Donald Trump: NIMBY or YIMBY? Decoding the President’s Housing Stance
Is Donald Trump a NIMBY or a YIMBY? The question of whether the president reflexively favors housing development has become crucial amid the ongoing housing crisis. However, Trump’s stance on housing seems to be a complex puzzle, leaving many uncertain about where he truly stands.
Trump’s Housing Conundrum
Trump’s wavering position on housing, much like many other issues, has left experts scratching their heads. On one hand, the idea of loosening zoning restrictions to increase housing supply has enjoyed bipartisan support at the federal level for years. In a 1991 report titled “Not in My Backyard: Removing Barriers to Affordable Housing,” a bipartisan commission highlighted the role of local zoning ordinances in hindering affordable housing development across the country. However, since local zoning falls outside federal jurisdiction, the impact of federal policies on this issue remains limited.
As a former real estate developer with a pro-deregulation stance, Trump should theoretically align with the YIMBY movement, advocating for more housing. In a recent interview with Bloomberg, he even criticized zoning as a hindrance to affordable housing and vowed to tackle high housing costs. Yet, his views on high-density housing in suburban neighborhoods, particularly in California, paint a different picture.
The Suburban Standoff
Trump’s vocal opposition to high-density housing in suburbs, citing a threat to the American way of life, has put him at odds with the YIMBY movement. While NIMBYism transcends political boundaries and stifles housing development in liberal enclaves, it also finds resonance among Trump’s supporters. The clash between MAGA activists protecting their suburban lifestyle and the push for more housing, as seen in places like Huntington Beach, underscores the complexity of the housing debate.
Furthermore, Trump’s attribution of the housing crisis to illegal immigration and the proposed mass deportation of immigrants as a solution raise questions about the effectiveness of such policies. Despite these claims, the plight of many native-born Americans struggling to enter the housing market remains unresolved.
Federal Land Development
One of Trump’s proposals to address the housing shortage involves opening up federal land for residential development, potentially creating “freedom cities” for housing and businesses. His choice for Interior Secretary, Gov. Doug Burgum, could play a pivotal role in this strategy, given the vast federal land holdings across California and the West.
However, the legal complexities of developing federal land, coupled with resistance from federal agencies with conflicting priorities, pose significant challenges to this vision. The historical precedent of limited success in building housing on federal land, as seen during the Great Depression, raises doubts about the feasibility of Trump’s freedom cities.
Ultimately, Trump’s housing stance remains ambiguous, reflecting the broader challenges of implementing significant zoning reforms and housing development at the federal level. As the nation grapples with the housing crisis, the question of whether Trump is a NIMBY or a YIMBY continues to perplex experts and observers alike.
William Fulton, editor of “California Planning & Development Report” and former mayor of Ventura, offers a unique perspective on the complexities of housing policy. Drawing from his experience in urban planning and local governance, Fulton underscores the intricate nature of housing reform and the challenges of aligning federal policies with local needs. Through his nuanced analysis, readers gain a deeper understanding of the multifaceted issues surrounding housing development and the role of political leaders in shaping the future of housing in America.
