The pandemic has unleashed a torrent of out-of-context policies. The lock downs and the moratoriums on evictions are but two examples. Sadly, the victims of these policies have often embraced the underlying principles. A debate in Massachusetts illustrates this point.
The Massachusetts state legislature is considering a bill that would strengthen the state’s eviction moratorium. Not surprisingly, MassLandlords— the landlord trade association in the state—opposes the bill. What might be surprising is the reason for that opposition.
Massachusetts has a program called Residential Assistance for Families in Transition (RAFT). RAFT provides financial aid to tenants who are unable to pay their rent because of COVID. MassLandlords argues that an eviction moratorium would not be necessary if landlords participated in RAFT. Besides, the association’s executive director writes, “It is our opinion that a landlord refusing to take RAFT” is in violation of Massachusetts law in many cases. Instead of imposing a moratorium, the director argues, the state should enforce existing anti-discrimination laws and compel property owners to participate in RAFT. (In Massachusetts a landlord who refuses to accept housing vouchers or other rental assistance if guilty of illegal discrimination.)
In other words, MassLandlords is opposed to government telling landlords what they can’t do (evict non-paying tenants), but has no problem with the government telling landlords what they must do (accept RAFT or other housing assistance). “Now,” writes the director, “there is no reason in law or moral principle for a landlord to refuse RAFT.”
Contrary to the director’s claim, there is a moral principle that supports a landlord’s refusal to accept RAFT. That principle is called freedom of contract—the freedom of individuals to voluntarily engage in business with others on terms that are mutually acceptable. Freedom of contract also means that one can walk away from any proposal that one does not find acceptable.
There are many valid reasons why a landlord might refuse to accept RAFT or similar assistance. A primary reason is that many assistance programs come with strings attached. A landlord may rationally judge those strings to be detrimental to his own goals and desires. A landlord has a moral right to make that determination and act accordingly.
But according to the trade association for Massachusetts landlords, property owners shouldn’t have the freedom to judge for themselves whether to accept RAFT or refuse. Landlords shouldn’t be free to act on their own judgment, but should be forced to act as state legislators dictate.
MassLandlords’ director isn’t opposed to the state issuing dictates to his members. He only opposes proposals that go “too far.” Sadly, because he accepts the principles underlying the proposed moratorium, his opposition is worse than useless. It actually strengthens the case for the proposed bill.