During his remarks announcing a federal takeover of D.C.’s police force, President Trump invoked harsh imagery — describing the capital as plagued with “slums” and promising, “We’re getting rid of the slums.” The phrase echoed again at a later briefing where he emphasized the need to eliminate “unsightly” encampments..png)
Yet beneath the surface of political spectacle lies a troubling paradox: the defendant “slums” are often owned and controlled by white landlords, even operating under federal HUD housing contracts. One such example is Minnesota landlord Don Klyberg, a registered slumlord who contracts with HUD yet remains shielded from accountability — epitomizing the hypocrisy embedded in the rhetoric. Despite generating revenue and relying on taxpayer-backed housing programs, landlords like Klyberg continue to neglect tenant welfare while operating with minimal oversight due to the criminal forces employed in public services such as HUD employees, federally contracted Housing Authorities and Development Agency employees, city housing inspectors, police officers, animal control and housing courts who refuse to honor strict enforcement of already established regulation and laws against slum owners and operators such as Don Klyberg.
So, how exactly would President Trump’s latest declaration — to deploy more personnel from minimally regulated enforcement fields — reduce crime or eliminate so-called “slums,” when those very communities exist largely due to the government’s systemic failure to regulate industries like housing, even at the federal level with regard to this population of citizens; such an approach risk increasing both poverty and criminalization, rather than solving either doesn't it?
The Bigger Picture
| Trump’s Rhetoric | The Reality |
|---|---|
| “We’re getting rid of the slums” — a political promise targeting urban decay | Many “slum” properties are owned by white landlords with HUD contracts — institutional neglect creates visible housing crises i.e. "slums" |
| Slums portrayed as the result of poor-city leadership and crime | Often, systemic inaction and opaque accountability allow slumlords to persist despite tenant harms resulting in desperate and displaced Americans resorting to crimes for survival and protection |
A sweeping, centralizing crackdown as the cure | Oversimplified: criminally targeting those experiencing housing crisis without cracking down on slum property owners and public service employee that shield criminal conduct from both parties, benefits the prison industry complex and expands dependence on tax-funded programs such as welfare and Medicaid for these economically injured communities. It does nothing to rectify the housing inequity (slum neighborhoods) which precede crimes of survival. Why would one not crack down on housing related crimes and slumlords to reduce both slums and crimes? |
Why This Matters
-
Structural Betrayal: Painting slums with racialized language obscures who holds real power and responsibility. The “slumlord” imagery diverts attention from regulatory failure.
-
HUD Blind Spots: Federal housing contracts don't always come with rigorous accountability, allowing neglect and abuse while retaining legitimacy.
-
Rhetoric Over Reality: Public declarations like “getting rid of slums” sound decisive, but lack follow-through in systemic reform — particularly for Black tenants and disabled residents in impoverished areas.
This juxtaposition of political theater and real-world neglect exposes how powerful voices can redefine social problems — shifting blame onto communities while shielding institutional beneficiaries.
The Triggering Incident
The wave of federal action was precipitated by the August 2025 attempted carjacking of Edward Coristine, a notable official tied to Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency. This incident reignited concerns about public safety in D.C. and laid the groundwork for drastic measures.
What the Administration Announced
-
Federalization of the City’s Police: President Trump invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to place the Metropolitan Police Department under federal control for up to 30 days. This move eliminates local authority—home rule—and is unprecedented in modern times.
-
Deployment of National Guard Troops: Approximately 800 National Guard members were sent to the capital—authorized by the president and coordinated through Attorney General Pam Bondi and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
-
Clearing Homeless Encampments—Shelter or Jail: The administration declared that homeless individuals must move into shelters—or face jail—an aggressive enforcement move aimed at “beautifying” the city and confronting crime.
What Officials and Advocates Are Saying
-
Mayor Muriel Bowser and D.C. Attorney General Push Back: Critics have decried the takeover as unconstitutional, unnecessary, and politically motivated. Bowser noted that violent crime in D.C. has dropped 26% year-over-year, making the declared state of emergency unfounded.
-
Civil Liberties Alarm: Voices such as D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton slammed the move as a historic attack on D.C. home rule, arguing it sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach.
-
Humanitarian Concerns: Advocates fear criminalizing homelessness without investing in supportive services can worsen systemic issues. Organizations like Miriam’s Kitchen caution that punitive measures disproportionately harm the most vulnerable.
The Data Contradicts the Crisis Rhetoric
Despite political rhetoric framing D.C. as lawless, official crime data reveals a different reality:
-
Violent crime is at a 30-year low.
-
Homicides are down 32%, robberies by 39%, and carjackings by 53% in 2024 compared to 2023.
Researchers and service providers report homelessness is declining—by nearly 20%—as housing and support programs improve.
What This Means Going Forward
| Aspect | Potential Outcome |
|---|---|
| Federal Overreach | Sets precedent for bypassing local authority—raising constitutional and democratic concerns. |
| Homelessness Response | Emphasizes enforcement over long-term solutions, risking further marginalization. |
| Public Sentiment | Could deepen mistrust in federal institutions among D.C. residents, especially communities of color. |
President Trump’s federal intervention in Washington, D.C.—through police takeover, National Guard deployment, and homeless encampment removal—reflects a broader strategy of aggressive federalization and mythology over data-driven policymaking. Despite actual reductions in crime and homelessness, the administration has mobilized vast resources and authority in the name of public safety, calling into question the motives and consequences of dismantling local governance over the problem, but not addressing its role in initiating and sustaining the problems through a commitment to social injustice.
AP News. (2025, August 12). Trump says he's placing Washington police under federal control and activating the National Guard. https://apnews.com/article/655bc22834223c7dc93115bbcb2b215c
AP News. (2025, August 11). Trump declares crackdown to 'get rid of the slums' in D.C., says he will clean up capital. https://apnews.com/article/39388597bad7e70085079888fe7fb57b
CBS News New York. (2025, August 12). NYC homeless advocates respond to Trump’s nationwide homeless crackdown plan. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/news/nyc-homeless-advocates-on-president-trumps-plan/
Independent. (2025, August 11). Trump declares 'we’re getting rid of the slums' during wild DC press conference. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-press-conference-dc-crime-b2805626.html
.png)
.png)
.png)
Post a Comment