by Andi Daniel, Technology Coordinator
October 28, 2025
In response to the federal administration's executive orders, specifically "Ending Crime and Disorder on American’s Streets” from July 24, and some policy statements from the head of Health and Human Services, SAMHSA released their strategic priorities in September. These priorities decenter the people who are struggling with behavioral health and homelessness by requiring specific treatment before housing assistance is available. This takes away voice and choice which are essential to sustained recovery.
As people in recovery, we know that forcing people to comply with specific types of treatment rarely works. Treatment courts often have incredibly high "success" while people are in the program but those successes drop dramatically when there is no longer the threat of incarceration. Effective, long term recovery must be freely chosen and individualized. I wrote about this back in August but it is in the forefront of my mind again because of some statements made by a candidate for city commission in Great Falls.
We have already seen cities and towns in Montana try to push unhoused people out of their communities claiming that providing services such as warming shelters "encourages" homelessness. Urban camping permits are expiring. Affordable housing simply doesn't exist in many places around the state. The new SAMHSA priorities eliminate housing first programs. This means that placing someone in housing before addressing things like substance use or mental health concerns is not an option. People must first comply with whatever treatment plan is created for them.
There is an emphasis on "opening up" civil commitment so that people with behavioral health issues can be forced into the state hospital. Montana doesn't have the capacity to handle an influx of people and civil commitment should only be used in when someone poses an immediate danger to themselves or others and cannot be effectively treated elsewhere. We already struggle to staff existing services; expanding them under these conditions will only worsen the crisis, leaving facilities chronically understaffed and unsafe.
At the beginning of this federal administration, the head of Health and Human Services suggested that people could be housed at "wellness farms" to get the treatment they need. He is a staunch supporter of 12 step programs and spirituality and condemns the use of medications - not just in recovery. Again, there is coercion at play. People may be told that they have to attend these wellness camps and comply with the rules of the camp or face incarceration. This also ignores the importance of finding the right recovery pathway for each person. 12 step works for some people but it doesn't work for all people. And it doesn't address the needs of people with mental health conditions and no substance use disorder.
Pete Anderson's statements from the October 20, 2025 candidate forum echo this same line of thinking. He even referenced the poor farms that existed at the end of the 19th century as his inspiration. People on these farms worked in exchange for food and shelter. They are someone reminiscent of company towns. In both instances, a disagreement with a supervisor could mean not only the loss of a job, but of housing and access to consumer goods if the stores are also owned by the farm or company. With wages too low to allow savings, escaping these farms was nearly impossible.
Not only did Anderson start with the term"homeless island" when asked how the city should manage the unhoused population, he suggested that these locations could be a tourist attraction, complete with business advertising. Sounds a bit like a zoo than a solution. Unhoused people are people who deserve dignity, autonomy, and safety, not incarceration, forced treatment, or exploitation for tourism. You can read more about Anderson's comments on the Montana Free Press website.
The policies being proposed federally and locally threaten to strip people of autonomy, dignity, and the right to choose their own path to recovery. Forcing treatment or isolating unhoused people will not solve the challenges of homelessness or behavioral health. It will only deepen harm. Real recovery and stability come from compassion, choice, and access to housing and support—not coercion or control.