Joe Mitchell Cost of Living Environment Iowa

Joe Mitchell's Entire Housing Plan Is Deregulation. Ask Iowa Towns How That Went.

His campaign says de-regulating homebuilding will fix housing costs. Iowa already ran that experiment — a law capping what cities can require for stormwater runoff, in a state with worsening floods. Meanwhile the real housing bill became law without Trump's signature, and his housing plank doesn't mention it.

MAGA Report Cards · Aug 07, 2026

Joe Mitchell is a housing candidate. He's a developer of workforce housing, he was a Regional Director at HUD and Chief of Staff at the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and he says young Iowans can't afford to stay in the towns they grew up in. He's right about the problem.

Here is his solution, in full, from his campaign's issues page:

"The skyrocketing price of homes has made the American Dream unattainable for most Americans. Due to over-regulation and a shortage of affordable homes for sale, the median first time home buyer is now over 40 years of age. De-regulating the homebuilding industry will allow more builders to build more homes at a much lower cost."

That's it. One diagnosis — over-regulation — and one prescription: deregulate.

It's worth knowing that Iowa already ran a version of this experiment, and that Mitchell's own trade association helped pay for it.

The Iowa test case

In 2024 the Iowa Legislature passed Senate File 455, which bans cities and counties from adopting stormwater and topsoil rules stricter than state and federal guidelines. Local runoff regulations were capped at standards based on a five-year return frequency.

The pitch on the Senate floor was exactly Mitchell's pitch. Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny:

"We have an opportunity today to address an area that is a cost driver — a regulation, that drives up the cost on a per-house basis for working Iowans, Iowans who want to stay in small communities, who want to stay in Clear Lake, want to stay in Algona."

The bill failed in the Iowa House on its first attempt, then passed on a second try after being amended to let a city or county set higher standards only if it pays the increased development costs itself. It cleared the Senate 29–18 and was signed into law.

The Iowa Real Estate Developers Association — which Mitchell's company helped found and which he led — spent nearly $75,000 on lobbying from 2023 through 2025, Salon reported, efforts that were apparently aimed at passing this bill. The group attended the signing ceremony. Mitchell publicly supported the change on a real estate development podcast.

What "over-regulation" meant in that bill

Here's what the regulation being capped actually does.

Stormwater rules govern how much water a new development dumps onto everyone downhill from it. When you cover fields with roofs, driveways, and streets, rain that used to soak into the ground runs off instead. Retention ponds, topsoil depth requirements, and runoff limits are how a city keeps that water out of its neighbors' basements and off its roads.

During House debate, Democrats argued that some Iowa communities need higher standards than the bill allows — standards "aimed at mitigating harm to residents and property damage with more frequent floods and other extreme weather events."

Sen. Claire Celsi of West Des Moines put the practical objection this way:

"It has to be thought out ahead of time, it has to be planned, but there is no reason why builders and developers cannot incorporate smart storm water practices into their building practices. Otherwise, they'll end up with basements full of dirt."

And Sen. Janice Weiner of Iowa City named who ends up holding the bag:

"I see this bill as not being about affordable housing, which some may talk about. I don't think that the cost per lot … to require more restrictions is that great. And if we want to figure out another way to pass along that cost, let's leave that up to the communities to let them decide. What I care about is the fact that we, the Legislature, are going to be passing these costs on to ordinary citizens, homeowners, your friends and neighbors, because they're the ones who will ultimately pay now."

That's the whole argument in one paragraph. Deregulation doesn't make the cost disappear. It moves it — off the developer's balance sheet and onto the city's, and then onto the homeowner's, in the form of taxes, flood damage, or both.

And note who loses the ability to decide without paying for it: the city council closest to the actual creek.

Meanwhile, the actual housing bill

There's a strange silence in Mitchell's housing plank.

In June 2026, Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, a landmark housing bill. The Senate passed it 85–5. The House passed it 358–32. It exempts some housing projects from federal environmental review, loosens the rules for manufactured homes, bars large corporate landlords from buying up more single-family houses, and expands rental help. The nation's homebuilders backed it.

Then President Trump canceled the signing ceremony and said he wouldn't sign it until Congress passed a separate voter-ID bill that has nothing to do with housing. He never did. On July 11, the bill became law without his signature.

So a veto-proof, bipartisan housing bill — including the deregulation and permitting reform Mitchell says he wants — became law with the President of his own party refusing to put his name on it.

Mitchell's issues page doesn't mention it.

That's the test of whether someone is actually a housing candidate or just uses housing as the frame for a deregulation agenda. A landmark housing law got through over a hostage demand from his own party's president, and the candidate who talks about housing more than anything else has nothing on his housing page about it.

The pattern

Put the two things next to each other.

When deregulation helped developers — capping what Iowa cities can require to manage runoff — Mitchell's association spent nearly $75,000 on lobbying and showed up for the signing.

When a housing bill passed with 85 Senate votes and his own party's president refused to sign it, his housing plank said nothing.

"De-regulating the homebuilding industry" is a policy that has a clear winner, and it isn't the first-time buyer. Iowa already paid for that lesson. We deserve better.