Terrell A. Williams of Middletown is an attorney.
I often use pop culture videos in the public policy courses I teach at Drexel University, to show the contrasts of art imitating life. Ironically, I often find that the art, as comical as it is, can be an accurate and scary reflection of life. For instance, “Bulworth” is a 1998 political satire that was, and remains, reflective of America’s tension with healthcare and access to care. In the infamous church scene, Warren Beatty’s character, Sen. Jay Bulworth, tells a parishioner why he has not supported a bill for access to cheaper insurance, with brutal honesty.
Parishioner: “We can’t get any insurance down here. We can’t get health insurance, fire insurance, life insurance. Why haven’t you come out for Senate Bill 2720?”
Sen. Jay Bulworth: “You haven’t contributed any money to my campaign. ... Now, what do you think? Do you think the insurance companies contribute money to my campaign? Yeah. Significantly. And they expect something for that money. And what they expect is for me to bottle up bills like 2720 in committees during election years, so they can die there when the public isn’t looking.”
Now, you are probably wondering why I used that reference, when this article is about Delaware’s Democratic gubernatorial paradox.
Well, like Sen. Bulworth, Delaware’s succession of Democratic governors has lied to us and has repeatedly sided with insurance companies, big businesses and corporations, and, more importantly, the housing and financial industries that are robbing Delawareans of affordable housing. While making promises to improve financial outcomes for all Delawareans, Gov. Matt Meyer and his predecessors have improved the lives of their cohorts of family and friends, political donors and multimillion/billion-dollar corporations, leaving the average politically unconnected Delawarean fending for him- or herself.
Our past Democratic governors have derailed Delaware’s potential, without the political charm or charisma of Sen. Jay Bulworth.
Delaware’s Democratic governors have overseen one of the nation’s largest increases in housing costs, while continuing to campaign on promises of affordable housing throughout more than 30 years of Democratic leadership.
Delaware’s housing market has priced out the average Delawarean, despite 34 years of Democratic promises on affordable housing.
Delaware’s housing market has experienced a dramatic increase in home prices, raising serious questions about whether the state’s housing policies have kept pace with the needs of working- and middle-class Delawareans.
Since the beginning of the Democratic gubernatorial era in 1992, Delaware’s Federal Housing Finance Agency house price index has increased by roughly 237% through the second quarter of 2026, meaning that home prices tracked by the index have more than tripled over that period.
The increase has been particularly pronounced in recent years. Delaware home prices increased more than 37% over the five years ending in the second quarter of 2026, while the state continues to confront rising rents, limited housing supply and growing affordability pressures. Delaware’s own housing officials have acknowledged the severity of the problem. Under John Carney’s administration, the state’s 2023 Housing Needs Assessment found that 50% of renters and 21% of homeowners were cost-burdened, meaning they spent at least 30% of their household incomes on housing. The assessment also identified an estimated shortage of nearly 20,000 affordable rental units for households earning less than 50% of the area median income.
Yet housing affordability has remained a recurring campaign issue for Democratic governors. The question, therefore, is not whether Delaware has recognized the housing problem, but whether, after more than three decades of Democratic leadership, it has produced policies capable of keeping housing affordable, as home prices, rents and other housing costs have continued to rise. Even Gov. Meyer’s administration has acknowledged that housing has become unattainable for many Delawareans, that rents have outpaced incomes and that the state needs to increase the supply of workforce and affordable housing.
That history raises a broader question about accountability: If housing affordability has remained a persistent problem through successive Democratic administrations, why have the policies governing housing supply, development, zoning and affordability not produced more substantial and measurable improvements for Delaware families? I suspect that those who have made up Delaware’s long line of successive Democratic governors are not true Democrats but hybrid Republicans with soft progressive beliefs grounded in trickle-down economics. For instance, there is a belief that Meyer is a moderate Democrat with progressive principles. However, his administration’s housing philosophy mirrors, in several respects, that of Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, particularly on increasing housing supply, reforming zoning, streamlining permitting and reducing regulatory barriers to development. Both emphasize building more housing and using infrastructure and land use policies to make development faster and more attainable, though Meyer places greater emphasis on government coordination and affordable and workforce housing. Meyer’s own housing agenda calls for boosting housing supply, supporting zoning reforms, managing smart growth, lowering construction costs and assisting first-time homebuyers. However, none of those recommendations addresses the fundamental issue, which is affordability!
