21st Century ROAD to Housing Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6644
Last Updated: September 15, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]

ID: H001072

Follow the money

The bill

21st Century ROAD to Housing Act

HR. 6644, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$133,000 raised

21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Housing and Urban Development" section, p. 548-550 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Became Public Law No: 119-101.

July 10, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

Passed Congress

Presidential Action

Became Law

📍 Current Status

This bill has become law!

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The "21st Century ROAD to Housing Act" - because what's more original than slapping a trendy title on a bill that's essentially a laundry list of special interest handouts and bureaucratic busywork?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to create the illusion of addressing America's housing crisis while actually serving as a vehicle for politicians to reward their campaign donors, appease various lobbying groups, and expand the federal bureaucracy. The objectives are twofold: (1) to funnel more taxpayer money into the coffers of favored industries and organizations, and (2) to create a complex web of regulations and programs that will inevitably lead to more inefficiencies, corruption, and opportunities for cronyism.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill is a sprawling mess of provisions, but some highlights include:

* Reforms to housing counseling and financial literacy programs (because clearly, the problem with America's housing market is that people just don't know enough about mortgages) * Exemptions for construction or modification of residential housing on infill sites (a gift to developers and real estate interests) * A database of publicly owned land (because what could possibly go wrong with a federal registry of vacant lots?) * FHA Small-Dollar Mortgages (because who needs prudent lending standards when you can just have the government guarantee everything?) * A Temperature Sensor Pilot Program (yes, really - because climate change is clearly the most pressing issue in American housing)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:

* The usual suspects: real estate developers, construction companies, mortgage lenders, and other industries that will benefit from the bill's provisions * Taxpayers, who will foot the bill for this legislative monstrosity * Low-income families and individuals, who will be "helped" by the bill's various programs and initiatives (read: subjected to more bureaucratic red tape and dependency on government handouts) * Federal bureaucrats, who will get to administer the new programs and regulations created by this bill

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is to further entrench the problems it purports to solve. By throwing more money at the housing crisis without addressing its root causes, Congress will only succeed in creating more distortions in the market, more opportunities for corruption and cronyism, and more dependencies on government handouts. The implications are clear: this bill will make America's housing crisis worse, not better.

In conclusion, the "21st Century ROAD to Housing Act" is a textbook example of legislative malpractice - a bloated, corrupt, and ineffective attempt to address a complex problem through bureaucratic fiat and special interest pandering. It's a testament to the boundless cynicism and incompetence of America's political class, and a reminder that the only thing more broken than the US housing market is the US Congress itself

Related Topics

Housing & Urban DevelopmentFederal Budget & Appropriations
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$133,000
21 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$1,000
Committees
$0
Individuals
$132,000

No PAC contributions found

1
THE ROYER LAW FIRM PLLC
1 transaction
$1,000

No committee contributions found

1
BRADBURY, CHARLOTTE S. MRS.
1 transaction
$6,600
2
BRADBURY, CURT MR. JR.
1 transaction
$6,600
3
KEITH, STEVEN M. MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
4
KNAPPLE, WHITFIELD L. DR.
1 transaction
$6,600
5
PFAUTCH, ROY MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
6
QUINTILIAN, DENNIS
1 transaction
$6,600
7
QUINTILIAN, DORIS
1 transaction
$6,600
8
RUTLEDGE, REYNIE MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
9
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN A. MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
10
DORRELL, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$6,600
11
SCHUECK, PATRICK T. MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
12
FISHER, KENNETH MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
13
FISHER, SHERRILYN MRS.
1 transaction
$6,600
14
ALLEN, MARY
1 transaction
$6,600
15
DALY, JUSTIN MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
16
ROWAN, CAROLYN MS.
1 transaction
$6,600
17
ROWAN, MARC MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
18
SNIDER, TED MR. JR.
1 transaction
$6,600
19
SCHWAB, CHARLES MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
20
ANTHONY, JOHN E. MR.
1 transaction
$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]

