Titus plays politics while Nevada families can’t afford homes

By Amy Groves  

Nevada News and Views

If you’ve been following the debate over Nevada’s housing crunch, you’ve probably heard Democrats like Rep. Dina Titus paint a pretty gloomy picture about Republican-led efforts to free up federal land for development.

The problem is, a lot of their claims just don’t hold water.

The “Guardrails” Excuse

Titus says any land sales should come with strict “guardrails” — things like mandatory affordable housing rules, hard water limits, and long public comment periods. Sounds nice, right? But piling on federal rules actually makes housing more expensive, not less.

Developers already face red tape that slows projects to a crawl. Add more regulations, and you drive up costs, shrink supply, and end up with fewer homes on the market.

That means higher prices for everyone, which is the exact opposite of what families need.

Conservatives argue a better approach is the one we’ve already seen work. Since 1998, the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act (SNPLMA) has allowed sales of federal land, with proceeds funding schools, parks, and water projects.

It’s generated over $4 billion without suffocating development with endless rules.

“Closed Doors” or Local Control?

Titus also complained that Republican Rep. Mark Amodei’s amendment to sell 460,000 acres of federal land was hashed out “behind closed doors.” That’s just not true.

The proposal came through a normal House committee process, with counties like Clark, Lyon, Pershing, and Washoe identifying which lands made sense to sell.

That’s local input. Local leaders know better than D.C. bureaucrats what their communities need. Calling it “secretive” is just political spin.

The Bipartisan Illusion

Some Democrats claim land sales are bipartisan. Technically true, but it’s misleading.

Democrats only support land sales when they’re tied up with strings that satisfy environmental lobbyists and special interests. Republicans push for freeing up land so Nevada families can actually afford homes and so local governments can make their own choices. Big difference.

The “Water Crisis” Scare

Another talking point: opening up land will dry up Nevada’s water supply. It’s a scare tactic.

A study once estimated new development could use 49 million gallons of water per day.

Sounds huge, until you realize that’s about 18 percent of Nevada’s Colorado River allocation. And SNPLMA funds have already been used to improve pipelines and water efficiency.

Growth and conservation can go hand in hand.

Blaming Trump

Titus even tried to tie the housing shortage to Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement, claiming deportations shrank the construction workforce. That’s a stretch.

Nevada’s housing slowdown has far more to do with inflation, supply chain breakdowns, and government permitting delays than with enforcing immigration laws.

Illegal immigration undercuts wages for American workers. Enforcing the law doesn’t create a crisis — it protects citizens and creates incentives to build up a legal workforce through training and apprenticeships.

The “Vacant Land” Myth

Titus points to a Regional Transportation Commission report claiming 78,000 acres of “vacant or underutilized land” in Southern Nevada could be redeveloped instead of selling federal land.

In reality, much of it isn’t viable — wrong zoning, costly infrastructure upgrades, or locations that just don’t work for new neighborhoods.

The Southern Nevada Home Builders Association warned that developable land is running out. Without new federal land releases, housing shortages will only get worse.

The Market Knows Best

Finally, Titus insists developers will only build “luxury homes” unless the government forces them to do otherwise. But the housing market doesn’t work that way.

Builders respond to demand. In Las Vegas, where young families and first-time buyers are desperate for options, there’s plenty of incentive to build affordable housing, without Washington writing the blueprints.

In fact, under SNPLMA, some land has already been sold at deep discounts specifically for affordable housing projects.

Free markets with light-touch government oversight have delivered results before, and they can again.

The Bigger Picture

Over 80 percent of Nevada’s land is controlled by the federal government. It’s a real obstacle for housing, jobs, and growth.

Republicans like Amodei are pushing to put more land under local control, where decisions can be made closer to the people who actually live here.

Democrats, on the other hand, keep using scare tactics about water, climate, or Trump to stall progress. Meanwhile, families can’t find affordable homes, and prices keep climbing.

The truth is simple: selling some federal land responsibly, without piling on red tape, is one of the best tools Nevada has to deal with its housing shortage. And history shows it works.

*

Amy Groves is director of the Coalition for Housing Freedom. You can contact her at amy@nevadasfinestproperties.com.