Although throughout the United States
panhandling is discouraged, passive panhandling falls under
First Amendment rights to free speech. In
Alabama the prohibition of
aggressive panhandling and regulation of passive panhandling is controlled by individual cities, with many panhandlers being charged with
loitering offenses. Loitering for the purposes of begging and prostitution in Alabama is a criminal offense. An issue for Alabamians is the proportion of panhandlers defined as
vagrants, who contrary to their implications, are not homeless but accept the generosity of the community under this false pretense. As the cities decide ordinances for the control of panhandling, there is a variety of methods used across the state depending on the issues in each city. Many cities such as
Mobile, Alabama have introduced a set of ordinances to prohibit panhandling in the "Downtown Visitors Domain" area, as well regulations for panhandlers in the rest of the city including disallowing; panhandling at night, physical contact while panhandling, panhandling in groups, and approaching those in queues or traffic. These ordinances are an improvement on the previously vague prohibition of "begging". Panhandling in the Downtown Visitors Domain may result in fines and jail sentences for those involved. Another effort to limit panhandling in Mobile is an initiative using donation meters through which people can donate money to approved charities in attempts to resolve the necessity of panhandling by providing disadvantaged citizens with resources. This method attempts to lessen the recurring arrest and release of the publicly intoxicated, who are often homeless or vagrant and participate in panhandling. An important concern for those in Alabama's capital city,
Montgomery, is those who travel from other cities to panhandle, with a police report from November 2016 showing that most panhandlers in the area had travelled to the city for the purposes of begging. In the city of
Daphne, panhandling is prohibited within 25 feet of public roadways and violators are subject to fines, while the cities of
Gardendale and
Vestavia Hills prevent all forms of panhandling on
private and
public property. The city of
Tuscaloosa prohibits all aggressive panhandling, as well as passive panhandling near banks and
ATMs, towards people in parked or stopped vehicles and at public transport facilities. Alabama's most populous city,
Birmingham has considered limitations on panhandling that disallow solicitation near banks and ATMs, with fines for infractions such as aggressive or intimidating behaviour. Another concern for Birmingham is litter left behind in popular panhandling sites, especially for business owners in the downtown area. In Birmingham, specifically asking for money is considered illegal panhandling. The City Action Partnership (CAP) of Birmingham encourages civilians to report and discourage panhandlers throughout the city, especially under unlawful circumstances including panhandling using children, aggression, false information and panhandling while loitering as prohibited by City Ordinances. Within the city of
Opelika it is considered a
misdemeanour to present false or misleading information while panhandling, and there are requirements for panhandlers to possess a panhandling permit. Threatening behaviours towards those solicited to are also considered misdemeanours and include; being too close, blocking the path of those approached, or panhandling in groups of two or more persons. Those previously charged with these offences in Opelika are not eligible for a panhandling permit within set time limits.
Arizona
Panhandling is not an illegal practice in the United States; however, states and counties have different policies in dealing with the issue. Arizona has a 17.4% of the population living below the poverty line and has 56 units per 100 renters being considered affordable housing for being living under the poverty line, Arizona is considered one of the poorest states in the USA being ranked 8th poorest. In this sense panhandling is a major issue in the region. Aggressive measures have been taken in order to address this issue. == Arizona ==
Arizona
The state of Arizona has been very active in attempting to criminalize acts of panhandling. Measures have included arresting and jailing individuals caught in the act. Arizona's Revised Statutes title 13. Criminal Code 2905(a)(3) sought to ban begging from the state of Arizona, specifically in the area of being "present in a public place to beg, unless specifically authorized by law." The city of Flagstaff took the policy a step further by implementing a practice of arresting, jailing and prosecuting individuals who are beg for money or food. After criticism and a lawsuit from The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona the policy was deemed unconstitutional, as it breached free speech rights granted by both federal and state constitutions. In his judgement, Judge Neil V. Wake declared the A.R.S 13-2905(a)(3) was void and prohibited any practices the city of Flagstaff has implemented that " interferes with, targets, cites, arrests, or prosecutes any person on the basis of their act(s) of peaceful begging in public areas." It prohibits "following the person being solicited in a manner that is intended or likely to cause a reasonable person to fear imminent bodily harm," or "obstructing the safe or free passage of the person being solicited." Under the proposed law, the first violation would be treated as a civil traffic offence; however, a second violation within 24 months would be treated as a Class 1 misdemeanor citation in which an individual could be fined a maximum of $2500 and face up to six months in jail. The State of Arizona continues to seek measures that would both limit panhandling but also satisfy the judgement made by Judge Neil V. Wake and the First Amendment. ==Arkansas==