ID: W000187

Top Contributors

20

1
GUSSMAN, HOWARD L.
MARVIN ENGINEERING CO, INC. • CHAIR AND CEO
IndividualINGLEWOOD, CA
$3,300
Aug 29, 2023
2
HAMILON, ROBERT
SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER
IndividualPASADENA, CA
$3,300
Aug 29, 2023
3
HAMILON, SARA ANN
SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER
IndividualPASADENA, CA
$3,300
Aug 29, 2023
4
ROSENBLOOM, KATHLEEN
KATHLEEN ROSENBLOOM • WRITER AND DESIGNER
IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA
$3,300
Aug 29, 2023
5
BROOKS, BRANDI
SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER
IndividualPASADENA, CA
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023
6
CALLAWAY, ANTHONY
SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER
IndividualLAKE ELSINORE, CA
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023
7
GOULD, DAVID
GOULD & ORELLANA, LLC • PRESIDENT/POLITICAL REPORTING & CONSUL
Individual
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023
8
GUSSMAN, MADELINE
NONE • HOMEMAKER
IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023
9
GUSSMAN-ZAIRI, LISA
MARVIN ENGINEERING CO.INC. • CONTRACTS MANAGER
IndividualENCINO, CA
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023
10
LECHTER, ARIEL
MARVIN ENGINEERING CO., INC. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualENCINO, CA
$3,300
Aug 30, 2023

Rep. Flood, Mike [R-NE-1]

ID: F000474

Top Contributors

26

1
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
2
DEMOCRACY ENGINE, LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1,919
Jun 24, 2024
3
SUGAR CREEK REALTY
OrganizationSAINT LOUIS, MO
$1,500
Oct 1, 2024
4
DEMOCRACY ENGINE, LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$959
May 28, 2024
5
LAMA COMMUNITY TRUST
OrganizationSAN CRISTOBAL, NM
$833
Jun 26, 2024
6
RADCLIFFE GILBERTSON & BRADY
OrganizationLINCOLN, NE
$500
Oct 20, 2024
7
CASSLING, MICHAEL
CASSLING • CEO
IndividualOMAHA, NE
$13,200
Mar 13, 2023
8
BRADFORD VI, DANA
C3 BRANDS • CEO
IndividualOMAHA, NE
$6,600
Mar 28, 2023
9
HAWKINS JR, FRED
HAWKINS CONSTRUCTION • CONSTRUCTION
IndividualOMAHA, NE
$6,600
May 11, 2024
10
DUGGER, CATHERINE
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualOMAHA, NE
$6,600
Oct 21, 2024

Rep. Cleaver, Emanuel [D-MO-5]

ID: C001061

Top Contributors

22

1
BARNES LAW FIRM, LLC
OrganizationKANSAS CITY, MO
$2,500
Jul 21, 2023
2
GRAHAM-ANDEBRHAN LLC
OrganizationKANSAS CITY, MO
$1,125
Jul 7, 2023
3
OBERHELMAN, DIANE
CULLINAN PROPERTIES LTD. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualEDWARDS, IL
$3,300
Nov 20, 2024
4
EMERSON, BILL
ROCKET COMPANIES • PRESIDENT
IndividualBLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI
$3,300
Dec 19, 2023
5
RAYANT, GARRY
SELF EMPLOYED • DENTIST
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Oct 18, 2023
6
RAYANT, GARRY
SELF EMPLOYED • DENTIST
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Oct 18, 2023
7
HALL, DAVID
HALLMARK • EXECUTIVE
IndividualKANSAS CITY, MO
$3,300
Jan 25, 2024
8
HALL, DON JR.
HALLMARK CARDS • EXECUTIVE
IndividualKANSAS CITY, MO
$3,300
Jan 25, 2024
9
LOVIER, HEATHER
ROCKET MORTGAGE • CHIEF CLIENT EXP. OFF.
IndividualROCKWOOD, MI
$3,300
Jun 28, 2024
10
GRAY, JON
BLACKSTONE • PRESIDENT
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
May 15, 2024

Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9]

ID: G000553

Top Contributors

20

1
GONDO, GLEN
TOKYO GARDENS CATERING • PRESIDENT
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$5,000
Feb 23, 2024
2
CHAUGLE, ABDUL
HCA • PHYSICIAN
IndividualKEMAH, TX
$3,300
Dec 8, 2024
3
CHAUGLE, SADAF
UTSW • PHYSICIAN
IndividualKEMAH, TX
$3,300
Dec 9, 2024
4
CHAUGLE, SHABNAM
HCA HEATHCARE • PHYSICIAN
IndividualKEMAH, TX
$3,300
Dec 9, 2024
5
HASSAN, LUTFI
APEX GROUP • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$3,300
Dec 8, 2024
6
SHABANEH, BAHAEDDIN
SEHC • PHYSICIAN
IndividualFRIENDSWOOD, TX
$3,300
Dec 8, 2024
7
ALATTAR, RIMA SUKHTIAN
SELF-EMPLOYED • ENTREPRENEUR
IndividualSUGAR LAND, TX
$3,300
Apr 25, 2024
8
DWAIRY, GUS
BESTWAY OILFIELD • CHAIRMAN
IndividualCHANNELVIEW, TX
$3,300
Apr 24, 2024
9
JONES, NELSON III
SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$3,300
May 15, 2024
10
LE, STEPHEN H. JR.
GREATLAND LIVING • REALTOR
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$3,300
Apr 26, 2024

Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-17]

ID: S000250

Top Contributors

25

1
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$5,000
May 16, 2024
2
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$5,000
Sep 12, 2023
3
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Jun 17, 2024
4
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
May 24, 2023
5
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
6
HOWARD, RONALD VANCE
BANKERS LIFE • MANAGEMENT
IndividualHUNTSVILLE, TX
$5,000
Mar 13, 2023
7
HOWARD, KAREN
ELEMENTS MASSAGE • MANAGEMENT
IndividualHUNTSVILLE, TX
$5,000
Mar 13, 2023
8
SINGH, PRITPAL
BETA SOFT SYSTEMS • MANAGEMENT
IndividualFREMONT, CA
$5,000
Jun 23, 2023
9
KAUR, MANJIT
SINGH SEMICONDUCTORS & SYSTEMS • MANAGEMENT
IndividualFREMONT, CA
$5,000
Jun 23, 2023
10
BEHRINGER, TODD
THE BEHRINGER GROUP, LLC • CONSTRUCTION
IndividualWOODWAY, TX
$3,400
Sep 1, 2023

Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7]

ID: V000081

Top Contributors

21

1
ONEIDA INDIAN NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, NY
$2,000
May 17, 2024
2
WEISS, ANTONIO
SELF-EMPLOYED • CONSULTANT
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Apr 22, 2024
3
RESTLER, SUSAN
KNOWLEDGE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST • CO-FOUNDER
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Mar 10, 2023
4
ALAIO, GIACOMO
PATRIZIA RESTURANT • OWNER
IndividualARMONK, NY
$3,300
Mar 26, 2023
5
RAMIREZ, OSCAR
FULCRUM PUBLIC AFFAIRS • GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Feb 22, 2023
6
GUTMAN, HENRY B
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Mar 16, 2023
7
WEISS, ANTONIO
THE PARIS REVIEW • PUBLISHER
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
Mar 28, 2023
8
BIANCO, GREGORY
METROPOLITAN RECYCLING • CEO
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023
9
RODRIGUEZ, RAMON J
WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER • ADMINISTRATOR
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Feb 23, 2023
10
RODRIGUEZ, RAMON J
WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER • ADMINISTRATOR
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Mar 7, 2024

Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6]

