Two Cheers for Zoning
The fight over zoning in America has created odd bedfellows. Self-declared socialists have allied with big developers and railed against regulatory burdens on business. Self-professed conservatives have allied with radical environmentalists to fight development. Now that housing prices have surpassed their 2006 peak, mortgage rates have risen, and discussions of a housing crisis have become common, these fault lines are increasingly salient.
At first glance, the current struggles of “yimbys” (Yes-In-My-Backyard), or advocates for denser housing, against “nimbys” (Not-In-My-Backyard), or opponents of it, would seem to follow the new drift of politics in the nation. There is a young, cosmopolitan, urban class that identifies with the Left yet advocates for markets, and there is an old, parochial, suburban or exurban class which identifies with the Right yet sides with anti-market forces.
Yet America has engaged in battles over local zoning for decades, and, for most of that period, conservatives have defended zoning against progressives. Furthermore, the history, economics, and political science of local communities demonstrate that those who ascribe to free market beliefs should not despise zoning. Even passionate libertarians would not deny the ability of people to form or join a local government with some say over their property. Most zoning in America is of such a local and consensual nature.
American federalism promises a diversity of policies and allows people to express preferences by choice and movement instead of collective votes. The same principle should apply to local governments, which must compete fiercely with each other for residents, businesses, and voters. In most of the nation, thanks to this local competition, zoning doesn’t have a significant impact on housing prices.
Yimbys are right that a lack of housing is the reason that housing prices in some areas are high. Americans can and should embrace reforms that open these areas for more housing, ameliorate the most stringent local zoning laws, and align the incentives of local governments toward growth. But we should not embrace a categorical attack on zoning or local governments in general, or the canard that single-family zoning is the cause of our housing woes. We can demand increased housing without demanding that all housing becomes denser or that all housing decisions get made at the state or federal level. While supporting some reforms to allow more housing, we do not have to sabotage the one type of government that most Americans still support—their local government.
Stay Informed
Sign up to receive updates about our fight for policies at the state level that restore liberty, accountability, and innovation in American governance.