21st Century Housing Act Becomes Law Without Trump's Signature

Overview

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, described by Emma Janssen in The New Republic as "one of the most significant pieces of housing legislation passed in decades," automatically became law on July 11 after sitting on President Trump's desk for 10 days without his signature.

Trump refused to sign the legislation in protest of Congress's failure to pass the strict voter ID bill he had been pushing. However, to Republicans' relief, he also decided not to use his veto power.

Key Provisions

The law aims to ease the affordability crisis by boosting housing supply and limiting construction regulations. Notable measures include:

• Removing the requirement that manufactured homes have a permanent steel chassis beneath them — a change that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) says could lower costs of a new unit by $10,000
• Restricting the purchase of new single-family homes by large institutional investors, whom Warren claims have turned America into "a nation of renters"

Mixed Reactions

Positive Assessments

According to Conor Dougherty in The New York Times, the law gets several things right. America needs more housing, but local governments — not the federal government — are "often the ultimate deciders of where, how, and if housing is built." The housing act addresses this "through carrots and sticks," including:

• A $200 million annual "innovation fund" to reward local governments that build more housing
• Cutting several strings attached to factory-built or modular home production, which could "unleash a wave of innovation in construction techniques"

Zeeshan Aleem of MSNBC criticized Trump's response, noting that in a "tantrum so baffling and self-destructive it beggars belief," the president called the housing bill "a big yawn." Aleem added that "the high cost of living is the defining policy issue in our country."

Critical Perspectives

The Wall Street Journal editorial board argued the law does more "to expand the federal bureaucracy than the supply of homes." It "dangles money" for housing construction that "comes with federal mandates" — such as wage requirements for workers. The editorial noted that while the White House has been eliminating "superfluous government programs," Congress is adding more.

Robert Kuttner in The Boston Globe described the law as "a medley of 47 promising ideas, virtually all at token levels." He argued this is not adequate, noting that "my generation and the one that came before us got an incredible deal" on homeownership thanks to New Deal programs that have since vanished. While it is laudable that the bill's sponsors are "shining a light on a dire national problem," Kuttner concluded that "it will take a great deal more to make housing truly affordable."

The Week Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.