ID: R000612

Top Contributors

21

1
OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Dec 12, 2024
2
EVANS, JOHN B.
NGU RISK MANAGEMENT • PRESIDENT
IndividualHENDERSONVILLE, TN
$13,200
Feb 24, 2023
3
HUDSON, PHILLIP JR.
CUMBERLAND SUPPLY CO. INC. • SHAREHOLDER
IndividualCOOKEVILLE, TN
$13,200
May 20, 2023
4
VADEN, JAMES L.
SELF-EMPLOYED • ORTHODONTIST
IndividualCOOKEVILLE, TN
$13,200
May 8, 2023
5
BARNES, SAM T. DR.
SELF-EMPLOYED • PHYSICIAN
IndividualCOOKEVILLE, TN
$10,000
Feb 12, 2024
6
EVANS, JOHN B.
SELF-EMPLOYED • SALES
IndividualHENDERSONVILLE, TN
$10,000
Feb 27, 2024
7
BARNES, SAM T. DR.
SELF-EMPLOYED • PHYSICIAN
IndividualCOOKEVILLE, TN
$6,600
Dec 8, 2023
8
LIPMAN, ROBERT S.
LIPMAN BROTHERS • EXECUTIVE
IndividualNASHVILLE, TN
$6,600
Nov 9, 2023
9
SMITH, BRAD
RUSSELL STREET VENTURES • CEO
IndividualNASHVILLE, TN
$6,600
Oct 26, 2023
10
SMITH, LAUREN
LH SMITH CONSULTING • PRESIDENT
IndividualNASHVILLE, TN
$6,600
Oct 26, 2023

Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-32]

ID: S000344

Top Contributors

26

1
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$2,000
Oct 30, 2023
2
MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS
OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS
$2,000
Oct 5, 2023
3
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,000
Sep 30, 2024
4
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,300
Oct 21, 2024
5
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,000
Oct 28, 2024
6
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$700
Oct 21, 2024
7
AHMED, TAIMOOR
MARKHOR LOGISTICS • CEO
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023
8
GARHWAL, HARI
GARHWAL, CHAN & WILLIAMS • CPA
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Mar 23, 2023
9
GARHWAL, HARI
GARHWAL, CHAN & WILLIAMS • CPA
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Mar 23, 2023
10
GARHWAL, SANJEEV
WWMG • PHYSICIAN
IndividualSEATTLE, WA
$3,300
Mar 29, 2023

Rep. Steil, Bryan [R-WI-1]

ID: S001213

Top Contributors

32

1
FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
OrganizationCRANDON, WI
$3,300
Apr 25, 2024
2
FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
OrganizationCRANDON, WI
$3,300
Mar 22, 2023
3
OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Sep 30, 2024
4
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Oct 30, 2024
5
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$2,900
Mar 13, 2023
6
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$2,500
Dec 23, 2023
7
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$2,000
Jun 30, 2023
8
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,500
Jun 30, 2023
9
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,500
Jun 30, 2024
10
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,300
Jun 30, 2024

Rep. Scott, David [D-GA-13]

ID: S001157

Top Contributors

20

1
RAYMAN, STEVEN
BIG ROCK EQUITIES • FOUNDER
IndividualBIG ROCK, IL
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
2
GLUSTROM, ROBERT
SELF-EMPLOYED • INVESTOR
IndividualATLANTA, GA
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
3
DUFFY, TERRENCE A.
CME GROUP • CHAIRMAN AND CEO
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Feb 6, 2023
4
HESSERT, BILL
SELF-EMPLOYED • ENTREPENEUR
IndividualMIAMI, FL
$3,300
Jul 24, 2023
5
STEPHENS, JOHN D
JDS HOLDINGS LLC • OWNER
IndividualDULUTH, GA
$3,300
May 13, 2024
6
TAYLOR, KAT
OFFICE OF KAT TAYLOR • PRINCIPAL
IndividualREDWOOD CITY, CA
$3,300
Oct 9, 2024
7
VECCHIARELLI, DANIEL
LEPRINO FOODS • CHAIRMAN
IndividualDENVER, CO
$2,500
Oct 29, 2024
8
RUSSELL, RANDALL M.
THE RUSSELL GROUP • LOBBYIST
IndividualMCLEAN, VA
$2,000
Aug 1, 2023
9
SU, NIEN
ARTEMIS ESG, INC. • CONSULTANT
IndividualCLEVELAND, OH
$2,000
Sep 13, 2023
10
HAYDEL, VICTOR L.
755 RESTAURANT CO. • MANAGEMENT
IndividualCOLLEGE PARK, GA
$2,000
Sep 30, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 39 nodes and 42 connections

