Former Austin Mayor Steve Adler Explains Why Fewer Immigrants Doesn’t Make Housing Cheaper
The United States was once called the “Land of Milk and Honey,” a moniker rooted in the symbolism of abundance and the promise of upward mobility and freedom. The prospect of higher wages, civil liberties, and free speech once drove people from all over the world to flock to this nation. In fact, many historians attribute immigration to driving both population and economic growth, especially between 1860 and 1910, when roughly 15% of American residents were born in foreign lands.
During that time, millions of immigrants helped develop the land into the thriving metropolises we see today. They were the farmers and miners, the merchants, laborers, and consumers. Today, immigrants make up a sizable share of the workforce, but fewer are entering the country. Furthermore, the number of people leaving as expats has increased, and the surge in emigration has created a historic shift that could disrupt housing and exacerbate the homeless crisis.
A Brookings Study Indicates the First Period of Net Negative Migration in Decades
For the first time since the Great Depression, a period of net negative migration, or more people leaving the country than entering it, has been observed. Brookings produced the study behind this information. It indicated that more people left the country than entered during the 2025 calendar year.
The data is contested, but by a study from a different timeframe that reflects different leadership and policies.
A separate study presented by the US Census Bureau seemingly countered that statistic. However, the Census Bureau’s data reflected a different timeframe: 6 months from 2024 and 6 months from 2025, indicating a net positive migration between July 2024 and June 2025, which is not the 2025 calendar year.
This distinction matters because 2024 had substantially more net international migration than 2025, and the Census Bureau’s numbers reflect that decline. Also, and importantly, the Census Bureau’s data calculates six months from the Biden Administration and six months from the Trump Administration. For that reason, the Census Bureau’s data doesn’t capture the full effect of an entire year of Trump-era policy changes, nor does it show how those policies affected US population growth.
The window between July 1, 2025, and December 31, 2025, matters because it covers major reforms enacted by the Trump Administration. For example, in July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was signed into law, and $170 billion was allocated for immigration enforcement. The rest of the summer was heavily marked by mass deportations enforced by ICE, which explains why the Brookings study shows a net negative number while the Census Bureau’s data still reflects a positive number. The argument isn’t really an information issue. It’s a timeline and policy issue.
Both studies ultimately show millions fewer people entering the country, and this phenomenon affects housing costs and homelessness at once. Even by the Census Bureau’s measurement, net immigration declined 53.8%, which translates to roughly 1.4 million fewer people immigrating.
A Steep Decline in Immigration Can Adversely Impact Economic Growth and Make Housing Less Affordable, Especially in Low-Birth-Rate Societies Like the US
The US currently struggles with a replacement problem regarding its low fertility rate. Below-replacement-level birth rates like the ones we are witnessing take a long and arduous toll on national economic dynamism, and this can span decades and generations.
In a country like the US, which has a statistically low fertility rate, sustained immigration is a pivotal driver of labor-force growth. Without it, what’s left is an aging society that cannot sustain its workforce.
Notably, Census Bureau data show that the construction industry relies heavily on foreign-born labor. As of 2024, immigrants make up a record 26.3% of the US construction workforce overall, and about one in three workers in construction trades specifically, like drywall installers, painters, and roofers.
To better understand how immigration policies play a role in affordable housing or the lack thereof, we turned to former Mayor Steve Adler, who served as the 52nd mayor of Austin from 2015 through 2023, at a time when the city saw explosive growth.
In his book Hot Seat— Hot City: The Austin Mayor’s Story, Adler details what it was like to work toward the decriminalization of homelessness and the expansion of affordable housing. On declining migration, he says that while the current national climate is far from a mass exodus, fewer immigrants could mean fewer affordable homes, which could ultimately increase homelessness.
“I wouldn’t want to overstate the issue,” he urged, adding that the data reflects a flat or slightly negative number as opposed to something more drastic. “My sense is that what’s really causing people to leave the US is not housing costs, but rather immigration policy.”
“That’s what’s really driving this. Fewer people from other countries coming into the country, more removals, suspended refugee and humanitarian programs, and fewer visas,” Adler continued. “If you look at the data, a lot of the people that are moving abroad are retirees or remote workers. And those are not the people that are most susceptible to finding themselves on the street.”
“Here’s the important other side of the argument,” he said. “Fewer people doesn’t necessarily make houses cheaper. In fact, that can actually make housing more expensive. And more expensive housing is, again, the correlator for increasing homelessness.”
“Homelessness follows housing costs and housing costs follow supply,” Adler explained. “Immigrants are a big share of the construction labor. Here in Austin, rental rates, after escalating, fell because we built supply. And during my last year in office, we built more housing than any city in the country in absolute terms, not just per capita; that includes New York and LA. And that has an impact on housing prices.”
“A shrinking population without building is Detroit. It’s not affordability,” he said.
Detroit is a sterling example of an actual mass exodus. After losing more than 60% of its population between 1950 and 2020, it went into a dire state of decline. What followed next was higher rates of unemployment, crime, poverty, and blight.
Enforcement Doesn’t Reduce Homelessness. It Forces Unsheltered People into Hiding.
“I do think that enforcement pushes homelessness underground,” the former mayor stated. “It doesn’t cut it down. Mixed-status families stop using shelters and outreach and coordinating entry. Point in Time Counts look better when the actual crisis gets worse and is harder to reach.”
“I think that immigration certainly has a real impact on homelessness numbers and people seeking solutions and support. It also impacts the effectiveness of homelessness programs,” he continued.
“And then finally, on that topic, it’s all tied also into cities losing money they need exactly when they need it most,” Adler said. “Brookings projects about $60 billion to $100 billion less consumer spending over this 25-26 period of time. And undocumented residents, contrary to urban myth, actually pay $100 billion a year in taxes. So, if a sales tax-dependent city loses that immigrant contribution to the tax base, that’s a lot of the money that funds vouchers, outreach and mental health services.”
Talk To Your Legislators About Building Permanent, Affordable Housing
“The biggest lesson from the camping ban here in Austin is that making people disappear from view never reduces homelessness. Housing does,” Adler concluded.
Talk to your representatives about building that housing and making it a human right for all.
