NATIONAL LAW CENTER
ON HOMELESSNESS & POVERTY
Homelessness and United States Compliance with the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Submitted to the Human Rights Committee by the

National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty
May 31, 2006
Introduction
The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (the “NLCHP”) submits the
following shadow report to the Human Rights Committee.1 Established in 1989,
NLCHP’s mission is to serve as the legal arm of the nationwide movement to prevent and
end homelessness in the U.S. Based in Washington, D.C., NLCHP works with thousands
of local level advocacy and service provider groups across the country.
Executive Summary
This shadow report focuses on homelessness in the United States. In particular, this
report details the failure of the U.S. federal government, over a number of decades, to
adequately address the need for affordable housing in this country and the impact that
failure has had on the lives of millions of Americans. A number of concerns relevant to
U.S. compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the
“Covenant”) arise as a result of the federal government’s approach to housing and
homelessness. These concerns include:
•

Article 6 of the Covenant: Right to Life
Homeless people suffer serious health problems that are directly related to their
lack of housing. Being subjected to the elements contributes to illness and death
among the homeless population.

•

Article 23 of the Covenant: Right of Family
Without affordable housing, many families are unable to remain together while
the federal and state governments have established programs to specifically
1

Maria Foscarinis, Executive Director; Tulin Ozdeger, Civil Rights Staff Attorney; Naomi Stern,
Domestic Violence Staff Attorney; and Joy Moses, Children’s Staff Attorney, contributed to this
submission. Assistance was also provided by David Hubb, a Partner at DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary US
LLP.

1411 K STREET, NW, SUITE 1400
WASHINGTON, DC 20005

www.nlchp.org
nlchp@nlchp.org

PHONE: 202.638.2535
FAX: 202.628.2737

prevent family separations due to lack of housing. These programs are underfunded and fail to meet the needs of homeless individuals.
•

Article 24 of the Covenant: Barriers to Homeless Children’s Right to Education
Homeless children face many barriers to receiving an education in the U.S. The
Department of Education has not taken an active role to ensure that state and local
officials remove obstacles such as residency requirements and lack of
transportation so that homeless children can attend school and obtain an
education.

•

Article 25 of the Covenant: Restrictions on the Right to Vote
Voting requirements established by federal, state, and local authorities effectively
deprive homeless people of their right to vote.

•

Article 26 of the Covenant: Discrimination Based on Property or Other Status
Local laws prohibiting sleeping, camping, and sitting in public places discriminate
against homeless people based on their status. In addition, without a permanent
residence, homeless people find it difficult to obtain identification cards, and
therefore, housing, employment, and other services.

•

Article 26 of the Covenant: Discrimination Based on Gender
Domestic violence is a leading cause of homelessness among women. When
these women are denied housing or evicted from their residence because of the
violent acts of their abusers, it constitutes a form of sex discrimination in housing.

Homelessness in the United States
In the United States, some 840,000 people experience homeless on any given night.2
Over the course of a year, an estimated 2.5 to 3.5 million people experience
homelessness; over the course of five years, the estimated number rises to 7 million
people.3 According to a telephone interview study conducted in 1994, as many as 12
million Americans, or 6.5% of the U.S. resident population in that year, had been
homeless at some point in their lives.4

2

See Martha Burt, et al., Helping America’s Homeless (2001).

3

Bruce Link, et al., Life-time and Five-year Prevalence of Homelessness in the United States, 65
American Journal of Public Health (1994).
4

Link, Homelessness in the U.S. 1995, supra note 2, at 347–54.

2

The lack of affordable housing is a leading cause of homelessness. Some 13.7 million
households, or 14% of all households, have “critical housing needs,” meaning that they
spend more than 50% of their incomes on housing or live in substandard housing.5
Inadequate incomes are directly linked to this problem: a person working a regular work
week at the legal minimum wage still cannot afford the fair market rent, based on federal
affordability guidelines (30% of income or less spent on rent), for a one-bedroom
apartment anywhere in the United States.6
As evidenced by Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, natural disasters can also be a
significant cause of homelessness.7 In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, an estimated
1.5 million people became homeless. The federal government’s response to this natural
disaster, or lack thereof, is well documented, and has only exacerbated the homeless
situation that Hurricane Katrina created.8 It should be noted that after failing to submit its
mandatory reports to the UN Human Rights Committee as requested by the Covenant in
October 2005, the U.S. submitted a combined second and third periodic report to the UN
Human Rights Committee in response to pressure from litigation groups and U.S. human
rights organizations. The combined report made no mention of the homelessness
problems created by Hurricane Katrina.
The U.S. homeless population is diverse. According to data from a 1996 national survey
commissioned by the federal government,9 African-Americans are disproportionately
represented, making up an estimated 40% of the homeless population; some 41% are
Caucasian; 11% Hispanic; 8% Native American. The survey found that 34% are families
with children, and that 44% of homeless adults worked at some point in any given month.
According to the survey, 66% of homeless adults reported problems with mental illness,
drug or alcohol abuse, or some combination of these problems.