Total contributions: $42

Top Donors - Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

1 Org20 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 7 helped, 1 harmed.

  • Multiple titles increase housing construction: Title I (Sec. 103 exemption for infill site construction), Title II (Sec. 202 whole-home repairs, Sec. 204 affordable housing construction eligibility, Sec. 205 BUILD Housing Act, Sec. 206 streamlined reviews, Sec. 207 grants for planning, Sec. 208 innovation fund, Sec. 209 accelerating home building, Sec. 210 revitalizing empty structures), Title III (manufactured housing expansion), Title IV (small-dollar mortgages), Title V (HOME program reform),

  • +Commercial Banksconfidence 0.90

    Title IX strengthens community banks' role in housing, including provisions like Sec. 901 (community bank deposit access), Sec. 902 (keeping deposits local), Sec. 903 (tailored regulatory updates), Sec. 904 (credit union board modernization), Sec. 905 (systemic risk authority transparency), Sec. 906 (least cost exception), Sec. 907 (failing bank acquisition fairness), Sec. 908 (mentor-protege program), Sec. 909 (American access to banking), Sec. 910 (promoting new bank formation), Sec. 911 (rura

  • +Real Estateconfidence 0.90

    The bill increases housing supply through numerous provisions (as noted for construction_engineering), which benefits real estate developers, REITs, homebuilders, and property managers by increasing development opportunities and property values. Title X specifically addresses homeownership for Main Street America, and Titles I-IX all contain measures to increase housing supply and affordability.

  • +Health Insuranceconfidence 0.90

    Section 202(b)(11)(A) defines 'specified program' to include Medicaid and CHIP, which expands eligibility for health insurance programs and benefits health insurers through increased enrollment and funding.

  • Section 202(b)(11)(A) includes Medicaid as a 'specified program', which increases funding for hospitals and health systems serving Medicaid patients.

  • Section 202(b)(11)(A) includes Medicaid as a 'specified program', which funds long-term care services for elderly and disabled individuals, benefiting long-term care providers.

+ 2 more industries not shown.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

  • from 22 contributions
    • SCHARF, CHARLES$8,300
    • LEOPOLD, ROBIN$3,300
    • DIMON, JAMIE$3,300
    • HEITSENRETHER, TERESA$3,300
    • HRANICKY, KYLE$2,900
  • from 3 contributions
    • NORMAN, WILLIAM SCOTT MR. JR.$6,600
    • KILLMER, WILLIAM$1,000
  • from 2 contributions
    • MEADORS, FREDERICK A. DR.$6,600

Industries this bill HARMS

  • from 10 contributions
    • ROWAN, MARC MR.$9,900
    • RAVIV, GIL$3,300
    • TAYLOR, NATHANIEL$3,300
    • ZELTER, JAMES$3,150
    • REISS, MICHAEL$1,800

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Strong
Vector: 73%
Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill strongly aligns with Project 2025's focus on increasing housing supply through regulatory reform, reducing barriers to development, and prioritizing homeownership—particularly via streamlining processes, supporting manufactured and modular housing, and reforming lending and appraisal practices to enhance affordability and access."

Key themes:housing supply expansionregulatory reformhomeownership incentivesmanufactured housingappraisal reform

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing. — 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Moderate
Vector: 69%
Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on increasing housing supply, affordability, and regulatory reforms, which aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on HUD reform and addressing systemic inefficiencies, though it does not explicitly target waste, fraud, and abuse reduction or administrative streamlining as core objectives."