If Meyer wants to differentiate himself from “Democrats in name only” and Republican talking points, he could begin with a radical shift in economic philosophy and policies. Because of Delaware’s relatively small size and political ideology, I believe the state is ripe for a more aggressive approach to addressing the affordable housing challenge. It is time for Delaware to establish a meaningful affordability standard in which housing costs do not exceed 33% of a homeowner’s or renter’s gross income. Delaware already recognizes the 30% threshold as a measure of housing cost burden, and the state’s own data shows that 50% of Delaware renters and 21% of homeowners are currently cost-burdened.
Housing costs have ballooned during the more than three decades that Democrats have controlled the state, and none of the reforms previously proposed has sufficiently slowed the increasing cost of housing. There is a place where affordability and housing can coexist without Democrats being called “socialists.” Delaware can pursue a more aggressive housing strategy by increasing housing supply, expanding financing and down payment assistance, reforming zoning and permitting, and creating incentives for the construction of workforce and affordable housing. The state’s own 2023 Housing Needs Assessment concluded that Delaware needs approximately 24,400 additional housing units by 2030 and that planning and zoning changes are necessary to encourage a greater diversity of housing types.
The 2008 housing collapse saw widespread reforms across the financial and mortgage industries intended to rein in banks and financial institutions whose lending practices were the predominant cause of the crisis. The Federal Reserve documented how lax underwriting, subprime lending and other mortgage practices helped fuel the housing boom and subsequent collapse, while postcrisis reforms sought to strengthen consumer protections and require lenders to better assess borrowers’ ability to repay. However, the aftermath also produced a significant tightening of mortgage credit and debt-to-income standards, making it extremely difficult for many borrowers to qualify for financing or leasing. The lesson for Delaware should not be that consumer protections were a mistake but that housing policy must protect consumers, while also ensuring that responsible borrowers, particularly working- and middle-class Delawareans, have realistic paths to homeownership and affordable housing.
Finally, Delaware could tie housing policy to measurable outcomes and infrastructure planning. Rather than simply announcing new housing initiatives, state leaders could establish annual targets for housing production, affordable units, homeownership opportunities, permitting times and reductions in housing cost burdens to measure whether those targets are being met. The state could also prioritize development in areas where roads, water, sewer, schools and public transportation can support additional growth, while discouraging development patterns that increase infrastructure costs without producing attainable housing. Delaware has already begun experimenting with zoning reform, permitting changes and incentives for higher-density development. Meyer’s administration has specifically pursued a Permitting Accelerator intended to reduce delays that can increase costs and hinder housing development. However, builders, developers and financial institutions have shown us that any savings they incur through regulatory relief do not necessarily mean savings for Delaware homeowners and renters. Too many Delaware leaders have been willing to ignore the affordable housing crisis facing average Delawareans, while rewarding the very industries that line their campaign accounts.
Now, Gov. Meyer — and his predecessors, John Carney and Jack Markell — are not Sen. Jay Bulworth. They are definitely not charismatic enough to deflect from the growing concerns about affordable housing or why housing market prices have increased so drastically under their leadership. I do not expect a come-to-Jesus moment from Gov. Meyer like Sen. Bulworth’s in the church scene, but his campaign finance reports may signal why his leadership decisions still overwhelmingly favor developers, financial institutions and construction companies.
Thirty-four years of Democratic governors in leadership, and I cannot tell Delaware from Arkansas!
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
