to determine someone as mentally handicapped would be beneficial as the person may not him/herself be able to notify the officer he/she has a problem. Also, this would help hospitals treat patients they have never seen before, as it could assist them in identifying a mentally ill person that needs a specific form of medication.

    But I guess you could say that the risks outweigh the benefits, and you are possibly correct.

    1. Re:May be bad, but also good. by calethix · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Also, this would help hospitals treat patients they have never seen before, as it could assist them in identifying a mentally ill person that needs a specific form of medication."

      That applies to everyone, whether they're homeless/mentally handicapped or not. Are you ready to be tagged?

      I might end up in a serious car accident some day leaving me unconscious. It would be really helpful if I have some implant so medical personel could find out who I was and see my medical history. That doesn't mean I'm going to volunteer to be tagged and tracked like an animal though.

  7. Good luck by Uruk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, it's good to want things like this, but I don't think it will really happen. Homeless people tend to be trasients, which means they're going to be hard to track. Additionally, most don't use legal names (preferring assumed names and nicknames), and may invent social security numbers. Others will be illegal immigrants who won't appear in any other record.

    Why can't we take the collective ingenuity that it would take to build a privacy invading system like this and bend it towards helping these people rather than tracking them? By helping them, there'd be fewer to track!

    --
    -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
    1. Re:Good luck by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Why can't we take the collective ingenuity that it would take to build a privacy invading system like this and bend it towards helping these people rather than tracking them? By helping them, there'd be fewer to track!"

      We're the government and we're here to help.

      For time immemorial these words have roughly translated as "Run away! Run away!" to the "helped." It's even become a joke cliche.

      Who determines what "helps" them? It seems unlikely it will be they themselves. God protect me from those that want to "help" me in ways I perceive as harmful.

      While many homeless are legitimately mentally ill many have simply fallen on temporary hard times, like the guy who actually has a job but gets locked out of his house by his drunken girlfriend and can't find an apartment in his large city for several months. This actually happens. I have a friend who ran a homeless shelter in SF for a year and he says people like this often made up half the residents. The worthless drunken girlfriend is treated like a valuable member of society and the poor guy is lumped in with the drug addicts and paranoid schizophrenics. Now they want to tag and track him?

      There are also people who simply live, by choice, outside the normal realm of behaviour, but aren't mentally ill. In fact, many of them are simply excesively sane to fit well in our idiotic society. Musashi Miyamoto and Euripides fell into this catagory once upon a time. Ghandi tried to. These people aren't sucking on the government tit. That's the whole point, they want to avoid all of that. They live or die on their own. These people are actually taking care of themselves in the true meaning of the phrase. I belive they make up a fair percentage of the homeless. They also scare the bejeezus out of the government. Round 'em up and track them. Them when something bad happens we can't explain we can just "round up the usual suspects" until we find one we can pin it on the make the populace feel secure and happy.

      In the old days these people would simply aquire a canoe, an ax and head out for the frontier to become a "fur trapper." Many of our treasured national heros, like Daniel Boone, were such people.

      Now there is no frontier and people with real independant gumption, the sort of people who could feed a tribe or conquer a continent are "mentally ill" or feared as criminals and terrorists.

      If humanity is destined to become a race of endentured clerks and marketing managers screw the whole lot of 'em and I'll join the homeless myself.

      Only problem is they don't make caves on the edge of town like they used to and the FBI is poised to track down anyone who deigns not to participate like rabid dogs.

      KFG

  8. Hey Mister! by LiftOp · · Score: 4, Funny
    "The government put a tracking device in my teeth!! No, seriously....!!"

    Think of all the money we'll save in mental institutions letting these guys we THOUGHT were nuts back out...

  9. Too Invasive by photoblur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Entities that provide services would collect their names, Social Security Numbers, dates of birth, race, gender, health status (including HIV, pregnancy, and domestic violence), veteran status, and income information."

    This sounds way too invasive. It concerns me because once things like this are manditory for homeless people (it sounds like this system is moving that direction), then it will slowly be introduced to the masses.

    Start with the outcasts of society as to make a quiet entrance. Then work your way up.

    I don't like it.

  10. That's good.. by preric · · Score: 5, Funny
    Because one morning I came out to my parking space (I live in an apartment near the beach) to catch a homeless man 'cleaning' his ass crack on the corner of my truck's bumper.

    He quickly ran off... I was still in shock and not sure if I should chase him down, let alone know what to do with him once caught, but now I can track him down and do the same to his shopping cart.

    Sweet revenge!

  11. Read between the lines by rot26 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development is proposing a massive system of tracking for homeless people and others

    They're not going to let this go away. This is just ANOTHER back-door version of TIA. We're going to see it introduced, again and again, under various disguises until they get it implemented. You can expect to see tracking systems suggested for the homeless, pedophiles, drug dealers, spouse abusers, bail-jumpers, tax evaders, etc etc and so on and so on, (each one being some particular organizations "most wanted") until it's actually implemented. And like stone soup, once it's in place, it will be "upgraded" to include everything that anybody ever wanted.

    --



    To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
  12. Re:For a safer society, we should track every one by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why not slap a yellow star on them too, for easier identification from a distance?

    Excuse me, but are people completely blind to what's happening and deaf to the cries from history?

