Housing Affordability Becomes a Defining Issue for Gen Z Voters Ahead of Midterms

As the United States heads into the midterm elections, housing affordability remains a top concern among voters, with Gen Z—currently aged 18 to 29—leading the charge in demanding political solutions. A recent CNBC poll found that housing costs have emerged as the single most critical political issue for voters aged 18 to 34, as well as for men aged 18 to 49. This shifting political landscape comes as little surprise to housing experts, given that the milestone of homeownership feels increasingly out of reach for millions of prospective buyers across the country.

Recent research from Realtor.com highlights the depth of the generational squeeze, revealing that about 1 in 3 adult children under the age of 35—an astounding 25.2 million people—still live with their parents. This ongoing trend has contributed to a staggering household deficit of about 4.3 million homes compared with 2010 levels. Yet, despite these structural hurdles, younger demographics maintain a steadfast belief that homeownership remains a vital cornerstone of the American dream. A 2025 Realtor.com survey showed that Gen Zers and millennials are more likely than older generations to view homeownership as a primary life goal, with roughly half considering it a key driver for building long-term generational wealth.

Young Americans are not turning their backs on homeownership by choice; rather, they are being priced out of the market by historic economic pressures.

"What you see is lots of people around the country waking up and realizing that they’re in their 30s and 40s, they’re not able to buy a home, and they may never be able to," says John D. Landis, professor emeritus of City and Regional Planning at the Weitzman School of Design at the University of Pennsylvania.

Nationally, housing affordability remains near its worst levels since the mid-1980s, according to Realtor.com senior economist Hannah Jones.

"With home prices and mortgage rates both elevated, the typical U.S. household can’t afford a median-priced home," Jones explains, noting that stagnant wage growth relative to soaring real estate values has drastically extended the timeline required to save for a down payment. "These pressures have made affordability a top concern for Americans worried about the future of accessible homeownership, and voters across the country are turning out to back policies that make housing more affordable."

A Perfect Storm

Landis attributes the widespread public dissatisfaction surrounding housing affordability to a convergence of systemic pressures. While elevated interest rates and post-pandemic inflation certainly play a role, Gen Z voters are also fueling a broader current of frustration directed at perceived government inaction and political stagnation.

A 2025 survey conducted by the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University revealed that younger generations increasingly feel that current political parties and governance structures do not adequately serve their interests. Rather than shifting uniformly toward conservative or progressive ideologies, younger voters are becoming increasingly cynical and politically alienated.

"They are not necessarily becoming more conservative or progressive. They are becoming more cynical and frustrated," Scott Warren, co-author of the report and a fellow at the SNF Agora Institute, said in a statement.

This deep-seated skepticism has been heavily shaped by formative economic events. Many young adults watched their parents weather the fallout of the 2008 financial crisis, and later lived through the socio-economic disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic.

"They saw during the financial crisis that nobody paid for it. Nobody went to jail. And in COVID, basically they saw, you know, messages being manipulated politically," Landis observes.

Combined with the pervasive influence of social media, these experiences have triggered a massive shift in how young people view the political process. Unlike previous generations who maintained faith in traditional ballot-box politics as a mechanism for change, many younger voters have lost confidence in older generations and established political parties. This disillusionment has driven a rising interest in alternative political movements, such as the Democratic Socialists of America, as young voters increasingly view the conventional political establishment as the core of the problem rather than its solution.

Wages Aren’t Meeting the Rising Cost of Living

Housing affordability is a multi-pronged crisis that cannot be resolved in a single election cycle, according to Kirk McClure, professor emeritus of urban planning in the University of Kansas School of Public Affairs and Administration. While the overarching shortfall in housing supply fails to meet robust market demand, wage growth has persistently lagged behind the rising cost of living.

"Simply put, we’ve got a whole lot of people in the bottom fourth, let’s say, of the income distribution who struggle to find a way to afford housing. Simply because the entry threshold for prices is just higher than they can afford," says McClure, who previously served as a Scholar in Residence at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Department of Policy Development and Research.

With median home listing prices sitting roughly 34% above pre-pandemic levels, the fundamental economic math simply does not add up for entry-level buyers. McClure argues that the disconnect between static wages and soaring living expenses represents the housing market’s single greatest structural failure. He suggests that raising the federal minimum wage—which has remained stagnant at $7.25 an hour since 2009—could provide a significant catalyst for helping young adults, who typically start their careers at lower pay scales, transition into homeownership.