Arkansas
In 2015, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development released a report detailing the decline of homelessness in Arkansas, but that the level of
homeless veterans had increased. They found that 2,560 people were homeless in Arkansas in January 2015, and that 207 were veterans, an 83% increase in veteran homelessness since January 2009. Arkansas is one of only five states to have seen homelessness among veterans to increase by more than 100 people in that time. Of those five states, Arkansas had the largest number of homeless veterans. This is compared to nationwide, where homelessness among veterans has decreased by 35% since 2009. As of 2015, it was estimated that 1,334 of the homeless in Arkansas are youths. In Arkansas, the most common causes of homelessness are income issues and personal relationships. The median time spent homeless is 12 months, however 30% have been homeless for over two years. Jon Woodward from the 7Hills shelter in Fayetteville, AR said "primarily the two largest groups of who's homeless in our region are families with children and veterans. And those are two groups that our community really does care about and can get behind supporting." Despite this, shelters in Little Rock have struggled with insufficient funding and police harassment, resulting in reducing hours or closure. Under loitering laws, lingering or remaining in a public place with the intention to beg is prohibited in Arkansas. However, in November 2016 in Little Rock, a judge ruled that this law banning begging was unconstitutional, and violated the First Amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the case on behalf of Michael Rodgers, a disabled veteran, and Glynn Dilbeck, a homeless man who was arrested for holding up a sign asking for money to cover his daughter's medical expenses. ACLU were successful in their challenge, meaning that law enforcement officers will be prohibited from arresting or issuing citations to people for begging or panhandling. The loitering law has had a history of being abused by police officers in the state of Arkansas. For example, two homeless men reported separate incidents of having been kicked out of Little Rock Bus Station by police officers. Despite showing valid tickets that showed that their bus would arrive within 30 minutes, they were told they could not wait on the premises because they were loitering. In another incident, police officers told homeless people to leave a free public event or be subject to arrest for loitering in a park, although vendors at the event had encouraged the homeless to attend and take free samples of their merchandise. In 2005, police assembled an undercover taskforce to crack down on panhandling in the downtown Little Rock area, arresting 41 people. 72% of the homeless report ever being arrested. ==California==
California
speaks about homelessness and federal support, 2019. in Oakland California, E. 12th Street, set up by local homeless people, 2019 0.4% of Californian residents (171,521) were identified as homeless in 2022. In 2017, California had an oversized share of the nation's homeless: 22%, for a state whose residents make up only 12% of the country's total population. The
California State Auditor found in their April 2018 report
Homelessness in California, that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development noted that "California had about 134,000 homeless individuals, which represented about 24 percent of the total homeless population in the nation” The California State Auditor is an independent government agency responsible for analyzing California economic activities and then issuing reports. The
Sacramento Bee notes that large cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco both attribute their increases in homeless to the
housing shortage. In June 2019,
Los Angeles County officials reported over 58,000 homeless in the county. Many of LA's homeless live in
Downtown,
Skid Row,
Westlake, and
Venice Beach.
San Francisco A 2023 study published by the
University of California, San Francisco found that around 90% of the homeless population of California lost their housing while living in the state. The research also revealed that around half of the homeless population is over 50 years old, with black residents disproportionately represented, that the majority of the homeless population want to find housing, and the high cost of housing was the greatest obstacle to exiting homelessness.
San Francisco and the general
Bay Area has tens of thousands of homeless. SF has between 7–10,000 homeless people. In June 2024, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling overturning a California appeals court decision, thereby allowing cities to ban homeless camps and sleeping in public areas. ==Colorado==
Florida
Because of its warm weather, Florida is a favorable destination for the homeless. As of January 2017, there are an estimated 32,190 homeless individuals in Florida. Of this high number, 2,846 are family households, 2,019 are unaccompanied young adults (aged 18–24), 2,817 are veterans, and an estimated 5,615 are individuals experiencing chronic homelessness. Due to the eviction moratorium ending during the early fall of 2021, the number of homeless individuals and families may increase. According to a January 2020 count, this figure was 27,487 on any given day, a decrease from previous years. However, this figure could likely increase due to the
COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States that started in September and October 2021.
