Sen. Warren to Introduce Housing Affordability Bill

Filed in Capitol Hill by on September 25, 2018 17 Comments

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is expected to introduce the American Housing and Economic Mobility Act on Sept. 26, legislation the senator says is designed to bring down costs for renters and buyers alike.

The intention of the bill is to:

  • Leverage federal funding to build up to 3.2 million new housing units for lower-income and middle-class families.
  • Create incentives for local governments to eliminate unnecessary land use restrictions that drive up costs.
  • Establish new programs to provide down payment assistance to first-time home buyers in disadvantaged communities and support families whose mortgages are underwater.
  • Expand and strengthen the Community Reinvestment Act.
  • Improve the housing voucher program and strengthen anti-discrimination laws.

To offset the cost of these new initiatives, the bill would make changes to the estate tax thresholds.

NAHB is currently reviewing the legislation and plans to work with Sen. Warren to address any concerns we may have with the bill and to promote provisions that we support.

View NAHB’s official statement on Warren’s housing bill and a summary of the legislation.

For more information, contact Scott Meyer at 800-368-5242 x8144.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail

Tags: , ,

Comments (17)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Norman Hyman says:

    Something to consider in an affordable housing statute is authorizing private rights of action in defined circumstances.

  2. Ray D says:

    Apparently she learned nothing from the first housing bubble implosion.

    • Tom Panek says:

      The first housing bubble implosion had nothing to do with making housing affordable. It had to do with predatory lending, speculative overbuilding (of which speculation building was NOT the intention of the Affordable Housing Act), the CDO boondoggle, and greed. I don’t see how banks encouraging lending agents to write no-interest balloon mortgages in excess of people’s ability to pay, and allowing them to build McMansions had anything to do with affordability. Then people started investing in spec homes and flooded the market.
      As an example of predatory lending, my wife and I bought a home in 2006. When I talked to my lender about the amount we wanted to borrow, he informed me with the assets we had we could get three times what we were requesting. When I asked him why we’d want to do that, his answer was that we could buy a larger home and sell it later and make a bigger profit from it. Good thing I didn’t listen to him or we’d be underwater on our mortgage now.
      If Senator Warren’s bill is bullet-proof and prevents predatory lending, overbuilding spec homes, and exploitation of the target group, we might see an actual, sustainable period of steady growth in true affordable housing for first-time buyers. But we must be vigilant.

  3. I, personally think we should be talking about assisting our aging population with helping them make the necessary modifications to the existing home and/or working with local building professionals to provide more safe and affordable living for those in our communities who are looking to downsize. This would help maintain our long-term taxpayers in our community, as well as free up the existing homes in our neighborhoods for our young people who want to start a family.

  4. Daniel Schifko says:

    How about scrapping this redistribution bill and getting behind fair trade deals that create better paying jobs for American workers which would result in more income to rent or buy housing? Why is the NAHB always being sucked into supporting socialist bills that have a long term detrimental effect on our industry and the economy as a whole?

    • Wayne D Coogan says:

      Good observation Daniel. NAHB leaders cannot help biting anything that looks like immediate benefits to them from the gubmnt. They have never learned to trust the free market. They believe, with Sen Warren, that housing prices result from a greedy industry rather than over-regulation. They overlook the fact housing, unlike health care, is the most economically competitive industry remaining in the USA. The government causes our housing problems then makes them worse by trying to correct them.

    • David Thompson says:

      Absolutely correct!!!!!!!

      Why is a business group backing a tax and spend plan!!!!

      This group makes me crazy.

      Stop supporting leftist agendas, and start listening to your members, instead of you left wing proffessors, that you had in college.

  5. LARRY BOWERS says:

    And exactly is Senator Warren expecting to get the money to build 3.2 MILLION units
    Cutback on the entitlement programs for illegal aliens maybe?

    • Ryan Shanahan says:

      “To offset the cost of these new initiatives, the bill would make changes to the estate tax thresholds.”

      • bill says:

        “make changes” more money taken from one and redistributed to another… socialism!

        • Ryan Shanahan says:

          Socialism = The military, highways and roads, public libraries, police, fire depts, student loans, bridges, garbage collection, farm subsidies, the CIA, the FBI, social security, museums, public schools, jails / prisons, public parks, sewers, medicare, courts, state / city zoos, public transportation… shall I go on?

          • Frank King says:

            Actually those are social programs which are actually different from socialism. Raising the estate tax to redistribute wealth is socialism. Learn the difference.

  6. 24.3 percent of the cost of a home in America is directly attributed to meeting government regulations. Maybe someone should encourage Senator Warren to submit a bill that reduces the costs of building. NAHB should resist endorsing any legislation that does not lower the costs of regulations.

    • Darren says:

      Amen and maybe pay for some of this with the Tariff incomes instead of dropping it on the Inheritance tax of (continuing) small businesses? Last time I checked most houses were paid for by Americans with jobs, especially jobs in America.

  7. Glen says:

    Support of bills like this and the Federal Flood Insurance program make me question NAHB organizationally.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *