Despite the lessons of the pandemic, the Left marches on toward the destruction of suburbs.

One might have thought Leftist Democrats would take a pause on the project to destroy the suburbs — if not to genuinely reevaluate things in light of the lessons about density learned from COVID-19, then at least to put some distance between their activism and the pandemic’s uncomfortable questions.  One would have been wrong.

Annie Lennox notes evidence that Biden is intent on urbanizing the ‘burbs:

… the Biden administration wants people to move from apartments in dense urban areas to apartments in neighborhoods in the suburbs. Not apartments in suburban towns, which often have a decent selection of apartments and townhomes for rent. The administration wants apartment buildings in developments zoned for single-family homes. They will use grants and tax credits as the carrot and eventually pull highway funds through the Booker Amendment as a stick.

Lennox reminds readers of a pre-election essay by Stanley Kurtz for National Review:

I’ve been studying Joe Biden’s housing plans, and what I’ve seen is both surprising and frightening. I expected that a President Biden would enforce the Obama administration’s radical AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) regulation to the hilt. That is exactly what Biden promises to do. By itself, that would be more than enough to end America’s suburbs as we’ve known them, as I’ve explained repeatedly here at NRO.

What surprises me is that Biden has actually promised to go much further than AFFH. Biden has embraced Cory Booker’s strategy for ending single-family zoning in the suburbs and creating what you might call “little downtowns” in the suburbs. Combine the Obama-Biden administration’s radical AFFH regulation with Booker’s new strategy, and I don’t see how the suburbs can retain their ability to govern themselves. It will mean the end of local control, the end of a style of living that many people prefer to the city, and therefore the end of meaningful choice in how Americans can live. Shouldn’t voters know that this is what’s at stake in the election?

That question makes me chuckle a little.  For decades, now, I’ve watched local Democrats in my town lead the charge to prevent as much development as they can in our town, going so far as to change zoning rules at the last minute.  The activists pushing central planning from the top don’t care about your town.  There’s simply too much incentive to force a change.  Their plan will funnel suburban money to their urban constituencies and political machines while embedding spheres of interest right in the heart of the suburban voting blocks.

Of course, there’s probably much more to the scheme.  After all, if you’ve got the political pull to keep those apartment buildings out of your single-family-house neighborhood, your property values will skyrocket because the middle ground for the middle class will disappear.  It’s either accept the more-urban side of town or find a way to pay a premium for the genuine suburban experience.

Suburbanites all along the political spectrum would do well to start asking themselves which side of that line they’re likely to find themselves on a few years down the road when this hen comes home to roost.

 

Featured image by Isaac Quesada on Unsplash.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.