5

Stegman et al., Housing America’s Working Families at
http://www.huduser.org:80/periodicals/urm/urm_12_2000/urm1.html on August 2, 2001.
6

National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2005.

7

Other natural disasters that have caused a significant increase in the number of homeless people
include the Northridge earthquake in 1994 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992.
8

See “Hurricane Katrina: A Nation Still Unprepared,” Additional Views of Senators Lieberman,
Levin, Akaka, Carper, Lautenberg and Pryor on White House Katrina Failures, Administration Lack of
Cooperation with the Investigation, and Failure to Establish Unified Command (the “Report”), page 11.
(“In fact, it seems as if President Bush and, consequently, the Administration, did not grasp that Katrina
was a catastrophe until later in the day – a full day and a half after landfall – when Michael Brown
informed President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Chertoff, and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove
in a telephone call that at least 90% of New Orleans’ population had been displaced and that responders
“needed military assets; this was the big one.”)
9

Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve, Findings of the National Survey of
Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients. Highlights. Interagency Council on the Homeless, December
1999.

3

Homelessness has a devastating effect. A 1996 survey revealed that 40% of homeless
clients had gone a full day without eating within the last 30 days.10 Forty-five percent
(45%) reported one or more chronic health conditions, and 26% reported one or more
acute infectious conditions such as bronchitis.11 The Interagency Council on the
Homeless reported in 1991 that “the death rate for homeless males in each age group is
roughly five times that of non-homeless males.”12 Two in five homeless people report
that they have faced the threat of robbery and theft, 22% report being physically assaulted
and 7% report being sexually assaulted at least once since being homeless.13
Homelessness also contributes to the breakdown of families. In a 25-city survey, 57% of
cities surveyed reported that families may have to break up in order to be sheltered.14
Homeless children suffer additional harms, including barriers to their education. In
addition, they may also suffer serious emotional and developmental problems that can
persist long after their homelessness ends.
Homelessness and the problems that homeless Americans face present several concerns
relevant to U.S. compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
We summarize a few of these concerns below.
1. Article 6: Right to Life
The staggering level of homelessness and poverty in the U.S. has led to serious health
problems and even to death for some homeless persons, particularly in extreme weather
conditions. For example, in July 2005, 21 homeless people living on the streets of
Phoenix died in one week during a heat wave.
Instead of taking positive measures to address this serious problem, the federal
government has consistently cut housing programs. For example, during President
Reagan’s two terms in office, the federal housing program was severely cut. The U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) share of federal budget
authority fell from over 7% in 1978 to less than 1% ten years later. New budget authority
for housing assistance fell $24 billion, or more than 80% between 1978 and 1987.15
While the federal housing budget began to creep upward again during the Bush and
Clinton administrations, between 1991 and 1997, approximately 370,000 affordable
10

Homelessness: Programs and People, supra note 7 at 22.

11

Homelessness: Programs and People, supra note 7 at 23.

12

Interagency Council on the Homeless, Annual Report 34 (1990), as quoted in Moore v. Ganim,
233 Conn. 557, n11 (1995).
13

Homelessness: Programs and People, supra note 7 at 22.

14

U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2005 Hunger and Homelessness Survey.

15

Paul A. Leonard, Cushing N. Dolbeare, and Edward B. Lazere, A Place to Call Home: The
Crisis in Housing for the Poor (Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 1989.

