National Association of Realtors must be held nd accountable for more than just commissions
The National Association of Realtors recently agreed to a $418 million settlement resulting from the cooperative system that determined the commission buyers’ and sellers’ agents receive. The settlement gives consumers more negotiating power when buying or selling a home, but NAR’s influence over commission structures is a minor aspect of a much more insidious influence over housing in America. NAR’s influence extends to every level of government, and the results aren’t necessarily in the best interest of the public.
NAR policy pursuits over the past century have contributed to the challenges we all face today: high rents, high home prices, the housing shortage, exclusionary zoning, economic inequality, and even the repeal of Roe v. Wade. The Center for Responsive Politics has consistently ranked NAR’s spending near or at the top of its list of lobbying spenders. NAR has also spent tens of millions of dollars annually on political campaigns through its super PAC. Realtors sit on state government bodies that regulate all real estate agents.
I’ve been a member of NAR for over 20 years and have benefited greatly from the educational opportunities it provides. There are many fine and dedicated realtors throughout the country who work hard for their clients and their communities. Most realtors are not directly involved in the political activity of the association, although a portion of our dues is used for that purpose.
NAR has framed housing policy for its own benefit for over 100 years; policy that has contributed to the housing shortage, which has raised rents and home prices beyond reach for so many today. Exclusionary zoning in the Commonwealth started with the racist practices of real estate agents a century ago, which also informed racist federal policies like redlining. It was only in 2020 that NAR formally apologized for practices that helped shape the racist housing policies of the past, the legacy of which continues to plague underserved communities to this day.
NAR also continues to defend the mortgage interest deduction, a homeowner subsidy that allows for the tax deduction of mortgage interest. The deduction has been criticized by economists for disproportionally benefitting wealthier homeowners, encouraging the construction of large homes, and contributing to economic inequality.
NAR also makes significant campaign contributions to incumbents supportive of its policies through its super PAC, known as the NAR’s Congressional Fund. NAR isn’t as transparent with its members about the super PAC as it is with RPAC, a regular political action committee. In fact, information about the super PAC is almost impossible to come by outside of FEC filings. The 62 percent of NAR’s members who are women are probably unaware of how NAR super PAC spending contributed to the repeal of Roe v. Wade.
The Center for Responsive Politics shows that NAR’s super PAC contributed over $2 million to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in 2014, when he faced a strong challenger. It was NAR’s largest contribution that election cycle, because McConnell was poised to become Senate majority leader. McConnell would abuse his role in that position by refusing to hold hearings for then-President Barack Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland. He would later usher in three associate justices, nominated by then-President Donald Trump, who eventually voted in the majority to repeal Roe v. Wade. NAR’s political spending helped make it happen, to the detriment of the majority of its members.
NAR also made a concerted effort to preserve Republican control of the Senate in 2020, which was under threat. Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine and David Perdue of Georgia both faced strong challengers, and NAR contributed more than $2 million to Collins and more than $3 million to Perdue. They were NAR’s top two contributions that election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
In Massachusetts, realtor officers serve on the Commonwealth’s Board of Registration of Real Estate Brokers and Salespersons, which is responsible for enforcing the rules of all real estate agents. So there is no separation between the private interests of NAR and the public’s interests. That is because NAR drafted the first model licensing law in 1918, which was adopted by many states throughout the 1920s. That’s right, the trade group predates licensing.
As current NAR president Kevin Sears was rising through the ranks of one of the nation’s most powerful lobbying groups, he was also serving as the chair of the Commonwealth’s regulatory body. In 2022, the chair of the state board who succeeded Sears, Peter Ruffini, was married to the president of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors. Ruffini is currently both the president of the Realtor Association of Pioneer Valley and the chair of the board of registration. The conflict of interest is self-evident. Those of us who make a living selling homes shouldn’t have such power over housing policy.
It’s not in the public’s best interest. NAR needs to be made more accountable.
The Legislature should revise real estate licensure law to address any conflict of interest between the realtor trade organization and the public. NAR’s settlement significantly empowers consumers. The state board of registration already mandates an agency disclosure form and home inspection facts for consumers. New mandatory forms that educate consumers of their options in light of NAR’s settlement terms will be necessary, like a home shopper’s right to know how much their agent will be paid beforehand.
News outlets should devote more attention
NAR policy pursuits over the past century have contributed to the challenges we all face today: high rents, high home prices, the housing shortage, exclusionary zoning, economic inequality, and even the repeal of Roe v. Wade.
to the political activity of NAR. A powerful group of real estate agents should not be informing housing policy behind closed doors. NAR advertises itself as a champion of homeownership and property rights, but it does so on its own terms. The public should have a louder voice. News coverage should also include how much NAR is spending on political campaigns in addition to the who, the why, and the implications.
Our nation’s housing policy has been largely influenced and determined by real estate agents. We can do better.