Christine Quinn fancies herself a great advocate for “affordable” housing – but she apparently doesn’t care if it’s crumbling, crowded or hard to find.

The City Council speaker this week became the latest in a growing number of city and state politicians to endorse the repeal of ’90s-era reforms that brought some degree of sanity to New York’s Soviet-style rent laws.

Under those reforms, city landlords finally got to escape strict rent controls if any given unit’s monthly rent rose above $2,000 – and the previous tenant chose to move out.

Under housing bills recently passed by the Assembly, however, the state would abolish that practice – re-regulating rents in hundreds of thousands of units across the city.

In any normal city, of course, such a plan would instantly be seen for the terrible idea it is: Rent controls always breed scarcity in the housing stock – driving up prices for everyone not lucky enough to land a controlled unit.

At the same time, they quicken decay in the units that are controlled, as landlords, knowing that they’ll never be able to command a higher price, have far less incentive to keep them in good repair.

In fact, New York’s rent regulations are relics of World War II-era price controls, and the City Council has had to declare a state of “emergency” every three years to keep them in effect.

Yet the Assembly would turn back the clock even farther:

It would raise to $240,000 the annual income limit that qualifies someone for a rent-stabilized apartment; strip the rent-increase allowance for landlords who make upgrades, and – in a move much beloved by Quinn – allow the city to expand its controls even more.

This will keep her up in the polls.

Which, after all, is the point.