4

housing units were lost as old public-housing projects were retired and landlords opted
out of HUD programs and upgraded properties to appeal to higher-income tenants. 16 In
addition, from fiscal 1995 to 1998, Congress created no Section 8 vouchers, the
government’s main rental assistance program for low-income families.17 Starting in
2004, the Bush administration has proposed deep cuts in the Section 8 voucher program.
In its fiscal year 2004 and 2005 budget requests, the Bush administration requested from
Congress less money than was required to guarantee renewal of existing vouchers in
place - the first time in the 30-year history of Section 8 that an administration had
proposed this. In fiscal year 2004, following vigorous protests, Congress restored $900
million to the administration’s request, averting a potential elimination of funding for
185,000 families.18 In fiscal year 2005, the administration tried again, proposing to drop
250,000 families from Section 8 in 2005 and 600,000 by 2009 - a 30% reduction in the
number of families served; again, Congress restored $1.4 billion to the administration's
request, with the aim of fully funding existing families in place.19 For fiscal year 2006,
the U.S. Congress has cut spending on Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, the
government’s main rental assistance program for low-income families, which could result
in the loss of subsidies to 65,000 low-income households.
In response to Hurricane Katrina, FEMA, the federal organization whose mission is to
provide assistance in response to large scale disasters, has failed to provide adequate
assistance to the millions of people in need of housing. FEMA’s policies and procedures
for processing and distributing assistance, including requiring applicants to submit a SBA
loan application in order for their housing assistance application to be considered and
failing to promptly process applications, resulted in a class action lawsuit being filed
against it.20 FEMA’s bureaucratic response has done much to worsen the plight of those
made homeless by Hurricane Katrina and little to address their need for permanent
housing.21

16

Shailagh Murray, Record 5.4 Million Households Need Aid on Rent, Cuomo Says in Plea to
Congress, The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2000.
17

Id.

18

Letter from the National Association of HUD Tenants to Santiago A. Canton, Esq. Executive
Secretary, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Organization of American States, 1889 F Street
NW, Washington, D.C. 20006 dated March 3, 2005.
19

Id.

20

See McWaters v. FEMA. In that case, Judge Duval, among other things, has issued orders
requiring FEMA to (i) extend its short term lodging program, and (ii) not make the submission of an SBA
loan application a condition precedent to applying for assistance.
21

In their Report, Senators Lieberman, Levin, Akaka, Carper, Lautenberg and Pryor note that
“several FEMA witnesses [acknowledge] that FEMA’s budget was not sufficient to fulfill its mission.” See
page 27 of the Report.

5

In addition to cuts in housing programs, the federal government has also proposed cuts in
the Medicaid program that will result in much larger co-payments for health care services
for very low-income people. The co-payments for Medicaid recipients would go up from
$3 to up to $100 for some health care services, making it more likely that recipients
would forego necessary medical care. Such cuts not only make the homelessness
problem worse, but threaten the lives of thousands of poor and homeless people
throughout the country.
2. Article 23: Right to Family
Because of the shortage of affordable housing, many families lack stable shelter.
Unfortunately, many states and communities have laws and policies specifying that a
parent’s inability to provide shelter constitutes child neglect, and thus a basis for
government agencies to remove children from their parents’ care. These young people
are placed in foster homes and institutions away from their parents, siblings, relatives,
friends, and communities.
In 1990, the federal government established the Family Unification Program (FUP), a
program that allows child welfare agencies to connect families with government housing
assistance in order to prevent family separations due to a lack of shelter. Many states and
communities have also established programs that provide government assistance to
prevent evictions, establish new residences, or otherwise stabilize housing. However,
these programs are grossly under-funded and fall tremendously short in meeting the
needs of families living in poverty.
3. Article 24: Barriers to homeless children’s right to education
Some 1.35 million children are homeless in America. Of that number, about half are
school aged. Many of these children face barriers in getting an education simply because
of their status as homeless.
In some cases, schools require an address before homeless children may be enrolled. In
other cases, the barriers are more subtle: homeless children move often, and transferring
their records from one school to another takes time, and during that time they are out of
school. In addition, they are likely to face transportation problems: if there is a school bus
it may not stop at the shelter or other location where they are living. If there is no school
bus, their parents may not be able to afford to pay for private transportation.
Further, homeless children who frequently change schools as they move are unlikely to
get an adequate education. They also may be unable to participate in school activities or
services such as special education classes. In addition, the instability of school changes
will only add to the negative emotional impact caused by their housing instability.
Federal law enacted in 1987, and strengthened since then by amendment, requires state
and local education agencies to ensure access to school for homeless children by