Pinellas County has one of the highest concentrations of any Florida county, at nearly 0.3% with nearly 3,000 homeless people and a population in general of almost one million. It is second next to
Miami-Dade County's homeless population at 4,235, but this is due to a higher general population (6 million; 0.08%) and still a lower prevalence closer to Florida and the U.S.'s average between 0.1 and 0.2%. Various cities in Florida have laws against aggressive panhandling and general panhandling that could result in fines or demands to leave, as well as sleeping on benches or parks. == Georgia ==
Georgia
The rise of
neoliberal governance has dramatically changed the way that people who are homeless in heavily populated cities are dealt with and treated around the United States. Neoliberal governance is the promotion of human advancement through economic growth. The most accepted idea of achieving this is by pushing towards a
free market economy which thrives off of not having much government or state participation. In the 1970s and 1980s,
Atlanta, Georgia was one of these cities where businesses were very active in their efforts to decrease homelessness in the spirit of this idea. The
Central Atlanta Progress (CAP) was one of the most notable voices in Atlanta promoting these sorts of initiatives. For example, their first major initiative was to criminalize homelessness. They saw the homeless population as a threat to public safety. Their efforts were met with conflicting responses from police and Georgian citizens due to the large size and demographic makeup of the homeless population in Atlanta. The majority of the homeless were black males. In 1996 to prepare for hosting the
Olympic games,
Fulton County provided the homeless people in the area with the opportunity to leave the town as long as they could provide proof of either a family or a job waiting for them at their choice of destination. Fulton County would then give them a one-way bus ticket, provided that the recipient signed a document agreeing not to return to Atlanta. While it is unclear how many people took this offer to leave the city for free, it is estimated that thousands of the homeless population in Atlanta did take this one-way ticket. For the ones that did not leave, around 9,000 homeless persons were arrested for activities such as trespassing, disorderly conduct, panhandling, and urban camping. Urban camping is the use of public or city-owned space to sleep or to protect one's personal belongings. For example, the use of a tent underneath a bridge in order to serve as a living space is prohibited. Action towards panhandling has also been seen from the government. Many downtown cities around the United States have tried to combat panhandlers by prohibiting panhandling at certain locations as well as restricting the time periods during which it is allowed. In Georgia, Atlanta was proactive with this idea by banning panhandling in what is known as the "tourist triangle" in August 2005. Another ban prohibited panhandling within 15 feet of common public places such as ATM's and train stations. Violations are punished with either a fine or imprisonment. In 2012, the city of Atlanta created an anti-panhandling law that criminalizes aggressive panhandling. Aggressive panhandling is defined as any form of gestures or intense intervention for the sake of retrieving monetary substance. The policies that Atlanta has put in place were very similar to the ones that
Athens, Georgia currently has. Failing to adhere to the law could result in jail time or community service.
Athens-Clarke County added the possibility for a fine to be paid instead of serving prison time or participating in community service. ==Hawaii==
Illinois
The city of
Chicago, Illinois has gained a reputation as the city with the most homeless people, rivaling Los Angeles and
New York City, although no statistical data have backed this up. The reputation stems primarily from the subjective number of beggars found on the streets, rather than any sort of objective statistical census data. In 2007, Chicago had far less homeless people per capita than peers New York, and Los Angeles, or other major cities such as Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Boston, among others, with only 5,922 homeless recorded in a one night count. A 2019 study by the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless found that among Chicago's homeless population for 2017, 18,000 had college degrees and 13,000 were employed. Despite the challenges surrounding the search for objective data, a 2022 study led by
University of Chicago Health Lab researchers Jackie Soo and Leoson Hoay uncovered significant costs associated with high users of the city's social services, including homelessness services. These costs were amplified within a particularly vulnerable group that consistently cycled across multiple services - specifically the homelessness system, hospital system, and criminal justice system. Chicago's response to homelessness involves a diverse ecosystem of non-governmental organizations. Advocacy groups like
The Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, social enterprises like
StreetWise, and direct service providers like
Care for Friends all play a critical role. ==Indiana==
Iowa
