A University of Virginia professor’s research aims to illuminate how federal policy that supports affordable homeownership intersects with civic engagement via the ballot box, as housing affordability and access remain top concerns for voters in Virginia and across America.
A new study titled “Mortgage Refinancing and Political Participation” explored how remedies in the aftermath of 2008’s recession correlate to surges in people heading to the polls.
A joint analysis by UVA professor W. Ben McCartney along with co-authors from the University of Southern California, University of Oregon and the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas found that homeowners who refinanced their mortgages during the recession were more likely to vote in the 2012 presidential election than otherwise similar homeowners who didn’t.
In the fallout of a banking and housing crisis that erupted in 2008, many American homeowners struggled financially. One remedy was a government program called the Home Affordable Refinance Program, or HARP, which allowed certain borrowers to get new deals with lower interest rates on their mortgages.
By linking mortgage data with voter records for millions of Americans, McCartney and co-authors tracked who showed up to vote in 2012.
He said a key takeaway from his analysis was that voter motivation spanned party affiliations or lack thereof.
“The effect was especially strong among independent and unaffiliated voters,” he added.
“That matters because this is not a case of a policy clearly helping one party and hurting the other,” he said. “The main effect is simply greater engagement. When people receive meaningful financial relief, they become more likely to participate in the political process.”
Enhanced financial security not only eases stress, McCartney argued, but can help free up peoples’ time. A voter who can feel positive effects of public policy may also become more motivated to vote.
“Policies that relieve financial distress may not only improve household finances,” he said. “They may also change whether people feel able and willing to engage with democracy.”
In the 18 years since the Great Recession, housing affordability and supply issues have surged nationwide.
A 2021 state report found that Virginia had a housing shortage of at least 200,000 affordable rental units and that fewer Virginians could afford to purchase a home.
State lawmakers have since passed a series of laws aimed at addressing supply and affordability for renters and homeowners. Congress also recently passed an overwhelmingly bipartisan housing package to tackle matters at the federal level. The federal legislation entailed numerous proposals that were first introduced or piloted in states like Virginia.
Though McCartney’s recent study was retrospective and more narrowly focused on mortgages post-recession, he believes that in the current sense, whether people still find housing costs a motivation to vote or not “could go either way.”
Some people will see it as a reason to vote, while others may feel like the government failed them and “become disenchanted with politics altogether,” he added.
Economic analysts and media companies are conducting surveys about how much housing may factor into this fall’s congressional midterm elections.
A recent CNBC poll found that young voters — between 18 and 34 years old — view housing affordability as a top issue.
Candidates across political spectrums are talking about housing affordability on campaign trails this summer, too.
McCartney is continuing work exploring housing policies’ effects on political engagement through his role at UVa’s Household and Urban Finance Lab.
His team will soon study how Opportunity Zones may or may not shape the political behavior of people living in those communities. These zones provide federal incentives to invest in distressed areas.
They’ll also research how locked-in mortgage rates from 2020 and 2021 influence engagement.
Following the early stages of the COVID 19 pandemic, homebuyers were able to secure very low interest rates on mortgages. While it was a boon for some homebuyers, it could also mean families feel compelled to stay in a home or community they may have outgrown personally or professionally.
“They are essentially golden-handcuffed to their current homes. That may create frustration, especially for people whose homes no longer fit their families or jobs. But it could also make them more invested in local politics,” he said.
“Someone who originally expected to move may instead realize that they are likely to remain in the same community for a long time and become more involved in what happens there.”
(0) comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.