Data from the Annie E. Casey Foundation underscores this vulnerability, showing that about 18% of adults aged 18 to 24 live below the federal poverty line, while approximately 35% of young adults reside in low-income households.

"If we up the minimum wage to $25 an hour… you would now be moving people well [into stability]. And even if you go less than that, $20 an hour, you’d be moving households into $40,000 annually. If you look at the incidence of high housing cost burden… that problem pretty well goes away," McClure says.

However, he acknowledges that even in progressive metropolitan areas like Seattle, where the minimum wage is projected to surpass $22 an hour by 2027, affordability disparities stubbornly persist. Even with substantial wage adjustments, prospective buyers face immense financial hurdles.

"When you’re talking about buying, even a 5% down payment, it’s a lot of money to put aside, especially if you’re straddling student debt," McClure explains. "Then you’ve got to have a car. You shouldn’t have a fancy one, but you still need a car to get to work in most of America. So therein lies the problem. It is almost impossible for these young people to get a well-paid position and be able to save sufficient money even to do the first step of getting a first apartment—much less 5% down on a home."

Despite these barriers, McClure remains hopeful that current macroeconomic pressures, such as high interest rates, will incentivize state and local governments to introduce targeted buyer-assistance policies. He points to precedents set during the early 1980s, when high interest rates similarly spurred state-level interventions to assist builders and homebuyers alike. However, he notes that legislative focus remains heavily skewed toward ownership rather than the rental market, meaning comprehensive relief will likely arrive incrementally on a state-by-state basis rather than through a single nationwide overhaul.

A Housing Supply Gap Stokes Concern

Beyond general political disillusionment and inadequate wage structures, prospective Gen Z homeowners face an expanding housing supply gap. According to Realtor.com research, new home construction fell well short of household formation in 2025, culminating in a national housing supply deficit of approximately 4.03 million homes.

Victor Body-Lawson, principal architect at Body Lawson Associates, a New York City-based architecture and design firm specializing in affordable housing projects nationwide, has witnessed the severity of this crunch firsthand. A recent 100-unit affordable housing development designed by his firm in New York attracted more than 70,000 applications—equaling roughly 7,000 applications for every available apartment.

"That’s how huge the need is," Body-Lawson says.

He notes that older housing stock frequently saddles lower-income tenants with exorbitant utility and operating costs due to aging mechanical systems and outdated infrastructure.

"The fact that the building is essentially in the last stages of its life cycle makes it a lot more expensive than if I were to move to a new building," he explains.

Compounding the supply shortage are persistent administrative backlogs and municipal permitting delays that hinder developers from delivering much-needed inventory in a timely manner. To address these structural roadblocks, lawmakers passed the 21st Century Road to Housing Act with broad bipartisan support, aiming to cut bureaucratic red tape and accelerate new construction, despite President Donald Trump’s ultimate refusal to sign the legislation.

As the midterms approach, the federal administration has ramped up its messaging on housing affordability to connect with anxious voters. President Trump recently issued an executive order focused on housing affordability and established a dedicated task force centered on manufactured housing. While declining to sign the Road Act, Trump asserted in a statement that his administration remains committed to reducing regulatory barriers that impede mortgage origination and drive up homeownership costs, calling the ability to own a home "a vital pillar of our great country."

Concurrently, the U.S. Treasury Department proposed a new regulatory rule that would limit institutional investors to owning a maximum of 350 single-family homes. While institutional investors currently control roughly 1% of the nation’s single-family rental stock, Realtor.com senior economist Jake Krimmel has previously noted that their actual impact on the broader housing and rental markets is frequently exaggerated by political figures across the ideological spectrum.

Despite the widespread frustration surrounding affordability, Landis maintains that real estate remains a fundamentally sound long-term investment for those who manage to break into the market.

"There’s strong demand. There’s limited supply. So housing is gonna be a solid investment," he says.

Looking past the immediate political cycle of the midterms, Landis emphasizes that localized policymaking will ultimately dictate the trajectory of housing affordability nationwide.

"We don’t have a national housing market in this country," he concludes. "We have national forces that buffet local housing markets, and we may worry about how those national forces buffet local housing markets, but at the end of the day it’s really up to states and local governments to figure out what they wanna do about housing, and they will. Some will and some won’t."