President Biden Wants to Make Housing Affordable. But Should He?

The topic of making housing affordable has always carried weight in Greenville, but President Biden’s recent State of the Union address brought it straight to the center of the national stage. His proposals triggered equal parts curiosity, confusion, and debate, especially for anyone following the real-time shifts within the housing landscape. Some ideas landed well, others raised eyebrows, and most of them left the market wondering what the long-term impact might be.

This episode breaks down those proposals through a Greenville lens, looking closely at what was said, why it matters, and whether making housing affordable through federal policy will actually help the buyers and sellers living through today’s complicated market. Spoiler: Some ideas sound helpful at first glance, but the ripple effects might not be as friendly once the short-term excitement wears off. (Kind of like buying a treadmill you swear you will use every day.)

Housing Affordable Policies and the Biden Question

President Biden’s push to make housing affordable took center stage with bold claims, new credits, and sweeping federal ambitions. The transcript reveals exactly what he wants to do, how he wants to do it, and why some of those ideas could spark more problems than solutions. The discussion quickly turned into a deeper look at demand, inflation, rates, shortages, and long-term consequences that do not disappear just because an incentive looks attractive on paper.

Biden’s Offer, the $400 Monthly Credit, and the Risk of Artificial Demand

One of the most attention-grabbing parts of Biden’s plan is his proposed annual tax credit designed to give buyers four hundred dollars a month for two years, a temporary boost meant to help first time buyers or those trading up for more space. On the surface, it feels like a generous step toward making housing affordable, but the transcript makes it clear why this comes with serious concerns.

Artificial demand sounds helpful at first, but history shows it often causes more harm than good. The episode compared this proposal to the 2009 and 2010 first-time homebuyer credit that temporarily boosted the market, only for the market to sink even harder once the credit expired. When artificial demand disappears, the market drops back to its real level, sometimes even lower than before. (Think of it as a sugar rush for the housing market, followed by an absolutely brutal crash.)

The concern is simple. If the federal government injects demand while rates are already sensitive, inflation in housing may rise again. If inflation rises, the Federal Reserve will not lower interest rates as expected. And when the credit disappears after two years, buyers could be left with homes bought at artificially inflated prices and mortgage rates that stayed higher than necessary.

That danger puts the idea of housing affordable policies in a much more complicated light.

Title Insurance Reform, Refinancing, and Unanswered Questions

Another major piece of Biden’s plan involves eliminating title insurance fees for federally backed mortgages during refinancing. In theory, this could save homeowners money, and the transcript shows interest in this concept as long as it is done responsibly.

But the proposal leaves many questions. Is title insurance being removed entirely for federally backed refinances or simply reduced in cost? Does this apply to purchases or only refinances? Title insurance is essential for protecting ownership, and while reforms could legitimately save homeowners thousands, the details need clarity before anyone can say whether this is a smart path or another example of the federal government stepping deeper into a system that is already complicated enough.

There is real potential here, but without specifics, the uncertainty outweighs the excitement.

The Crackdown on Big Landlords and Why the Real Solution is Still Building

The transcript makes it clear that the crackdown on big landlords accused of price fixing is not the strongest part of Biden’s affordable housing agenda. The facts show that rents have already been naturally dropping nationwide because builders have delivered a historic number of new apartments.

More supply equals lower prices. Always.

The simplest solution to affordability problems is increased construction. As the episode cleverly noted, if politicians can shout "drill, baby, drill," then housing needs "build, baby, build." You do not eliminate rent inflation by blaming landlords; you eliminate it by easing zoning restrictions, cutting local red tape, and allowing supply to catch up with demand.

That leads directly into the next issue.

1.7 Million Housing Units, Red Tape Cuts, and the Limits of Federal Power

Biden highlighted 1.7 million new housing units under construction alongside his call to build and renovate two million more affordable homes. While those numbers sound impressive, the transcript makes an important point: the real bottleneck is not Washington; it is local zoning.

Federal financing changes might help slightly, but the real gatekeepers are cities, counties, and municipalities that oppose density, development, and growth. Nimbyism drives most of the nation’s housing shortages, not a lack of federal incentives.

This part of the conversation reveals a deeper truth. You cannot make housing affordable nationally without fixing the local systems that restrict building. And until those barriers change, federal incentives may do little more than push demand into a supply-constrained market, raising prices instead of lowering them.

A Warning About Overinvolvement and Unintended Consequences

The transcript ends with a clear warning. More federal involvement in the housing market may not make housing affordable in the long run. The Federal Reserve already influences mortgage rates heavily. Add more interventions, more credits, more demand injections, and the market risks swinging out of balance again.

Every proposal sounds good if viewed in isolation. But when layered on top of existing economic pressures, the outcome could be expensive, inflationary, and damaging for the very buyers these ideas hope to protect.

Making housing affordable is a worthy goal, but how we get there matters more than how loudly the plan is announced during a State of the Union speech.

Watch Or Listen To The Selling Greenville Podcast

Subscribe to the Selling Greenville podcast for real-time insights, bold perspectives, and unfiltered takes on the Upstate housing scene. Whether you are buying, selling, or simply watching the market unfold—this is where Greenville goes to stay informed.

Bottom Line

President Biden’s attempt to make housing affordable raises important questions about demand, inflation, market stability, and federal influence. Some proposals have potential, others risk repeating past mistakes, and most require far more clarity before anyone can confidently say they will help the housing market instead of distorting it.

The Greenville market, like the rest of the country, is sensitive to every shift in rates, supply, policy, and demand. A temporary boost may look good now, but cause long-term issues later. And while affordability is a major concern, it will take smart planning, sustainable building, and careful economic balance to achieve it without creating new problems along the way.

Ien Araneta

Journal & Podcast Editor | Selling Greenville