Is the housing shortage simply bad, or shockingly catastrophic? That’s a matter of perspective. According to various sources, there is a deficit of anywhere from 1.5 million to 6 million homes. The Biden administration has introduced several programs to promote the construction of affordable housing, which could provide some relief for households in the coming years. However, these efforts may not be enough, as the federal government is taking a gentle approach rather than aggressively addressing the issue. Increased funding and a more imaginative approach from Congress and the White House could make a bigger impact.
Two main factors contribute to the shortage of affordable housing: the high cost of land and the expense of borrowing money for construction. High lumber prices and a scarcity of construction workers also play a role, but land costs and financing are the primary focus of the Biden Housing Supply Action Plan. When builders talk about land costs, they are referring to not just the price of the land itself, but also the additional costs imposed by local governments, such as impact fees and zoning rules. The process of gaining approval for housing projects, particularly those for low-income households and multifamily units, can be lengthy and costly due to legal challenges and political opposition.
Local governments, both Democratic and Republican, are responsible for creating zoning rules that drive up housing costs. Some states have taken steps to restrict local governments’ powers in order to promote affordable and multifamily housing. Housing advocates believe that the federal government should intervene and compel local governments to allow for less expensive housing options, such as apartments. The Biden administration has adopted this approach through programs like Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing, but critics argue that it lacks teeth and is underfunded.
To effectively address the housing shortage, it may be necessary for the federal government to apply more pressure, potentially withholding funding from cities that refuse to relax zoning restrictions. This tactic has proven successful in the past, such as when the threat of withholding highway funding led states to raise the drinking age. Increasing funding is also crucial. While the $85 million allocated to the Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing program is a step in the right direction, it pales in comparison to the $50 billion per year for 10 years that experts suggest would make a significant impact.
In addition to funding and zoning reforms, other initiatives are indirectly addressing the housing shortage. The Department of Transportation is providing funding to extend public transportation to affordable housing, and the Commerce Department is favoring development projects that promote living closer to work when distributing grants. Furthermore, the Department of Housing and Urban Development has implemented measures to make it easier for builders to borrow money for apartment projects, which could expedite construction in the short term.
Ultimately, the long-term solution to the housing shortage lies in loosening regulations that impede new construction. If paying cities and towns to reduce red tape does not yield results, state and local governments may need to consider withholding funding. Without addressing the restrictive regulations, the housing shortage will continue to persist.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