6

removing residency requirements, providing for quick transfers of records, and ensuring
transportation. In addition, it allows homeless parents to keep their children in the
original school if they so choose, thus promoting stability. But there is significant state
and local noncompliance, and NLCHP has had to go to court to enforce the law. The
U.S. Department of Education, the federal agency responsible for overseeing the law
nationally, has not taken an active role in promoting state and local compliance.
4. Article 25: Restrictions on the right to vote
According to Article 25, every citizen shall have the right to vote. Poor people and
people experiencing homelessness in the United States face many barriers to exercising
this right. Due to lack of a stable residence or identification documents, homeless
persons face obstacles to registering and voting. Obstacles include durational residency
requirements, mailing address requirements, identification requirements, and the impact
of felony convictions upon voting rights.22 A growing trend among states, including
Georgia and Indiana, is to require voters to have a photo identification card in order to
vote. Since homeless persons have difficulty obtaining identification cards, such a
requirement effectively denies thousands of poor and homeless persons the right to vote.
5. Article 26: Discrimination based on property or other status
Many cities across the country have enacted laws that criminally penalize homeless
people based on their status. Such laws include prohibitions on sleeping, “camping,”
lying, and even sitting in public places. These laws are often enacted specifically to
remove homeless people from public places like parks, sidewalks, and downtown areas.
For example, in Sarasota, Florida, a law prohibiting “lodging” in public specifically states
that it applies to people with no other place to live. In some cases, cities enforce
generally applicable laws in a discriminatory way, targeting only homeless people. For
example, laws against loitering or drinking in public may be enforced only against
homeless people.
Such laws sometimes focus on particular parts of a city, such as the downtown area,
tourist destinations, or locations where city events are planned to take place. Police
sometimes enforce the laws to carry out “sweeps” of particular locations before city
events. For example, in St. Louis, Missouri, police “swept” homeless people out of the
location of planned Fourth of July activities before the event. These laws and practices
also constitute restrictions on the right to freedom of movement, raising concerns under
Article 12.
Restrictions on begging are also prevalent, raising concerns under Article 22. Some are
general restrictions; others prohibit begging in particular locations or in particular

22

For more information about barriers homeless persons face when voting, see NLCHP, Voter Registration
and Voting: Ensuring the Voting Rights of Homeless Persons (2004).

7

manners. In a more recent trend, some cities prohibit people who are not homeless from
serving food to homeless or poor people in public places.
The cities that enact these laws, however, have insufficient affordable housing for their
residents; indeed, they also have insufficient emergency shelter space. These laws
penalize homeless people for being in public spaces even though they have no other place
to go. In either purpose or effect, they punish homeless people based on their status.
NLCHP, in collaboration with the National Coalition for the Homeless, published a
report on this topic in January 2006. Titled A Dream Denied, the report includes
information on 224 cities across the U.S. The report is available at
http://www.nlchp.org/Pubs/index.cfm?FA=4&TAB=2.
Other violations of Article 26 in the U.S. include laws that make it difficult for homeless
persons to take action that may help them move out of homelessness. For example,
without a permanent residence, homeless people many not be able to obtain identification
cards which severely hampers their efforts to find housing, employment, and other
services. Stringent state requirements for issuance of identification cards make it
virtually impossible for some homeless persons to obtain an identification card, as
homeless persons do not have a permanent residence and may not have identification
documents. For example, the State of Michigan requires a person to prove residency by
providing a document that includes the applicant’s name and a Michigan residence
address, something a person living on the street, in a car, or doubled up in another
person’s home will not have.23
When homeless persons do not have identification, they are prevented from taking
actions that help them move out of homelessness. Without identification, a homeless
person may not be able to obtain housing or employment.
6. Article 26: Discrimination based on gender
Domestic violence is a leading cause of homelessness among women.24 Among cities
surveyed in 2005, 50% identified domestic violence as a primary cause of local
homelessness.25 In varying regions, between 22% and 57% of homeless women reported
that domestic violence was the immediate cause of their homelessness.26 Ninety-two
23

For more information about barriers to obtaining identification cards and the consequences, see
NLCHP, Photo Identification Barriers Faced by Homeless Persons: The Impact of September 11 (2004).
24

Much of the data regarding homelessness varies regionally and locally. Nevertheless, national
data collected in 1996 indicated that while women made up a minority of both currently homeless
individuals (32 vs. 68 percent) and formerly homeless individuals (46 vs. 54 percent), women made up a
distinct majority of those homeless individuals who never had been homeless in the past (61 vs. 39
percent). See MARTHA BURT ET AL., HELPING AMERICA’S HOMELESS: EMERGENCY SHELTER OR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING? 225, table 8.1 (2001).
25

U.S. Conference of Mayors/Sodexho Survey on Hunger and Homelessness, 2005.

