21st Century ROAD to 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 pen.

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.), a co-sponsor of the bill, said 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

Supportive Views

Conor Dougherty in The New York Times noted that America needs more housing, and that 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 the production of factory-built or modular homes, which could "unleash a wave of innovation in construction techniques"

Zeeshan Aleem in MSNBC criticized Trump's refusal to "slap his name on the one thing he should," calling his dismissal of the bill as "a big yawn" a "tantrum so baffling and self-destructive it beggars belief." Aleem added that "the high cost of living is the defining policy issue in our country."

Critical Views

The Wall Street Journal editorial board argued that 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 the White House has been actively eliminating "superfluous government programs," while 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," calling that inadequate. He noted 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."

Source: The Week