As
the
nation
progresses
further
into
a
hotly
contested
election
cycle,
President

Joe
Biden
and
the


White
House
have
continued
to
address
housing
supply
and
pricing
policy
priorities
that
were
highlighted
during
the

State
of
the
Union
address
earlier
this
month.

While
the
arms
of
the
federal
government
aim
to
address
certain
housing
policy
challenges,
different
localities
across
the
country
are
also
working
to
address
them
in
their
own
backyards.

An
article
published
this
week
in
The
New
York
Times
highlights
some
of
these
efforts
in
different
pockets
of
the
country,
showing
that
even
lawmakers
who
have
broad
fundamental
disagreements
on
hot-button
political
issues
are,
in
some
cases,
trying
to
work
together
to
address
the
nation’s
housing
challenges.

ADUs,
lot
sizes,
zoning
rules

Experts
agree
that
while
federal
intervention
can
have
an
impact,
the
most
productive
action
on
housing
issues
must
come
from
lawmakers
at
the
city,
county
and
state
levels.
An
increasingly
popular
option
for
adding
more
housing
is

accessory
dwelling
units
(ADUs),
but
restrictive
land
development
policies
sometimes
prevent
ADUs
from
becoming
the
norm.

Even
in
states
that
may
have
comparatively
lower
home
values
than
some
of
the
hotter
markets
across
the
country,
higher
home
prices
are
eating
into
the
budgets
of
individuals
and
families
to
the
point
where
lawmakers
recognize
a
need
for
action.
ADUs
are

one
possible
solution.

“Generally,
Republican-led
states
have
been
more
affordable
than
Democratic-led
ones,”
the
Times
explained.
“They
tend
to
have
fewer
construction
and
environmental
rules,
which
allows
the
housing
supply
to
expand
faster.
But
as
rent
and
home
prices
climb
beyond
middle-income
budgets
in
more
places,
states
are
racing
to
add
housing.”

The
legislative
answer
can
often
be
the
removal
of
“permitting
and
design
barriers
so
new
construction
can
be
approved
faster,”
which
at
the
state
level
could
include
altering
“zoning
rules
to
allow
a
greater
diversity
of
units
in
more
neighborhoods,”
the
article
stated.

ADUs
are
one
option,
but
another
is
to
decrease
lot
sizes
and
change
zoning
rules,
something
that
is
only
possible
for
lawmakers
below
the
federal
level
to
accomplish.
Some
states,

including
Washington,
have
pursued
such
policies
with
a
degree
of
bipartisan
support.

Bipartisan
recognition

The
White
House
has
repeatedly
said
that
housing
issues
should
not
be
defined
along
partisan
lines.
In
certain
states,
lawmakers
with
very
different
ideologies
have
demonstrated
recognition
of
that
idea.

“Already,
Democrats
and
Republicans
in
Montana
and
Arizona
have
united
for
housing
legislation,”
the
Times
explained.
“A
similar
coalition
has
taken
shape
in
other
states,
including
Texas,
Minnesota
and
North
Carolina.
Even
in
California
and
Oregon,
whose
governments
are
both
dominated
by
Democrats,
Republican
votes
have
helped
pass
housing
bills.”

State
Rep.
Cody
Vasut
of
Texas,
a
Republican
whom
the
Times
describes
as
wanting
to
“drastically
restrict
abortion,”
also
wants
to
open
up
the
state’s
zoning
laws
and
has
found
common
ground
with
Democrats
on
the
issue.

“Some
issues
become
a
horseshoe,”
he
told
the
outlet.
“We
have
different
views
of
government,
but
sometimes
we
arrive
at
the
same
conclusion.”

But
some
coalitions
are
not
as
successful,
as
most
recently
evidenced
by
the
failure
of
some
united
Democrats
and
Republicans
in
Arizona
to
pass
a
bill
aimed
at
creation
of
more
starter
homes.
Gov.
Katie
Hobbs,
a
Democrat,
surprised
lawmakers
and
local
leaders

by
vetoing
the
measure,
citing
“undetermined
outcomes”
and
opposition
sent
to
her
office
by
the

U.S.
Department
of
Defense.

A
path
forward

Economists
place
much
of
the
blame
on
the
current
housing
shortages
on
local
governments,
the
Times
said.

“City
councils
hold
most
of
the
power
over
where
and
what
types
of
housing
get
built,
but
they
are
beholden
to
homeowners
who
often
pack
meetings
to
complain
that
new
developments
would
destroy
nature
and
snarl
traffic,”
the
article
stated
in
describing
the
phenomenon
known
as
“NIMBYism.”

In
2021,

National
Housing
Conference
chairman
and
CEO
David
Dworkin

told
HousingWire
that
the
phenomenon
has
contributed
to
a
lack
of
action
at
the
local
level,
despite
some
regions
receiving
federal
funding
to
address
housing
shortages.

At
the
time,
Dworkin
said
that
local
governments
are
given
pots
of
money
by
Congress
to
build
affordable
housing
projects,
only
to
face
resistance
from
NIMBYs
who
claim
the
homes
will
affect
their
quality
of
life.

Getting
past
this
attitude
has
often
relied
on
stripping
cities
of
the
power
to
shut
down
such
policy
changes
in
both
Democratic-
and
Republican-led
states,
the
Times
explained.

“State
legislatures
are
close
enough
to
voters
to
share
their
concerns
about
rising
housing
costs
—
but
far
enough
that
they
don’t
have
to
answer
for
every
new
local
development,”
the
Times
stated.
“They
are
the
Goldilocks
level
of
government
for
housing
reform.”

Related