26

Wilder Research Ctr., Homeless in Minnesota 2003: Key Facts from the Survey of Minnesotans

8

percent (92%) of homeless women have experienced severe physical or sexual abuse at
some point in their lives,27 and 63% have been victims of domestic violence as adults.28
Currently, 38% of all domestic violence victims typically become homeless at some point
in their lives.29
In some cases, victims become homeless when they are denied housing or evicted from
their homes based on the violent acts of their abusers. Because such practices virtually
always affect women, and because they have an adverse impact based on sex, they in fact
constitute a form of sex discrimination in housing.
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, also known as the federal Fair Housing
Act (FHA), sex discrimination in housing is statutorily prohibited.30 A violation of the
FHA can occur if a landlord denies a tenant or prospective tenant housing, evicts her, or
discriminates against her with regard to the “terms, conditions, or privileges” or “in the
provision of services and facilities.”31 However, compliance is significantly lacking, and
these provisions are largely not enforced by the federal government.

without Permanent Housing 22 (Feb. 2004); Ctr. for Impact Research, Pathways to and from
Homelessness: Women and Children in Chicago Shelters 3 (Jan. 2004); Nat’l Ctr. on Family Homelessness
& Healthcare for the Homeless Clinicians’ Network, Social Supports for Homeless Mothers 14, 26 (Oct.
2003); Inst. for Children & Poverty, The Hidden Migration: Why New York City Shelters Are Overflowing
with Families (Apr. 2004); Homes for the Homeless & Inst. for Children & Poverty, Ten Cities 1997-1998:
A Snapshot of Family Homelessness Across America 3 (1998); Virginia Coalition for the Homeless, 1995
Shelter Provider Survey (1995) (out of print), cited in Nat’l Coalition for the Homeless, Domestic Violence
and Homelessness: NCH Fact Sheet #8 (1999).
27
A. Browne & S. Bassuk, Intimate Violence in the Lives of Homeless and Poor Housed Women:
Prevalence and Patterns in an Ethnically Diverse Sample, AM. J. ORTHOPSYCHIATRY, 67(2), 261-278 (Apr.
1997); A. Browne, Responding to the Needs of Low Income and Homeless Women Who are Survivors of
Family Violence, J. AMER. MEDICAL ASS’N, 53(2), 57-64 (Spring 1998).
28

Id.

29

Charlene K. Baker et al., Domestic Violence and Housing Problems: A Contextual Analysis of
Women’s Help-Seeking, Received Informal Support, and Formal System Response, Violence Against
Women 9(7) 754-783 (2003).
30

42 U.S.C. § § 3601 et seq.

31

42 U.S.C. § 3604(a), (b). See Bouley v. Young-Sabourin, 394 F.Supp.2d 675 (D. Vt. 2005);
Warren v. Ypsilanti Housing Commission (E.D. Mich. 2003) (settled); United States ex rel. Alvera v.
C.B.M. Group, No. CV 01-857-PA (D. Or. 2001) (consent decree); Alvera v. Creekside Village
Apartments, No. 10-99-0538-8 (HUD 2001) (HUD Determination of Reasonable Cause); Winsor v.
Regency Property Management, No. 94 CV 2349) (Wis. Cir. Ct. 7, 1995) (memorandum opinion).

9

Conclusion
Based on the above facts, we respectfully request that the Human Rights Committee
conclude that the Government of the United States is in violation of its obligations under
Articles 6, 24, 25, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Specifically, we respectfully request that the Committee conclude as follows:
•

The Committee is concerned that homelessness has led to serious health problems
and even to death, and that proposed further cuts to housing and health programs
will exacerbate these problems. The Committee recommends that the State party
take positive measures required by Article 6, including the allocation of more
funds to federal housing programs, to address this serious problem.

•

The Committee is concerned that the shortage of affordable housing and even
emergency shelter has led to the separation of homeless children from their
families due to homelessness. The Committee recommends that the State party
fully fund the Family Unification Program and take other positive measures
required by Article 23 to address this serious problem.

•

The Committee is concerned that homeless children are being denied full access
to their right to education. To address this problem, the Committee recommends
that the State party require the U.S. Department of Education fulfill its
responsibility by enforcing current federal laws and take other positive measures
required by Article 24 to address this serious problem.

•

The Committee is concerned that homeless adults are being denied their right to
vote, in violation of Article 25. The Committee recommends that the State party
take positive measures required by Article 25, such as prohibiting states from
requiring that voters present a photo identification card in order to participate in
elections.

•

The Committee recommends that the State party take positive measures required
by Article 26, to remove barriers to obtaining identification cards. The
Committee recommends that the State party insure that both federal and state laws
have provisions to help homeless persons obtain identification cards.

•

The Committee is concerned that homeless people are being criminally punished
based on their homeless status, in violation of Article 26. The Committee
recommends that the federal government discourage penalizing homeless persons
based on their status by not distributing certain federal funds to cities and
localities that use such measures.

•

The Committee is concerned that women victimized by domestic violence are
unable to obtain and are being evicted from their housing based on gender
discrimination, in violation of Article 26. The Committee recommends that the
State party take positive measures required by Article 26, including more active

10

enforcement of Tile VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to address this serious
problem.

11