With a housing crisis underway, housing affordability in Connecticut and other parts of the country is a major concern among voters.
A recent Gallup poll found that when it comes to financial worries among Americans, housing ranked second on the list, behind inflation.
Agendas proposed by both presidential candidates, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, place housing as a top issue. But housing advocates say that many of the policies that both candidates would like to see in place nationally already exist in Connecticut.
Trump’s housing plans and track record
Trump’s proposed housing policies revolve around cutting taxes and curbing illegal immigration.
Trump’s track record as president included defunding federal housing programs, and ending Obama-era efforts to decrease housing discrimination, according to Sean Ghio, policy director with the Connecticut housing nonprofit Partnership for Strong Communities.
“What we have is a federal Department of Housing and Urban Development that's hostile to its constituents, largely, and I'd expect to see that again,” Ghio said. “And then the nexus between deporting immigrants and housing affordability is lost on me.”
Trump also wants to focus on single-family housing by protecting and expanding exclusionary zoning, which places the power to construct new buildings in the hands of local leaders.
Exclusionary zoning makes it more difficult to get approval for multi-family homes. Connecticut is a poster child of this practice, Ghio said.
“Connecticut's one historic example, that we've been at it for very long, much longer than most places in the country,” Ghio said. “We do it in a much more extreme way, based on lots of research. Our lot sizes are bigger. We approve fewer homes.”
Harris’ presidential housing proposals
Harris is looking to add more multi-family homes. Harris has also outlined specifics for increasing affordable housing and decreasing the cost of rent.
Several of Harris’ proposals already exist in Connecticut, in smaller forms, including down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers and incentivizing the rehabilitation of older homes.
Rehabilitation of existing homes is an often overlooked part of the housing market, Ghio said.
“This is the segment of housing that I think largely falls through the cracks with public policy,” Ghio said. “There's some programs now to try to address that, those older, single family homes, older, two-, three-family homes. But they're all very small. They're not programs that have many resources. They can't impact many towns or many homes.”
When it comes to new housing construction, both candidates have plans that need fleshing out, Ghio said.
One of Harris’ proposals, which would be new for Connecticut, involves a tax credit for the construction of starter homes. But it isn’t clear what counts as a starter home.
For places like Connecticut, with significant suburban sprawl, starter homes should include townhouses, condos and small multi-family buildings, Ghio said.
“It really depends on what that means, and I think I'd ask our federal representatives and senators to push for starter home to mean something broad,” Ghio said.
What’s missing from the plans
Democratic U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut agrees there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to alleviating the housing crisis.
Trump’s plans to decrease taxes won’t equal a decrease in rent prices, according to Blumenthal.
“We have seen this movie before. It doesn't lead to more affordable housing and it doesn't lead to more wealth equity,” Blumenthal said. “It means enriching people at the very tippy top of the wealth spectrum of this country and that's not going to result in more affordable housing.”
One thing that isn’t discussed enough in either candidates’ housing plans is the effect of climate change, Blumenthal said.
“That aspect deserves more attention, because there are materials, there are places, there are prices that we should take into account as we construct new housing so as to make it more environmentally friendly,” Blumenthal said.
Trump is also looking to add housing on federal land. It’s a complicated move that would have little impact in Connecticut, according to Democratic U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, who represents parts of Fairfield and New Haven counties.
The plan wouldn’t mitigate the housing affordability crisis, Himes said.
“Federal lands are largely in sparsely populated places in Nevada, Wyoming and Idaho, where it's not clear people want to live,” Himes said. “I don't suspect that there's a lot of federal land in downtown Boston or downtown San Francisco, where the housing crisis is most acute.”
The doubt of efficacy and ability to follow through on policy plans goes for Trump’s zoning proposals as well, Himes said.
“Inclusionary and exclusionary zoning are largely municipal and state issues,” Himes said. “That's both frustrating because it makes it very hard for the federal government to assist in increasing housing supply, but it also means that our communities are not likely to be bossed around by Washington when it comes to housing.”
The importance of revitalizing cities’ urban cores through reform and multi-family construction can be seen throughout Fairfield County, including downtown Bridgeport, Stamford and Norwalk, Himes said.
The Connecticut congressional delegation doesn't include Republicans. Connecticut Public contacted several Republican state lawmakers on housing and development committees, asking them to discuss what the candidates’ plans would look like in Connecticut. All declined to comment.
Himes said state Republican lawmakers don’t have good answers.
“The Democrats in Connecticut, and I'm talking about this at the state level, have offered up a bunch of policies that would allow for the increase in supply, and the Republicans have opposed those policies,” Himes said.
But voters should keep in mind that any president has little say over the housing market and even less over housing construction, according to Himes.
“The president has almost no control over the American housing market,” Himes said. “States and municipalities have much more control, and it will be through working with states and municipalities, not with the Oval Office, that we fix this problem.”
Himes said the issue of housing costs is a bit like gasoline prices. Voters will blame whoever is in office when prices go up — and they’ll credit whoever is in office when the prices go down.
