Saying that increasing supply with fix housing issues assumes that the free market to is working properly. For this to be a valid assumption, the legal system has to adequately and fairly address any issues arising from rental contracts. The article in question points out that this may not be the case and so the author is jumping the gun. I'm guessing from their use of the regal we that they are a lawyer, did they fail logic 101? 

It's not more rules, it's ensuring the fair applicability of existing rules.