Republican mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt laid out a hardline approach to Los Angeles’ homelessness crisis during an interview Friday, arguing that the city’s problem is driven less by a lack of housing and more by widespread drug addiction, crime, and what he described as failed government policies.
Speaking with ABC7 Los Angeles reporter Josh Haskell, Pratt said he believes the city already has enough shelter space and resources available for people living on the streets, but claimed many homeless individuals refuse assistance because they do not want to comply with rules attached to housing programs.
“What are your plans for the over 40,000 homeless in Los Angeles?” Haskell asked during the interview.
Pratt immediately pushed back on the framing of the question.
“They’re not homeless, they’re drug addicts,” Pratt replied. “Most of these people are addicted to fentanyl and meth.”
When Haskell followed up by asking whether Pratt was saying these individuals do not lack housing, the candidate argued that Los Angeles already has places available for them to stay.
“There is places for all of these people to sleep in LA, no matter what anybody tells you,” Pratt said. “We have housing and shelter for everyone that’s living on the street.”
According to Pratt, many individuals remain on sidewalks and encampments because they want to continue using drugs without restrictions. He argued that shelters and housing facilities impose behavioral rules that some people are unwilling to follow.
“They are choosing to be on the street because they want to do drugs,” he said. “They don’t want rules. They don’t want to listen.”
NEW: Spencer Pratt fires back at reporter after he was asked about his plan for the homeless, says they will all end up in Seattle.
Reporter: “What are your plans for the over 40,000 homeless in Los Angeles?”
Pratt: “Well, they’re not homeless, they’re drug addicts… These… pic.twitter.com/rLaxyvKF0a
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) May 25, 2026
Pratt also criticized the city’s spending on homelessness programs, saying Los Angeles taxpayers have already poured billions into the issue without meaningful results. He claimed the city has spent roughly $24 billion trying to address homelessness while conditions on the streets continue to deteriorate.
He pointed to public concerns about crime, public nudity, animal abuse, and erratic behavior in encampments, arguing that city leaders have failed to enforce laws or hold offenders accountable.
“The people that are getting naked in front of kids, they’re going to jail,” Pratt said. “The people that are torturing animals, they’re going to jail.”
Pratt also argued that many homeless individuals currently living in Los Angeles are not originally from the city or even from California. Citing a recent City Journal report, he claimed that roughly 60 percent of the homeless population came from outside the area and were brought in by what he described as “scam rehabs,” nonprofits, and NGOs that profit from government homelessness funding.
“These people have been bused in by scam rehabs, scam NGOs, scam homeless nonprofits,” Pratt said.
As part of his proposed plan, Pratt said many of those individuals would be sent elsewhere, specifically mentioning Seattle. He claimed the city’s leadership there would be more welcoming toward homeless populations and looser policies regarding drug use and encampments.
“When I unplug them and say, we’re not taking our tax money anymore, they’re all going to Seattle,” he said.
Pratt acknowledged that not every person living on the streets falls into the same category, but maintained that Los Angeles already possesses the money, infrastructure, and facilities necessary to address genuine homelessness. In his view, the larger problem is enforcing laws and separating people struggling with addiction and criminal behavior from those who simply need temporary assistance.
The remarks are likely to generate significant controversy as homelessness remains one of the most politically charged issues in Los Angeles. City officials and advocacy groups have long argued that rising housing costs, mental illness, addiction, and limited affordable housing all contribute to the crisis, while critics contend government spending has failed to produce visible improvements.
