Reading time: 10 minutes

Skip to Key Takeaways

There’s a Lot to Like About Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris’ Housing Plan, but is 3 million homes enough? And will the policies she’s proposing get us there?

Six years ago, when Up for Growth arrived on Capitol Hill, most lawmakers we talked to were happy to defer to state and local authorities on issues related to housing supply. One of our earliest meetings was with a senior congressional staffer who was polite but visibly skeptical of the notion that the federal government should be involved in what he dubbed a “local zoning problem.” “That’s why we have mayors and city councils,” he said.

Today, it’s a much different story. Predictably, underproducing 3.9 million homes has led to a boatload of problems across the social and economic spectrum; the kinds of problems that can either drive hurting voters to the polls or discourage them deeply enough to stay home. As a result, lawmakers of all stripes seem to be paying more attention.
Last Thursday, Candidate Harris announced a high-level plan to create 3 million new homes in 4 years. The plan includes:

• Stimulating Production – New and expanded tax incentives for builders
• Enabling More Types of Housing – incentives for builders to develop starter homes sold to first-time buyers and an expansion of existing incentives for developers to build rental housing
• Funding Housing Innovation – $40 billion federal fund to spur innovative housing construction

Is 3 million new homes in 4 years enough to get the market onto a more solid footing?

At its current baseline, the U.S housing market produces about 1 million new housing units per year. Assuming the Harris housing folks have taken this into account, 3 million net new homes in 4 years would require a 75% increase in annual homebuilding.

If her policies succeed, the market could jump from producing 1 million per year, to about 1.75 million new units per year by the end of 2028. Compared to a status quo scenario where the market would produce about 4 million units in that period, the Harris plan would hit 7 million. Taking it a step further, it’s reasonable to assume that if there were a second term and continuity of policies, production could continue to increase.

Who’s to say? With numbers like these, we could get darn close to digging ourselves out of the deficit, and accommodating growth via new births, in-migration, and new household formation (kids can’t live with their parents forever, can they?).

Are these policy proposals the right ones to get us there?

Do we need 7 million homes, 10 million homes? Even more? We could quibble with the math all day. But it’s probably wiser to consider whether the policies the Harris campaign is proposing are the right ones to stimulate production of the right types of homes. Will they work quickly? Are they enough?

Make no mistake, these policy recommendations are a good start. The themes of innovation, diversity, and making it easier for new projects to pencil are among the right ones. And if they are consistently applied and well-funded, there’s a strong chance that the plan could eventually generate increasing amounts of housing through its own momentum. Just as the interstate highway system catalyzed economic growth and transformed American infrastructure, investment in innovative building types and methods could create a virtuous, self-sustaining new industry.

But housing supply is a stubborn systemic problem. And any lasting solution to the housing crisis will require us to think bigger – much bigger. It’s not enough to patch the holes; we need to fundamentally re-engineer the way we plan, finance, and build housing in this country. This means committing to policies that work, being willing to experiment with new approaches, and, above all, declare housing a national priority that demands sustained attention and action at all levels of government.

Long-term Solutions

So, what do we need lawmakers to commit to in the long-term so that we don’t find ourselves in this mess again?

Zoning reform is non-negotiable. Outdated and overly restrictive zoning laws are one of the biggest barriers to increasing housing supply. Local governments need to embrace more flexible zoning policies that allow for higher-density developments, especially in areas well-served by public transportation and close to job centers. This means not just upzoning but also reducing the bureaucratic red tape that can delay or even prevent housing projects from getting off the ground. Streamlining the approval process and implementing by-right zoning can make a significant difference in how quickly new housing can be brought to market.

Tax incentives that encourage the development of new housing, particularly affordable housing, in areas where it’s needed most. Federally backed finance products and tax credits, like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), have proven effective, but they must be expanded and targeted to incentivize not just the construction of affordable units but also that can help integrate communities economically. We also need to look at opportunities to provide tax relief for developers where building costs and regulatory barriers are high.

Create new capacity We must support a new generation of builders who are more diverse and more equipped to meet changing preferences in housing types. We must provide funding and training programs for women and BIPOC-led developers. And we must provide support for smaller-scale developers who specialize in the construction of duplexes, triplexes, and quads.

A national commitment to plan for growth This means investing in infrastructure to support new housing developments, ensuring that schools, transportation, and public services can keep pace with new construction. It also means adopting a long-term perspective that anticipates future housing needs rather than reacting to crises as they emerge. Regional planning efforts that coordinate across municipalities and states can help ensure that housing is built in the right places, at the right scale, and with the necessary amenities to support thriving communities.

The Wrap

It’s safe to say the days of the federal government sitting on the sidelines of housing are over. The highest government officials are including it in their platforms and there are at least three bi-partisan bills in front of Congress designed to make it easier to build much-needed housing. In general, we are all happy and hopeful that housing supply will finally get the careful attention it deserves.