Good morning. Happy Friday. I want to tell you about a rare instance of bipartisan cooperation in Congress.
More housingA major bipartisan housing bill that President Trump has dismissed as a “yawn” appears set to become law without his signature late tonight, weeks after he surprised congressional Republicans by suddenly canceling his plans to sign it. (He could always sign it, or it could fall to a veto, today.) The bill is the first genuine effort the federal government has made in over 30 years to build more housing, the problem at the heart of the nation’s persistent housing crisis, says my colleague Ronda Kaysen, who has been covering its passage. Among other requirements, the bill — known in typically inelegant Washington-speak as the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act — adjusts a plethora of federal rules, with an aim to make it easier and cheaper for developers to break ground and raise walls, and illegal for large investors to snap up single-family homes. That combination could increase the supply of housing and drive down prices for homeowners and renters alike. “Some of the provisions cut through red tape, others make it easier to lend or borrow money,” Ronda told me yesterday. “But more than anything, this bill puts a flag in the ground, telling states, cities and builders that the federal government is taking this crisis seriously.” A bipartisan featThe legislation passed both chambers of Congress in June, an unusual example of aisle-crossing cooperation. Michael Gold, who covers Capitol Hill, told me that was notable. “In a Congress where much of the sweeping legislation has been in party-line bills, to me, there was something almost old-school congressional about the way it all came together,” he said. “And the final bill is huge.” But Trump threw a wet blanket on the achievement. Just hours before a signing ceremony at the Capitol last month, he dismissed the legislation as “of minor importance,” saying that he would sign it only if Congress passed a bill to tighten voting restrictions. He’d pushed that voter ID bill for months, although it didn’t have the support to pass in the Senate. On June 29, Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House, apparently sent the housing bill to Trump’s desk anyway. That started a 10-day clock for the president to sign the bill, veto it or do nothing and allow it to pass into law automatically. At midnight, by many interpretations of the timing, that clock goes ding.
A muted winI asked Michael how common this kind of non-action is on the part of a modern president. He told me it was fairly rare. It happened a decade ago, when Barack Obama didn’t sign a bill that renewed sanctions on Iran, which had cleared the Senate on a unanimous vote. Obama decided not to sign the bill to show he didn’t like it, while conceding that it was veto-proof. Trump’s decision was more unusual. Weeks before this bill passed, he’d called it the “most comprehensive and consequential housing legislation” in American history. But then, Michael said, “he seemed to reverse course, allowing it to become collateral in a rift that opened up between the president and Senate Republicans in particular.” And as the midterm elections loom, that approach took from Republicans a chance to make the case, loudly, that affordability is something they’re concerned about. Instead of a being a rousing win, as Michael put it, the housing bill effectively limped across the finish line. Taking actionStill, many see the law as a triumph — or something that will be a triumph at midnight. Ronda told me it provides a kind of road map for communities, providing strategies that allow them to make changes to zoning codes and permitting rules and building regulations. “The bill says that there is a lot more that America can do to get us out of this crisis than simply wait for interest rates to fall,” she said. I asked her for an example. She pointed to the rules that currently govern manufactured housing, what you might recognize as trailer homes. They came by the name honestly, but that could change. Here’s Ronda: Manufactured homes are generally faster and cheaper to build than stick-built homes. But they have never been widely adopted because to meet federal standards, they have to be built on a steel chassis, which is expensive and also limits the size and style of home you can build (you’re basically limited to what looks a lot like a trailer). But under the new bill, they won’t need to have that steel chassis. And that change will allow other kinds of factory-built, modular homes to meet federal standards. They could have second stories, for example. They won’t need to pretend to be mobile. As the men in quarter-zips say, that business could scale.
We’ve made the stories in this section free for you, once you log in.
Graham Platner
More on Politics
Middle East
Around the World
Other Big Stories
It’s time to build a new Penn Station in New York City. But Trump is the wrong man for the job, Representative Jerrold Nadler writes. When society rewards women for thinness, using weight-loss drugs like Ozempic can become a depressingly rational choice, Jessica Grose writes. Deeply reported journalism needs your support. The Times relies on subscribers to help fund our mission. Become a subscriber today.
Here’s a good weekend project that’ll clean out your sinuses, too: |
