The NAR spends MORE MONEY than ANY OTHER Association on DC Politics:
"Our protagonist in this tale, the N.A.R., spends more money on federal lobbying than any other entity, according to the Center for Responsive for Politics. To puzzle out its actions and advocacy, let's first be crystal clear about what the N.A.R. is and whose interests it serves. As its own chief executive boasted to members in 2017, it's really the National Association for Realtors, not just of them. It's a guild, and that's no sin.
We could just as easily call it the National Association for Landlords.
Not all members are thrilled with the organization's stance. Many, including upstart real estate companies like Redfin and Zillow, join up by necessity. This is because N.A.R. affiliates keep tight control of the information in the various Multiple Listing Service databases where members post homes for sale, and most start-ups that aim to provide comprehensive data to consumers end up having to do business with the N.A.R. somehow.
"Redfin has consistently been in favor of moratoriums," said its chief executive, Glenn Kelman. "History will judge us."
Side Note, I believe that the DJT Administration tried to have DOJ sue the NAR because its MLS is exclusively available to members only. Info from todays NYT.
"According to the N.A.R., landlords may not in fact be the scrappiest among us. The "moratorium continues to devastate millions of housing providers," the trade group said in a statement that a spokesman asked me to attribute to Christie DeSanctis, its director of federal banking, lending and housing finance policy. Also "nearly half of all rental units are mom-and-pop operations," which the N.A.R. defines as entities that own four units or fewer.
"Broad, nationwide, blanket eviction moratoriums do not serve the purpose they did when first enacted last year," the spokesman, Wes Shaw, said in another emailed statement. "If these property owners are put in a position where they can no longer justify or properly maintain operations, every tenant in the property would be left without a proper home and the supply of affordable housing would shrink as more and more units went off the market.""
