Guide to understand what Junts can gain with the 'no' to the housing decrees

BarcelonaCould the refusal to vote for the housing decrees in the Congress of Deputies benefit Junts? The calling of early elections by Spanish President Pedro Sánchez, will it allow him to gain support, stop the decline detected by the polls, or, on the contrary, will it take its toll? Issues related to housing navigate, in the electoral and communicative sphere, between what is technically called a positional issue and a valence issue. That is to say, on one hand, parties have different positions (proposals), which in this case can oscillate between positions more pro-market or pro-intervention (often aligned with the logic of left and right). On the other hand, there are valence issues, a way of focusing on a question that, a priori, has an opposing position, but which no one defends. For example, the idea that everyone has the right to housing is, politically, a valence position. Rarely will a politician give a public speech defending the opposing position. This also applies in many other areas: it is hard to think that a party can win votes by defending corruption or incompetence.

At the end of the day, parties often not only compete to show an ideological position, but seek to be seen in the eyes of the citizenry as the best at defending an issue, especially those that have an opposing position that no one will defend. That is why these issues or approaches are often known as the gold mines of politics: if the citizenry sees you as the best political formation to generate well-being, fight against corruption, or deal with the housing crisis, you have the issue "in ownership" and a good part of the electoral game won. The other parties can already make proposals on this matter, but their credibility will be low.

This framework helps us understand the housing approach taken by Junts (and, in fact, by the rest of the parties). There are certain issues, such as the limitation of tourist apartments or the obligation for large property holders to allocate part of their properties to social housing, with a broad consensus among the Junts electorate (between 70% and 80% of their voters defend it, according to the CEO survey on housing published in 2025). Therefore, the party tends to distance this from the political and media battle. On the other hand, the Junts members seem to have detected some growth among small property owners (around 80% of Catalans own a property) and small landlords (40% of the rental stock corresponds to small owners who have a single property rented out, according to data from the Ministry of Consumer Affairs).

One in every seven Junts supporters has an apartment rented out to third parties (the electorate with the fewest is the CUP's) and the majority own a property (with or without a mortgage). If the recent CEO barometers and the longitudinal survey are analyzed, one of the strong points of Junts' refusal to approve the decrees is that its former voters or those who are positioned on its border (those it can most easily reach and capture) have a structure similar to that of the current voters. Likewise, the Junts hope is to give a nod so that landlords from other parties start leaning toward the group. For example, 22% of voters close to the PSC are small landlords, a figure higher than in the case of Junts.

One of the difficulties is that the potential electorate who might be satisfied by Junts' position is located mainly in the center and center-right. However, this ideological segment, at least until now, prioritizes security and immigration more than housing. For its part, the (potential) center-left Junts electorate would prefer to see measures rather against speculation (and, in second place, increasing the housing stock).

The data analysis indicates that Junts' growth could be possible, but it is uncertain. Its widest area of increase is among center and center-right voters, especially among non-independence supporters. Conversely, some Junts sympathizers hold positions somewhat distant from the leadership and, therefore, it could alienate them. In the most optimistic scenario, that is, one in which it were capable of convincing 60% of potential voters who do not have a clear position regarding housing and a third of those who do, it would achieve a balance of +10 voters. In the average scenario, for every 1,000 electors it would attract 29, but it would also alienate 23.

All in all, statistical speculations aside, if Junts wants to win votes on the issue of housing, as in almost any other, it needs to square the circle in different areas: that the housing issue remains a relevant topic until the date of the elections, to show that its ideological positions are reasonable for the potential electorate and to be seen as a competent party in this area, even for the voter who does not fully agree with its positions.