“Reclaiming Affordability” is an op-ed series in partnership between the Independent Women and the Washington Examiner. Each day this week, a policy expert at Independent Women will tackle the top concern on the minds of voters this election cycle from a different angle, putting forth realistic solutions to the affordability crisis.
All issues are women’s issues, but no issue is more important today to the largest voting bloc than housing. Women want affordable housing — whether a first apartment after college, a starter home to begin a family, or a place to age with dignity. We have arrived at the moment for policymakers to address the structural challenges that have restricted housing supply and made housing so expensive.
Women today feel deep pessimism about their financial future. According to a New York Times poll in early 2026, shelter costs ranked as most concerning for women, followed by healthcare. Nearly six out of 10 women characterized the cost of housing as completely unaffordable, outpacing men by a 10-point margin.
HOUSING IS THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE THAT COULD COST THE GOP IN 2026
Americans overall are fatigued by high shelter costs. Some 23 million renters (half) and 21 million homeowners (a quarter) reported spending well above the recommended 30% of their income on housing costs. Being home-burdened forces people to cut back on quality-of-life expenses, such as family vacations, dining out, and debt repayment. In lower-income homes with stretched budgets, rent and mortgage increases can force painful choices such as between medicine, heat, and groceries.
How did we get here? Housing unaffordability is driven by an inadequate supply to meet growing demand. Our nation has a shortage of around 5 million homes due to poor — even if well-intentioned — policy decisions over decades that drove up the costs of home renovation and building.
At every level of government, restrictive zoning and land-use laws, opaque and arbitrary (even biased) permitting processes, and environmental laws and mandates pose major impediments to building more homes in America. Restrictions on the amount and types of housing that can be built in an area and rules on lot sizes, parking, height, occupancy, and a host of other issues that have little or no safety impact make it difficult and costly to expand the stock of single- and multi-family homes.
We cannot underscore the costs of red tape enough. According to research by the National Association of Home Builders, regulations add $93,870 to the price of an average new single-family home built for sale. Government regulations at every level account for 24% of the final price of a new single-family home and 40% for multifamily homes.
Biden-era energy mandates on home appliances and fixtures compounded the costs. By forcing consumers to switch to electric alternatives for 15 consumer appliances and requiring that new homes financed by FHA loans meet the new efficiency standards, the Biden administration’s green agenda added about $31,000 to the price of a new home.
Institutional investors are not stealing away homeownership dreams; overregulation is. Policymakers would be wise to focus their energy where they will have the greatest impact.
Here is a road map to get it done. The government at every level must enact sweeping deregulation. Tinkering around the edges is not enough. The federal government must eliminate costly federal regulations that impact home building, zoning, financing, and permitting. Congress should also repeal the climate-change mandates on appliances that traded consumer preferences for high prices. In addition, Washington should incentivize states and local governments to enact needed zoning and permitting reforms. The ROAD to Housing Act, passed by the U.S. Senate last week, and the House’s version, are just the kind of packaged reforms that can spur the development of single-family and multi-family homes. We look forward to both chambers removing counterproductive elements of the package to ensure a strong deregulatory outcome.
Increasing the stock of multifamily properties is especially important to women. Many women desire multigenerational living so they can age in place with caregivers. Others value the opportunity to build income security in their later years by renting out spaces in their homes, such as finished basements (also known as accessory dwelling units or ADUs).
Finally, Congress should flex its taxing power to reduce inflation-driven tax penalties on home selling. Rising home prices boost homeowners’ portfolio values, but high inflation has unfairly padded their tax liabilities when it comes time to sell their homes. For decades, Congress has excluded from taxation up to $250,000 of the capital gain for individuals ($500,000 for married couples) on the sale of a primary residence. After 40 years, the exemption levels are outdated and should, at a minimum, be indexed for inflation. This breaks the lock-in effect for homeowners in single-family homes.
CITIES ARE PRICING OUT THE ONE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT COULD SAVE THEM
I work for an organization staffed entirely by women of all ages. Younger staff in their prime career-building years express despair that, because of high housing costs, they will never be able to afford to own a home.
The right policy solutions, as detailed in the new report “Reclaiming Affordability,” can fix past regulatory failures to change the trajectory of home building. Doing so will finally bring the dreams of home ownership back within reach for these young women, and millions of would-be homebuyers like them.
Patrice Onwuka is vice president of economic policy and director of the Center for Economic Opportunity at Independent Women and a co-host of WMAL-DC’s O’Connor & Co.
