In Hollywood shows like “Friends”, the idea of rent control—where a landlord can’t charge the fair-market value for an apartment — is often portrayed favorably. Without it, the heroes could never survive living in an expensive place like New York City. But the reality of rent control is never part of the Hollywood narrative. Apart from the obvious infringement on an owner’s property rights, the truth, actually, is that preventing owners from charging fair-market rates hurts renters by limiting the supply of apartment units.

Fortunately, Colorado has done the right thing when it comes to rent control — it has mostly outlawed it, by preventing localities from adopting such measures. Though some state legislators unsuccessfully attempted to repeal the prohibition in response to a recent spike in rental prices, they failed because their colleagues recognized repeal would in fact worsen an already difficult housing market.

Though it’s too charitable, unfortunately, to attribute the legislature’s rejection of rent control to a legislative commitment to property rights, most lawmakers and economists agree imposing rent control has an unintended consequence — it causes the supply of units to quickly dry up, ultimately creating scarcity and instability in the rental market, as owners see the prospect of becoming a landlord less appealing.

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

That analysis has been confirmed by a recent study by the Common Sense Institute, which found if rent control were enacted in Denver, by 2030, the city would lose 16,547 housing units, creating a shortage. In other words, the only law that can’t be repealed is the law of unintended consequences.

Though Colorado recognizes rent control would hurt families in the Rocky Mountain State, many of the folks in Washington, D.C. do not.

After three-and-a-half years of skyrocketing prices, President Joe Biden proposed imposing price controls on rents for more than 20 million units nationwide. His administration also proposed outlawing certain software that helps determine market conditions, which assists landlords in pricing their units based on real-time market conditions. It’s a lame duck proposal of epic proportions. The Biden-Harris DOJ is working on this issue too.

Though President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris might not have read Milton Friedman or Adam Smith’s books, and may not be aware of the philosophical arguments for natural property rights, they can certainly read political polls. The more than 22 million renters considered “cost-burdened” — those who spend more than 30% of their income on rents and utilities — is a powerful group of voters to appeal to during an election season. But if they really wanted to help these voters rather than tell them what they want to hear, they would not interfere with the price of rental nits.

Take Cambridge, Massachusetts, where rent control was in place for several decades until it was repealed in 1994. A study conducted by economists from MIT found once the city lifted rent control, property values increased by 20%, and the housing stock improved significantly.

The less regulation there is, the greater the housing supply becomes. And competition invariably leads to lower prices.

Numerous studies have confirmed this point. For example, a review of a half-dozen studies from the University of California Los Angeles found constructing new apartments reduces rent hikes for nearby existing housing, keeping local areas more affordable.

Even Democratic Gov. Jared Polis has recognized as much, which is why he has proposed zoning and other reforms to expedite construction in Colorado.

In this instance, Gov. Polis has the right idea: Colorado can relieve pressure on renters struggling with high costs by merely making it easier for developers to build. The affordability problem isn’t about greedy landlords or software programs; it has to do with a lack of housing options in the state, which has inflated the prices of the few options available.

By sticking to free-market principles and avoiding rent control, the state is ensuring long-term economic housing stability and protecting its residents from the unintended consequences of misguided policies.

Hopefully, the federal government doesn’t get in the way.

William E. Trachman is general counsel of Mountain States Legal Foundation, and a former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education.