Comparing Housing Plans: Harris vs. Trump
The New York Times decided to take a look at the housing plans from Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. They asked Jeanna Smialek and Linda Qiu to do the analysis.
Two Very Different Plans
Their plans to solve America’s affordable housing crisis are very different. Ms. Harris’s plan is much more detailed. But both plans have received some skepticism from economists.
Harris’s Detailed Plan
Right from the start, we see that Harris’s plan is far more detailed. She has an actual plan, but…
BOTH SIDES!
Ms. Harris is promising a mix of tax cuts to encourage home construction. Several economists said this could help create more homes. She also wants to give $25,000 to first-time buyers to help them buy a home. But many economists worry this could make home prices go up even more. And both sets of policies would need to pass in Congress, which would affect how they work.
Building 3 Million New Homes
Harris plans to build 3 million new homes. This might help with the supply problem. But the Times writers don’t focus on this big number. Instead, they mention “several” economists who say it could help. Could? Several? Are there any economists who think building 3 million new homes wouldn’t help?
Then, the Times writers talk about “many” economists who worry that helping people afford homes might push prices higher. So, according to the NYT, more economists worry about prices going up than about not having enough homes!
Trump’s Plan Raises Doubts
Mr. Trump’s plan has even more doubts. He wants to deport undocumented immigrants. This could temporarily reduce housing demand but would also cut into the construction workforce, making it harder to build new homes. He also wants to lower interest rates, something he can’t directly control and that is likely to happen anyway.
Deportation as a Solution?
Deporting people is actually a way to solve housing! Okay, there are doubts about it, but it’s a plan. As Andrea Pitzer, who wrote a book on concentration camps, explained:
If former president Donald Trump is elected for a second term, he and his advisers promise to remove from the U.S., via forced expulsions and deportation camps, as many as 20 million people—a number larger than the country’s current estimated population of undocumented residents. Put into effect, this scheme would devolve quickly into a vast 21st-century version of concentration camps, with predictably brutal results.
But to the New York Times, that’s actually a plan to create more affordable housing! One that, sure, might have flaws, but Harris’s plan also has flaws— “many economists” say— so,… Both Sides!
No Bottom for the NYT
For the New York Times, like the modern GOP, there is no bottom.
Main FAQs
What is the controversy surrounding mass deportations?
The controversy revolves around the proposal to forcibly remove large numbers of individuals from the United States, often referred to as mass deportations. Critics argue that such policies are inhumane, violate human rights, and have severe economic and social impacts on both the deported individuals and the communities they leave behind.
What are the arguments against mass deportations?
The arguments against mass deportations include:
- Human Rights Violations: Deportations can lead to families being separated, individuals facing persecution in their home countries, and a lack of due process.
- Economic Impact: The removal of workers can disrupt industries and economies, leading to job losses and economic instability.
- Social Impact: Deportations can cause significant social disruption, including the loss of community members and the strain on social services.
- Legal Concerns: Many individuals may have been living in the U.S. for years, having built lives and families here, raising questions about their rights and the fairness of deportation proceedings.
How do media outlets portray mass deportations?
Media portrayals of mass deportations can vary widely depending on the outlet’s perspective and agenda. Some outlets may frame these policies as necessary measures for national security or immigration control, while others may highlight the humanitarian concerns and potential negative consequences.
What is the New York Times’ stance on mass deportations?
The New York Times has been criticized for its coverage of mass deportations, with some arguing that it downplays the humanitarian aspects and frames these policies in a more positive light, such as an “affordable housing plan.” Critics contend that this framing is misleading and does not accurately reflect the complexities and challenges associated with mass deportations.
Why do critics argue that mass deportations are not an affordable housing plan?
Critics argue that mass deportations are not an effective or humane solution to addressing housing issues. Here are some reasons:
- Lack of Addressing Root Causes: Deportations do not address the underlying issues driving housing shortages or affordability problems.
- Displacement and Instability: Removing people from their homes can lead to further displacement and instability in both the U.S. and the countries from which they are being deported.
