White House Order on Homelessness Sets Stage for Policy Showdown with Vermont

While the order cannot unilaterally outlaw state policies, it can direct federal agencies like HUD and HHS to attach new conditions to the grants they administer that would make Vermont ineligible.

A sweeping presidential executive order issued Thursday, aimed at what the White House terms “Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets,” has established a federal policy direction that is in direct opposition to the core strategies Vermont has spent over a decade developing to address homelessness and the opioid crisis.

The order, signed on July 24, 2025, could force a difficult choice upon state leaders: abandon established, data-backed local policies or risk losing access to critical federal funding streams that support the state's most vulnerable residents.

A New Federal Mandate

The executive order outlines a fundamental reversal of federal policy. According to the text of the order, federal agencies are now directed to end financial support for “Housing First” policies, which the White House claims have “failed to deliver on their promise of promoting treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency.”

Instead, the order states that federal grants will be prioritized for states and municipalities that enforce prohibitions on urban camping, increase the use of law enforcement in responding to homelessness, and make access to housing assistance conditional on participation in treatment. This represents a return to a "treatment-first" model, where individuals are often required to achieve sobriety or meet other behavioral benchmarks before they can be deemed "ready" for housing.

Vermont's Contrasting Approach: Housing as Healthcare

This new federal directive creates a fundamental conflict with Vermont’s widely adopted “Housing First” model. For years, the state’s strategy, implemented by leading organizations like Pathways Vermont, has centered on providing immediate access to permanent, independent housing without such preconditions. The guiding principle, supported by state planning documents and advocacy groups like the Housing First Vermont coalition, is that people are better able to address complex challenges like addiction or mental health once they have the stability and dignity of a home.

The effectiveness of this approach in the state has been documented. According to a 2014 study of the Pathways Vermont program published in the peer-reviewed American Journal of Public Health, participants had an 86% housing retention rate after one year, a figure significantly higher than traditional models.

Furthermore, the executive order explicitly targets “harm reduction” initiatives, directing agencies to cease funding for what it calls “safe consumption efforts.” This runs directly counter to the public health strategy championed by Vermont's Department of Health and enacted by its Legislature. Harm reduction focuses on minimizing the negative health consequences of drug use—saving lives and preventing the spread of disease—rather than demanding immediate abstinence.

This philosophy is the basis for Vermont’s robust naloxone distribution program and the recent legislative authorization of an overdose prevention center in Burlington, a measure passed with a veto-proof majority. These policies treat substance use as a public health issue, not a moral or criminal failing.

A Collision of Policy and Funding

The central issue for Vermont is one of jurisdiction and financial leverage. While the executive order cannot unilaterally outlaw state policies, it can direct federal agencies like the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to attach new, conflicting conditions to the grants they administer.

Vermont relies heavily on this federal funding to support a wide range of social services, from rental assistance vouchers to substance use treatment programs. The order places state officials and the entire network of non-profits that form Vermont’s social safety net in a challenging position. Organizations from the Upper Valley Haven to the Groundworks Collaborative in Brattleboro have built their programs around a low-barrier, harm-reduction framework that is now at odds with federal priorities.

This directive appears to run counter to goals outlined in Vermont's own draft Consolidated Plan for HUD, which emphasizes the continuation of Housing First principles. Now, the state may be forced to choose between adhering to its own evidence-based plans and aligning with new federal mandates to secure funding.

The Stakes for Vermonters

This policy collision comes at a moment of profound crisis. According to data from the Vermont Coalition to End Homelessness, the state has experienced a dramatic surge in its homeless population in recent years. The end of a pandemic-era program that sheltered individuals in motels, combined with a severe shortage of affordable housing across the state, has left hundreds of Vermonters with no stable place to live.

Any disruption to the existing service infrastructure caused by a loss of funding or a forced change in policy could have dire consequences. The White House order argues that its approach will restore public order and provide a more effective pathway to recovery. However, in Vermont, where policymakers and providers have long viewed housing as a form of healthcare, the federal government’s new focus on law enforcement and conditional services represents a starkly different and challenging philosophy. The path forward for Vermont's leaders remains uncertain as they await guidance on the implementation of the federal order and its potential impact on the state's most vulnerable residents.