Meyer's Budget Throws Taxpayer Money at Housing Crisis While Ignoring Real Solutions

Governor Matt Meyer of Delaware has rolled out a budget that promises to tackle the state’s housing crisis with a hefty dose of taxpayer money. His plan, which includes a $12 million boost for affordable housing initiatives, sounds noble on the surface. Every Delawarean deserves a roof over their head, he claims, and few would disagree. But the governor’s approach, heavy on state intervention and light on market ingenuity, risks repeating the same tired mistakes that have plagued housing policy for decades.

The instinct to throw money at a problem is a classic reflex for big-government advocates. Meyer’s proposal, with $6 million earmarked for state rental assistance and a nod to the state’s Affordable Housing Production Task Force, leans hard into subsidies and bureaucratic oversight. It assumes that more public spending will magically produce affordable homes. History tells a different story. From the New Deal’s public housing experiments to today’s bloated federal programs, government-led solutions often create more problems than they solve.

Delaware’s housing market is undeniably strained, with a shortage of over 20,000 affordable units and median home prices climbing to $390,000 last year. Families are feeling the pinch, especially low-income renters and first-time buyers. But the answer isn’t to double down on programs that distort markets and reward inefficiency. Instead, Delaware should look to unleash the private sector, cut red tape, and empower local communities to address their own needs.

What’s at stake here is more than just dollars and cents. It’s about whether Delawareans will have access to homes they can actually afford, or whether they’ll be trapped in a cycle of dependency on government handouts. Meyer’s plan, while well-intentioned, misses the mark by ignoring the root causes of the crisis and betting on a top-down fix that’s bound to disappoint.

To understand why housing in Delaware and across the U.S. remains out of reach for so many, you have to look at the chokehold of regulations strangling the market. Restrictive zoning laws, endless permitting delays, and NIMBY-driven local policies have stifled new construction for years. These barriers, often championed by well-meaning but misguided policymakers, keep supply low and prices high. In Delaware, the Affordable Housing Production Task Force itself admits that local zoning reforms are critical, yet Meyer’s budget prioritizes spending over dismantling these obstacles.

Nationwide, the numbers paint a grim picture. The U.S. faces a shortage of 7.1 million affordable rental homes for extremely low-income renters, with only 35 units available for every 100 households in need. This isn’t because developers don’t want to build. It’s because they’re bogged down by layers of bureaucracy that make projects financially unfeasible. Conservative policy experts have long argued that slashing these regulations would unleash a wave of new construction, driving down costs through simple supply and demand.

Contrast this with Meyer’s approach, which leans on tools like Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and Community Development Block Grants. These programs, while popular, often funnel benefits to existing homeowners or well-connected developers rather than renters in need. A 2024 study showed that federal subsidies can inflate property values, making it harder for first-time buyers to break into the market. By doubling down on these flawed mechanisms, Delaware risks entrenching the very inequities Meyer claims to fight.

The conservative vision for housing affordability is grounded in a simple truth: markets, when freed from excessive government meddling, are remarkably efficient at meeting demand. Look at states like Texas, where relaxed zoning and streamlined permitting have fueled a housing boom, keeping prices in check even as populations grow. Delaware could learn a thing or two from this model. Instead of pumping millions into rental assistance, the state should focus on making it easier for builders to create homes that people can actually afford.

Meyer’s defenders might argue that subsidies are necessary to help vulnerable groups, like people with disabilities or low-income seniors, who face unique barriers. It’s true that these populations need support; only 5% of U.S. homes are accessible to those with disabilities, and 31% of the homeless have a disabling condition. But the solution isn’t to trap them in a web of government programs. Direct cash assistance, targeted and temporary, would give families the flexibility to find housing that fits their needs without distorting the broader market.

The alternative, pushed by Meyer and his allies, is a one-size-fits-all approach that assumes bureaucrats know best. Their track record isn’t inspiring. Decades of federal housing programs have left us with outdated public housing stock, long waiting lists, and a system where only one in four eligible low-income families gets assistance. Delaware’s own history mirrors this, with advocates now begging for just 1% of the state budget to be dedicated to housing. If throwing money at the problem worked, we wouldn’t still be having this conversation.

Delaware has a chance to chart a different course, one that prioritizes freedom, opportunity, and local innovation over centralized control. Start with zoning reform. The state’s own task force has called for loosening restrictions to allow more multifamily housing, which could ease the shortage of affordable rentals. Next, streamline permitting to cut costs and delays for developers. These steps, paired with incentives for private investment, would do more to boost supply than any state-funded handout.

On the national stage, conservative leaders are already pushing similar ideas. They’ve called for holding local governments accountable for restrictive practices and reducing federal regulations that drive up construction costs. Even President Trump, now in his second term, has signaled support for policies that prioritize market-driven growth over government overreach. Delaware could position itself as a leader in this movement, showing the nation how to solve the housing crisis without breaking the bank.

This isn’t about ignoring the plight of the vulnerable. It’s about recognizing that the best way to help them is to create an abundant, affordable housing market where everyone has options. Meyer’s budget, with its focus on subsidies and bureaucracy, takes us in the opposite direction. It’s a recipe for bloated government, inefficient spending, and a housing market that remains out of reach for too many Delawareans.

Delaware stands at a crossroads. Governor Meyer’s budget offers a familiar path: more spending, more programs, more government. But the housing crisis demands bold, market-driven solutions that empower individuals and unleash the private sector. By cutting regulations, reforming zoning, and prioritizing local control, Delaware can create a housing market that works for everyone, from first-time buyers to low-income renters.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Families are struggling, and the dream of homeownership feels increasingly out of reach. But the answer isn’t to lean on failed policies of the past. It’s to embrace a vision of abundance, opportunity, and freedom. Delawareans deserve a housing market that rewards hard work and innovation, not one propped up by taxpayer dollars and bureaucratic red tape. It’s time for Meyer to rethink his approach and put markets first.