Some find it brutal. But if done the right way, for the right people, it can work.
Whoever wrote this byline should be shot.
It’s trying to change policy really around three different issues. First, it’s trying to expand the use of civil commitments; that’s involuntary mental health treatment. It’s usually reserved for people who are a danger to themselves, danger to others, or unable to meet their basic needs. And he’s looking to expand that. It’s not totally clear how he’s gonna do that, because that’s determined by state law, but in any case, that’s one of his objectives.
They do love overcomplicating it. I’ve heard so many wild and usually contradictory assertions and all from the same lib lol. Ex “they don’t even want to live in homes”, and “they live in homes, they just go out and beg because they don’t want to work.”
It’s like the, “they don’t want to go to shelters because they have to be sober” line from people who have never witnessed how fucked up shelters can be.