    Regards,
    --
    *Art

  13. Re:Why do we kill Kenny? Because he's poor. by namespan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are a significant portion of the hard-core homeless that will simply stay off-grid, that's why they're homeless in the first place, they decline to participate.

    Dead right. And despite the fact we call it paranoia, slashdot paranoia is absolutely nothing compared to real paranoia. I have a paranoid schizophrenic aunt, and for the implication of every program like this, there's a very real chance she'd risk starvation before going to social services agencies.

    --
    Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
  14. Re:Great idea! by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And how long before they start tracking everyone in this way?

    What a naiive question. The reason they need to start tracking the homeless and not "the rest of us" is because they already are tracking "the rest of us." Try to buy a home or even rent an apartment without some sort of government ID. Hell, you can't even get electricity where I live without giving the electric company your social security number.

  15. Re:Why do we kill Kenny? Because he's poor. by hmckee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I fully support a person's right to privacy and their desire to not participate in society, however, getting government handouts and not participating in society are mutually exclusive.

    Why not track their benefits? The gov't and private agencies track all of my benefits: SS benefits, income tax, disability insurance, health care status. By tracking the "benefits" the homeless recieve, the gov't will be able to provide better care and make better plans and budgets thereby saving the taxpayer money.

    If they really want to live "off the grid" and not participate in society, screw 'em. They shouldn't get any gov't supplied and organized benefits from my taxes.

    I've chosen to participate in society and will not support an individual who wants to live outside society, they're on their own.

    As to the Secret Service getting the info at their own discretion, I'm against that.

    Harry

  16. operation homelesss by JimBobJoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the past the Libertarian Party has had somethign called "operation homeless" (at least, that's what I recall) that asked homeless people the questions from the world's smallest political quiz.

    They were overwhelmingly libertarian. The party marketed this by saying that the homeless know that the government is holding them back.

    I believe (and I happen to be an employee of the party in some capacity, so keep that in mind) that this was the wrong conclusion. The real reason is that the homeless don't like to be entangled, don't like to make agreements, and really just want to be left alone with no responsibility, no registration, no contractural obligations.) There is so much financial help that one can get in the form of welfare, food stamps, et cetera...and they choose not to do it, sometimes it is pride, but often it's this amazing resistance to being registered (and i should also think dependent on one entity.)

    Being homeless is the ultimate form of freedom (though the quality of life leave much to be desired.) I dunno if homeless in other countries are like this, but this often appears to be the case here. Nothing better than making your living "anonymously."

  17. Re:What a crock by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where is the breech of civil liberties?

    It's in the implementation details. You can't possibly track the homeless without forcing the homeless to provide information and forcing the caretakers to collect that information. That's where the breech of civil liberties comes into place.

    Honestly... I don't see the harm. They already track what I do based on my social security number, why should the homeless expect more privacy then I?

    Because providing information allowing yourself to be tracked should be voluntary, not mandatory.

  18. Sure you are by missing000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes we do need to track them.

    Fine, but now I want to track you.

    Why? Because you fit in some economic group I don't really like. I think all of you need armbands too.

    We're tired of getting all those fake, inflated numbers of how many there are. Knowing how many homeless are really out there is a vital statistic.

    Here's an idea -
    Go take a walk in the city tonight. It won't kill you. There are lots of homeless. All you need to know is that there are a bunch of people starving in your backyard.

    If you really care about the numbers, I bet the census bureau could help you come up with something.

    The bullshit about this has gone on too long. Let's have some real numbers.

    Oh all right. In 2000 it was 280,527 people according to the census bureau, I'll let you search for it yourself if you don't belive me.

  19. Bill Collectors already have this by CyberGarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Year ago I was homeless for a period of time, due to the fact that I was a teenager, my parents were dead and life is harsh. I fought my way back into society against it's better wishes.

    I actually managed to put my first year of college on credit. Then they figured out I was a bum without a job. Later I paid it back, got scholarships and managed to finish. It wasn't easy, but all this sob story has a point and it ain't for sympathy.

    I was hanging out in a particular location on a regular basis. I'm walking along and a payphone rings. Being bored and curious, I answer it. It was a bill collector! They had tracked me down to a payphone I frequently passed. Now tell me the government needs a new system, just give the homeless a credit card good for a nice sized bad debt. The bill collectors will track them for the government, no new system needed.

    --

    I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
  20. Re:Good deal by Greedo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... or forearm.

    Oh wait. That's been done.

    --
    Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
  21. Re:Some of them pick it by miguelitof · · Score: 4, Insightful
    My father in law is homeless and it is his choice. He has family that would take him in, but he is unwilling to:
    [...]
    Programs are not a solution for someone who does not want to be helped. He can't wait until he can start collecting SS checks that can help him sustain his "lifestyle." [...]

    Free medical and mental help won't help someone who doesn't want to change.

    So are you trying to create a logical fallacy here, stating that since your father-in-law is trying to scam the system, then every homeless person is trying to scam the system?

    There is good and bad everywhere. Take a group of 100 people, chosen by any criteria you want, and you will find good and bad people within that 100. But that doesn't mean that all 100 are bad.

    Yes, it sounds like programs offering free medical and mental health coverage would not help your FIL. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't help other homeless people.

    --
    --- Biffster.org
    "Bite my shiny metal ass."