Congress Sends Landmark Housing Reform Bill to the President

After nearly a year of bipartisan negotiations, Congress has approved the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, marking passage of the most significant piece of federal housing legislation in decades. The Senate approved the final compromise package by an 85-5 vote on June 22, followed by overwhelming House approval (358-32) on June 23. The bill now awaits President Trump’s signature, although the Administration has temporarily delayed a signing ceremony while pursuing action on unrelated legislative priorities. Under the Constitution, if the President neither signs nor vetoes the legislation by July 10, it will become law automatically. If the President vetoes the bill, it would return to Congress, where a two-thirds majority in each chamber is needed to override. A veto override is a strong possibility given that the bill passed both houses by overwhelming margins.

The final legislation represents the culmination of several bipartisan housing proposals developed over the past two years, including the Senate’s original ROAD to Housing Act and the House’s Housing for the 21st Century Act. The result is a comprehensive package that incorporates provisions from more than 60 previously introduced bills, reflecting an unusually broad bipartisan consensus that increasing housing supply will require reforms across financing, regulation, permitting, and federal housing programs.

Among its most significant provisions are reforms to the HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs, a three-year authorization of the Community Development Block Grant–Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) program, expansion of the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program by an additional 100,000 units, a new Moving to Work demonstration cohort, and numerous measures intended to streamline environmental reviews and modernize HUD program administration. The legislation also includes incentives for manufactured and modular housing, expanded access to small-dollar mortgages, rural housing reforms, and planning tools intended to encourage local housing production.

One of the most closely negotiated provisions involved institutional ownership of single-family homes. Earlier versions of the bill drew criticism from developers and housing finance stakeholders over concerns that restrictions on institutional investors could unintentionally discourage build-to-rent development. The final compromise retains limits on large institutional investors purchasing existing single-family homes while expressly preserving an exception for build-to-rent communities, reflecting lawmakers’ efforts to distinguish between speculative acquisitions and investment that expands the nation’s housing supply.

The legislation has received broad support from organizations representing affordable housing developers, local governments, lenders, and housing advocates. Enterprise Community Partners described the bill as one that would make it easier to build and find affordable homes. Similarly, National Housing Conference applauded the legislation’s bipartisan approach, noting that it combines supply-side reforms with investments in and reforms to community development and housing programs.

While many observers view the legislation as a meaningful step forward, expectations remain measured. The bill primarily addresses structural barriers to housing production rather than providing substantial new appropriations for affordable housing. As a result, its impact will depend largely on implementation by federal agencies, uptake by state and local governments, and complementary investments at other levels of government. Nevertheless, the legislation demonstrates that bipartisan consensus on housing policy remains possible, particularly around reforms that seek to increase supply, modernize existing programs, and reduce barriers to development.