Homelessness in Iowa is a significant issue. In 2015, 12,918 Iowans were homeless and 'served by emergency shelters, transitional housing, rapid rehousing or street outreach projects'. Another 8,174 Iowans were at risk of being homeless and lived in supportive housing or were involved in street outreach projects. Those who have been abusing substances are prohibited from using this shelter, thus excluding a large proportion of homeless people. Panhandling has become an increasingly significant problem in Iowa. There is much controversy surrounding how best to deal with this widespread issue. Debate has focused on the best way to balance compassion, free speech and public safety. Iowan cities have struggled with finding the balance between avoiding criminalising poverty, while at the same time not encouraging begging, particularly that which is aggressive. There has also been widespread concern about the legitimacy of panhandlers and the significant amount of money that some are making. Cedar Rapids panhandler, Dawn, admitted that she has come across many illegitimate panhandlers. These include people who already have access to housing and financial assistance, and even some who pretend to be disabled or to be a veteran. A famous incident in Muscatine, Iowa, photos of which went viral, provides a prime example of the tensions that exist around the legitimacy of panhandlers. In December 2015, two young boys were panhandling, holding signs which read 'broke and hungry please'. Pothoff, who worked nearby, offered the boys a job. The boys stated that they were 'not from around here', smirked and walked away. Pothoff then decided to join the boys on the side of the road, holding up his own sign, which read 'Offered these guys a job, they said no, don't give them money'. Following the Supreme Court case, United States v Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720, 725 (1990), the right to beg for money is protected speech under the First Amendment. Therefore, panhandling cannot be entirely prohibited. However, as per Ward v Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 791 (1989), US cities may enact 'reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions' which are narrowly drafted to 'serve a significant governmental interest' and also allow for this speech to occur in an alternative setting. A panhandling licence is required and this can be revoked for 6 months if any of these regulations are breached, in addition to a fine or incarceration. Bettendorf grants panhandling licences for free, however licences must be renewed every 6 months and candidates must undergo a police check. Similarly, in Davenport, aggressive panhandling, soliciting within 20 feet of an automated teller machine or bank entrance, or on a roadway or median of a roadway are prohibited. In light of community concerns, Davenport is set to review the ordinance. Iowa City has similar ordinances and has installed special purple parking meters which are used to fund homeless organizations. The aim is to encourage people to give money to homeless programs through parking fees, rather than directly to beggars. However, some argue that it is better to donate money to panhandlers than to organizations as you can be sure that the money is going directly to the person without any loss through administrative costs. As Cedar Rapids currently has no ordinance controlling panhandling, there has been an increase in the number of panhandlers. Cedar Rapids has also seen an increase in the number of complaints concerning panhandlers. However, Saelinger (2006) argues that these laws '"criminalize" the very condition of being homeless'. Saelinger (2006) also claims that through the implementation of these laws, governments have focused on making homelessness invisible, rather than working to eradicate it. The aesthetics of cities has also influenced the enactment of these ordinances, with businesses complaining that panhandlers bother their customers and make them feel uncomfortable, in addition to ruining the image of the city. ==Kansas==
Kansas
In comparison with the US, Kansas continued to have an increasing level of homelessness until 2015. Between 2007 and 2015, homelessness across the US fell by 13 percent, while in Kansas it rose by more than 23 percent. Individuals predominantly fell victim to homelessness rather than families, generating this increase in homelessness. This is in discord with
Sedgwick County's reputation as one of the most successful counties in the US for providing shelter to homeless family members and individuals. Chronic homelessness was seen to be more prevalent and increasing as was the proportion of veterans subjected to sleeping on the streets.
Begging and associated crimes There is much concern within Kansas regarding the legitimacy of begging and panhandling. For example, within Wichita alone, there are many reports of persons posing as homeless to make a quick income and fuel their addiction habits such as alcohol, drugs, and sex. This has been seen to increase recently with the development of boutiques and shops that are drawing growing numbers of customers and tourists to the area. Residents have further complained that many who are homeless frequently choose to bypass available services in order to maintain their lifestyle. This increase in 'untruthful' begging has resulted in further chronic homelessness, as those who are most genuinely in need are being sidelined by 'quick-fix intruders'. The consequences of panhandling present as an unclassified misdemeanour, which under Wyandotte County law signifies that unless the penalty is otherwise stated, it will receive the same penalty as a Class C misdemeanour i.e., punishable by up to one month in jail and a fine of up to $500. This is less severe in comparison to Wichita County whereby the act of begging is deemed as a crime of loitering and is penalized with a fine of up to $1,000, one year imprisonment, or both. Counties such as Shawnee County and Sedgwick differ, with Sedgwick County making no mention of such acts constituting crimes within its ordinance. Topeka follows suit. Such a scenario in Topeka occurred due to a 9–0 vote to defer action of panhandling, where a penalty of 179 days in jail and/or a fine up to $499 might have been applied if caught violating this ordinance. This ordinance was only suspended indefinitely. If it is reviewed and passed, it may result in the banning of solicitation on private property unless prior permission has been granted by the property owner. Begging would not be affected and would remain legal. Topeka currently holds laws against soliciting on public property, which have not been found to target the homeless, but rather target many backpackers instead. According to Topeka law, it is illegal to solicit funds, rides, or contributions along roadways, meaning that persons who present cardboard signs asking for lifts throughout the city can be liable to penalties. Such a law has stemmed from the high prevalence of scams in the area, such as men saying they have mechanical issues with their cars and women citing domestic abuse and the need for funds to stay at a hotel, which has forced a public awareness and therefore campaigns in the area. in association with the