- Economic Inefficiency: The costs associated with mass deportations—such as detention facilities, legal proceedings, and reintegration efforts—are often seen as inefficient compared to other solutions aimed at addressing housing needs.
- Harm to Communities: Deportations can harm both the communities from which people are being removed and those where they are being resettled, leading to social and economic disruptions.
What are alternative solutions to address affordable housing?
Alternative solutions include:
- Investing in Affordable Housing Programs: Governments can invest in programs that provide subsidies for low-income housing, increase funding for public housing projects, and incentivize private developers to build affordable units.
- Rent Control Measures: Implementing rent control measures can help keep housing costs stable for long-term residents, preventing rapid gentrification and displacement.
- Community Land Trusts (CLTs): CLTs allow communities to purchase land and hold it for the benefit of residents, ensuring that housing remains affordable over time.
- Homelessness Prevention Programs: Programs aimed at preventing homelessness by providing emergency assistance with rent payments or utility bills can be more effective than deportation policies.
How can individuals get involved in advocating against mass deportations?
Individuals can get involved by:
- Supporting Advocacy Groups: Joining organizations dedicated to immigrant rights and advocating for humane immigration policies.
- Engaging in Community Activism: Participating in local protests, rallies, and town hall meetings to raise awareness about the issues surrounding mass deportations.
- Writing to Elected Officials: Contacting representatives and expressing opposition to policies that support mass deportations.
- Spreading Awareness Through Social Media: Using social media platforms to share information about the negative impacts of mass deportations and promote alternative solutions.
What are the potential legal challenges associated with mass deportations?
The potential legal challenges include:
- Due Process Violations: Deportation proceedings often lack adequate due process protections, leading to potential legal challenges based on constitutional rights.
- International Law Violations: Mass deportations may violate international human rights law, particularly the Refugee Convention and other treaties related to non-refoulement (the principle that a state may not return a person to a country where they would face persecution).
- Administrative Law Challenges: Deportation policies can be challenged through administrative law proceedings if they are deemed arbitrary or capricious.
How do mass deportations affect families and communities?
Mass deportations can have severe impacts on families and communities:
- Family Separation: Parents may be deported while their children remain in the U.S., leading to long-term separation and emotional trauma.
- Community Disruption: The removal of community members can disrupt social networks, cultural events, and economic activities.
- Social Services Overload: Communities may struggle to support the remaining residents who are left behind after mass deportations, leading to an overload on social services.
What are some historical examples of mass deportations and their outcomes?
Historical examples include:
- The 1930s German Repatriation Program: This program forcibly removed Jews and other minority groups from Germany during the rise of Nazi power.
- The 1970s Indochina Refugee Crisis: The U.S. accepted large numbers of refugees from Vietnam following the fall of Saigon but also faced criticism for its initial reluctance to accept them.
- The 1990s Yugoslav Wars Deportations: Ethnic cleansing during the Yugoslav wars resulted in massive deportations that led to significant humanitarian crises.
How can policymakers balance national security concerns with humanitarian considerations in immigration policies?
Policymakers can balance national security concerns with humanitarian considerations by:
- Implementing Fair and Humane Procedures: Ensuring that deportation proceedings are fair and provide adequate due process protections.
- Providing Alternatives to Deportation: Offering alternatives such as asylum, temporary protected status (TPS), or other forms of relief that allow individuals to remain in the country without posing a threat to national security.
- Investing in Community Programs: Investing in community programs aimed at integrating immigrants into society while also addressing any potential security risks through targeted measures.
What are some potential long-term consequences of mass deportations?
The potential long-term consequences include:
- Psychological Trauma: The trauma experienced by those deported can have lasting effects on their mental health and well-being.
- Economic Instability: The economic instability caused by mass deportations can persist for years, affecting both the U.S. and the countries from which people are being deported.
- Social Cohesion Challenges:The removal of community members can erode social cohesion within communities, leading to increased tensions and decreased trust among residents.
