It is said that politics makes strange bedfellows. Individuals who normally disagree politically sometimes find themselves working for a common cause. As an example, consider the conservative response to Joe Biden’s infrastructure plan and the Leftist response to the Cedar Point ruling. Though these are two very different issues, both conservatives and Leftists are supporting the same underlying idea in their responses.
Conservatives are calling Biden’s infrastructure plan a “covert war on the suburbs” and “disastrous for the suburbs.” Such strong language might lead one to conclude that Biden proposes to carpet bomb suburban neighborhoods or send special forces door-to-door to relocate suburban families. But Biden’s plan doesn’t call for anything so sinister. Biden wants to eliminate exclusionary zoning.
As the term implies, exclusionary zoning is used to exclude certain types of land uses in a community. One of the most common means for doing this is to designate large portions of a city for single-family homes only. Duplexes, four-plexes, small apartment buildings, and other multi-family housing are illegal in areas zoned for single-family homes. Biden wants to eliminate such zoning to restore the freedom of builders and developers to produce more housing in high demand areas. And this is what conservatives find upsetting.
The purpose of zoning, in any form, is to give government officials the power to dictate how private property can be legally used. In eliminating exclusionary zoning, Biden’s plan would give property owners more freedom to use their land as they choose. Conservatives, who often give lip service to property rights, are essentially claiming that restoring some property rights will be a disaster. They want local governments, not property owners, to control land use in a community.
Leftists are making a similar argument in the wake of the Cedar Point ruling, which found that a California law requiring farm owners to allow union organizers on their property was a taking of private property for public use. Leftists are calling the ruling “disastrous news for unions” and a “blow to all workers.” Such language might lead one to think that the Court declared collective bargaining unconstitutional. But the Court’s ruling did no such thing. Instead, it declared that the right to property includes the freedom to exclude unwanted individuals, and the California law violated this freedom.
Leftists are troubled by this, arguing that it will make it more difficult for union organizers to speak to migrant farm workers. They want the government to force farm owners to allow union representatives on the farms, regardless of the owner’s desires. In other words, Leftists want the government, not the owner, to control how the farmer uses his property.
And this is where conservatives and Leftists agree. Both conservatives and Leftists want government to control property use. They might disagree on specific applications of this, as evidenced by the two examples above. But such disagreements are over details and not the principle.
There are aspects of both Biden’s plan and the Cedar Point ruling that are cause for concern. Despite whatever pro-property rights appearances they have, both set the stage for even worse violations of the right to property. And that is particularly disturbing when conservatives and Leftists are in bed together on the issue.