Wichita police, creating information on methods to stop panhandling. This has been developed in the form of a myriad of pamphlets regarding available services for the homeless, which can be printed off and distributed by businesses when they encounter persons panhandling or begging. Persons encountering panhandlers and beggars in Kansas, if unable to politely refuse, are encouraged to contact 911. ==Kentucky==
Kentucky
Many city and counties within the United States have enacted ordinances to limit or ban panhandling. However, the legality of such laws has recently come under scrutiny, being challenged as a violation of individuals first amendment rights. The first amendment states that "Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech." It is therefore argued that stopping someone from asking for help from their fellow citizens is impeding on their right to free speech. Panhandling laws differ throughout the state of Kentucky. In the city of Louisville, for example, it is an offence to panhandle in certain locations including: within 20 feet of a bus stop or ATM, in a crosswalk/ street, or anywhere that may be impeding others. The ordinance places a strong emphasis on aggressive panhandling which had become a prominent issue within Louisville. In October 2016, a judge of the Jefferson Court District ruled against the laws, deeming them to be unconstitutional. This decision is currently being reviewed by the Kentucky Supreme Court. However, recently the ordinance was amended to further crack down on the act of panhandling, adding an amendment to stop panhandlers from walking out into traffic, in an attempt to keep both beggars and the public safe. As an attorney of the UCLA states, panhandling laws are "misdirected" and their purpose is to try and hide the problem of homelessness. In 2017, there were 4,538 reported homeless people in the state of Kentucky (0.10% of the population), which is consistent with rates of homelessness in many of Kentucky's neighboring states including Tennessee and Ohio. The Kentucky Interagency Council on Homelessness is working towards an end to homelessness, their mission; to end homelessness across the state of Kentucky, with clear outlined goals and strategies on how this is going to be achieved. One of their main goals is to assist local municipalities to end homelessness within the state. which limits the organizations ability to assist the individual off the streets. In particular, the city of Owensber has had support from its homeless shelters in protecting panhandler's rights on the streets, for example, Harry Pedigo, the director of St. Benedicts Homeless Shelter in Kentucky wants local panhandlers to know that the homeless organizations are there to help and not judge their situation. ==Louisiana==
Maryland
In 2015, it was estimated that each year over 50,000 people experience
homelessness in
Maryland. Although Maryland is one of the nation's
wealthiest states, over 50% of impoverished Marylanders live in "deep poverty", meaning that their annual income is less than half of the federally defined poverty level.
Begging and associated crimes in Maryland Panhandling in
Maryland is widely protected under the
First Amendment, provided that the act does not include conduct which 'harasses, menaces, intimidates, impedes traffic or otherwise causes harm'. The president of the nonpartisan
First Amendment Center has stated that any legislation prohibiting the act of begging violates the constitution by "limiting a citizen's right to ask for help". In 1994, Baltimore City enacted a
zero-tolerance arrest policy to counter rising violent crime rates, prompting a push to reclaim public spaces by targeting beggars and homeless persons. This resulted in the case of
Patton v. Baltimore City (1994), where zero-tolerance arrest policies to reclaim public spaces were ruled to be unconstitutional, due to violation of the homeless' First Amendment right to freedom of association. In 2006, the
Anne Arundel County Council enacted a ban on panhandling by children under 18 years old. In April 2007, the Maryland General Assembly passed a bill banning panhandling beside and on Anne Arundel County roadways, as well as prohibiting the display of political signs or advertising messages on any public roadways. In late 2011, legislation was proposed in
Montgomery County which would require panhandlers to seek permits in order to engage in roadside solicitation, but this proposition was heavily scrutinized due to concerns that panhandling permits could constitute a breach of the
First Amendment. In 2012,
Allegany County imposed narrow restrictions on panhandling, allowing only one day permit per person per year for roadside solicitations. Other areas of Maryland with similar permit provisions include
Cecil,
Frederick and
Baltimore counties. Frederick County police allegedly responded by indicating that their initiative in panhandling arrests was in response to reported 'quality of life' issues. A revised bill was proposed in November, stipulating that panhandling would be prohibited only within 10 feet of outdoor dining areas. ==Massachusetts==