Key themes:housing supplyregulatory reformaffordabilityHUD programshomeownership

— 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from — 514 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for a Federally- funded program or project.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Exchange, “49 CFR Part 24–URA Regulations,” published February 2005, https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/804/ura-and- real-property-acquisition-policies-act-49-cfr-part-24/ (accessed March 4, 2023). HUD is one of the 18 federal departments and agencies that “are subject to the Uniform Act.” U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs,” Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 243 (December 18, 2019), pp. 69466–69521, esp. p. 69484, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-12-18/pdf/2019-25558.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 14. H.R. 3219, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-330, 104th Congress, October 26, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ330/PLAW-104publ330.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 6-1. The U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (Wagner–Steagall Act) established the origins of locally chartered housing agencies that administer federal funding for various rental assistance programs—a quintessentially progressive New Deal–era policy that expanded the administrative state’s powers to the housing market—with the primary legislative intent of eradicating slum housing in urban areas, boosting jobs, and providing housing for the working poor. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1437 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). A decade later, the Housing Act of 1949 codified federal standards for housing livability—a rationale that HUD and federal legislators have continued to use to justify federal intervention in housing—establishing as a national policy objective the provision of a minimum standard of housing quality for all Americans. This legislation also statutorily established many of the rural housing programs that are administered at USDA and expanded programs facilitating the removal of slum housing in urban areas. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1441 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 16. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, pp. 1-2 and 2-2. 17. The National Housing Act of 1934 established the FHA and the statutory authority for the secondary market. The main stated premise was to stimulate jobs and facilitate the housing and construction sector during the Great Depression. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12 (accessed March 4, 2023). 18. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 19. 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29 (accessed March 4, 2023). 20. HUD’s Departmental Enforcement Center (DEC) is led by a Director. It was established in 1998 as part of a broader effort to streamline and consolidate functions at HUD and was later merged with the Office of General Counsel. The DEC “is comprised of the Office of the Director, the Compliance Division, the Operations Division and five Satellite Offices” and describes its mission as “assuring the highest standards of ethics, management and accountability in the resolution of HUD's troubled properties.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Departmental Enforcement Center, “Program Offices: Departmental Enforcement Center,” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/enforcement (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. H.R. 5334, Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law No. 102-1017, 102nd Congress, October 28, 1992, Title X, https://www.congress.gov/102/statute/STATUTE-106/STATUTE-106-Pg3672.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 22. H.R. 8588, Inspector General Act of 1978, Public Law No. 95-452, 95th Congress, October 12, 1978, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-92/STATUTE-92-Pg1101.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 23. Guiding questions: What immediate administrative reforms of HUD and its programs can be made with high probability of success? What short-term legislative reforms can be proposed that, in tandem with administrative reforms, would achieve the HUD vision/mission objective? What HUD offices should be eliminated and/or realigned to reduce any redundancy that may persist in programmatic functions? 24. Wholly aside from reforms that would require legislation, the next Administration must ensure that key political appointees are able to acquit themselves as change agents to execute administrative reforms. Otherwise, whether because of a sheer lack of skill and expertise or simply a lack of will and philosophical alignment with reforms, staff may frustrate the efforts of committed political appointee staff and leadership to execute substantive administrative reforms. To achieve the policy and regulatory reforms outlined in this chapter, political appointees must be carefully placed in positions that reflect not only technical, market/ industry, and operational expertise, but also a shared will and commitment.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Moderate
Vector: 68%
Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill shares Project 2025's focus on increasing housing supply through regulatory reform and reducing barriers to development, particularly in Titles II and III. However, it does not address foreign market interference, DEI/ESG critiques, or specific appraisal reforms emphasized in the Project 2025 policy."

Key themes:housing supplyregulatory reformdevelopment incentives

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills