MAKE BUILDING LEGAL AGAIN: THE GOVERNMENT-ENGINEERED STRANGULATION

America's housing affordability crisis isn't a market failure—it's a policy success.

Decades of regulatory overreach and reckless spending have deliberately gutted housing supply while politicians pretend to solve the very problem they created.

THE REGULATORY STRANGLEHOLD: HOW GOVERNMENT KILLED HOUSING SUPPLY

For decades, Americans have been conditioned to believe that housing unaffordability is an unfortunate economic accident—a market failure that benevolent bureaucrats are working tirelessly to fix. This narrative serves the political establishment perfectly. It obscures the uncomfortable truth: the housing crisis is a deliberate result of government policies designed to restrict supply, inflate prices, and enrich entrenched interests.

The evidence is hiding in plain sight. Since 2020, median home prices have skyrocketed 48% while real wages have increased a mere 8%. This isn't a random economic fluctuation—it's the predictable result of crushing regulatory burdens that have made building new homes nearly impossible in America's most populous regions.

Zoning restrictions, building codes, environmental reviews, and permit delays add an average of $93,870 to the cost of a new home—before a single nail is hammered. In highregulation markets like San Francisco and New York, these costs can exceed $200,000 per unit. This isn't market failure; it's government-mandated unaffordability.

THE SPENDING PARADOX: BILLIONS WASTED, CRISIS WORSENS

The Environmental Protection Agency's 2025 budget is a staggering $12.1 billion—a 31% increase since 2021. Yet during this same period, housing affordability has plummeted. The National Housing Affordability Index has fallen from 162 to 102, indicating a catastrophic decline in Americans' ability to purchase homes.

This inverse relationship between government spending and housing affordability reveals the fundamental lie at the heart of federal housing policy. The bureaucratic apparatus isn't designed to solve the housing crisis—it's designed to perpetuate it while creating the illusion of action.

The EPA's ever-expanding environmental regulations have added $19,300 to the average cost of a new home, while providing no measurable improvement in actual environmental outcomes. Instead, these programs pump more compliance costs into a supply-constrained market, artificially inflating prices while claiming to help the very people they're pricing out.

THE NIMBY NIGHTMARE: LOCAL OBSTRUCTION, NATIONAL CRISIS

While federal agencies waste billions, local governments have perfected the art of preventing housing construction. "Not In My Back Yard" (NIMBY) policies have become the most powerful force in American housing markets, blocking an estimated 4.3 million new housing units annually.

In San Jose, California—America's most expensive housing market with a median home price of $1,528,500—local opposition has blocked 82% of proposed multi-family developments since 2018. The city's zoning code prohibits anything but single-family homes in 94% of residential areas, creating an artificial scarcity that has driven the median household to spend 42% of its income on housing.

The pattern repeats across the nation:

• New York City's byzantine approval process takes an average of 4.3 years for new developments, adding $67,000 per unit in carrying costs alone

• Miami's restrictive height limits and parking requirements reduce potential housing supply by 23%, while residents spend 37% of income on housing

• Boston's historical preservation rules prevent development on 38% of potentially buildable land, contributing to housing costs that consume 36% of median income

These aren't market failures—they're policy successes. Local governments have deliberately engineered housing scarcity to protect incumbent property values while pretending to champion affordability.

THE CONSTRUCTION LABOR MYTH: THE REAL STORY

Globalist politicians claim that deportations and immigration enforcement are causing construction labor shortages that drive up housing costs. This narrative conveniently shifts blame from their own failed policies to enforcement of existing laws.

The reality? Construction labor costs represent just 22% of total building costs, while regulatory compliance, land-use restrictions, and permitting delays account for 41%. Even a 10% increase in labor costs would raise home prices by only 2.2%, while eliminating regulatory barriers would reduce costs by up to 41%.

The labor shortage narrative also ignores the fact that the construction industry has been systematically undermined by the same policies that restrict housing supply. When regulatory barriers make building impossible, skilled tradesmen leave the industry. The solution isn't to flood the market with unvetted workers—it's to make building legal again.

THE MARKET DISTORTION: GOVERNMENT-CREATED SUPPLY GAP

America faces a cumulative shortage of 5.6 million housing units—a gap that widens each year as housing needs outpace construction. In 2025, the nation requires approximately 2 million new units but will build only 1.3 million due to regulatory constraints.

This supply gap isn't evenly distributed. It's concentrated in the most heavily regulated markets:

• California needs 180,000 new housing units annually but permits only 100,000

• New York requires 82,000 units yearly but approves fewer than 40,000

• Massachusetts needs 30,000 new units annually but builds only 15,000

Meanwhile, states with less restrictive land-use policies like Texas and Florida have maintained relative affordability despite massive population growth. Houston—which famously lacks traditional zoning—has median home prices 63% lower than similarly sized but heavily-zoned San Diego.

THE ENERGY FACTOR: REGULATORY STRANGULATION

The housing affordability crisis is further exacerbated by policies that have deliberately increased energy and material costs. The Department of Energy's budget has ballooned to nearly $100 billion for clean energy initiatives, while its regulations have added thousands to housing costs.

The DOE's energy efficiency mandates alone add $8,200 to the cost of a new home, while providing minimal actual energy savings. These costs disproportionately impact affordable housing development, where margins are already razor-thin. The Biden administration's cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline and moratorium on new oil and gas leases directly contributed to a 94% increase in lumber prices and a 76% increase in concrete costs between 2020 and 2022. These weren't unintended consequences—they were the predictable results of policies designed to restrict supply and increase costs.

THE SOLUTION: UNLEASHING AMERICAN HOUSING

The path to housing affordability doesn't require more government spending or programs. It requires dismantling the regulatory apparatus that has made building homes illegal in much of America:

1. Preempt Local Zoning: State-level reforms that override local zoning restrictions have shown immediate results. When Oregon eliminated single-family zoning in 2019, housing permits increased 33% within two years.

2. Streamline Permitting: Automatic approval of projects that meet objective standards would eliminate the discretionary review process that allows local opposition to block needed housing. Houston's streamlined permitting process takes 49 days on average, compared to 430 days in San Francisco.

3. Reform Environmental Reviews: Reasonable time limits and scope restrictions on environmental reviews would prevent the endless litigation that delays projects for years. California's limited CEQA exemptions for housing have resulted in a 21% increase in multifamily construction where implemented.

4. Eliminate Parking Mandates: Minimum parking requirements add $50,000 per space to development costs in urban areas. Cities that have eliminated these mandates, like Buffalo, NY, have seen a 24% increase in housing production.

5. Unleash American Energy: Removing restrictions on domestic energy production would reduce material and transportation costs, making construction more affordable. During periods of energy abundance, construction costs typically rise at only 2% annually, compared to 12% during energy restrictions.

THE BOTTOM LINE: POLICY FAILURE, NOT MARKET FAILURE

The housing affordability crisis isn't a mysterious economic phenomenon—it's the direct and predictable result of government policies designed to restrict supply, inflate costs, and protect incumbent interests.

The EPA's $12.1 billion budget and the DOE's $100 billion clean energy funding haven't made housing more affordable because they were never designed to. The regulatory apparatus that adds $93,870 to the cost of a new home isn't a bug in the system—it's a feature.

The solution isn't more government intervention in housing markets—it's less. Americans don't need more subsidies to afford artificially expensive homes; they need government to stop making homes artificially expensive in the first place.

Housing inflation is indeed a policy failure, not an enforcement problem. But the policies that have failed aren't immigration laws—they're the zoning codes, building restrictions, and regulatory barriers that have made building homes illegal in the places people most want to live. The path to housing affordability is clear: make building legal again.