Senate passes bill to lower housing costs and restrict Wall Street from buying homes

5 hours ago by MicroWave to c/politics

The bipartisan legislation was crafted in both chambers and must now pass the House. It seeks to build more homes and prevent large investors from out-bidding families.

The Senate voted overwhelmingly on Monday to pass a sweeping housing affordability bill aimed at lowering costs, putting Congress on the brink of a rare bipartisan victory in Donald Trump’s second term.

The vote was 85-5.

The legislation, which makes it easier to build homes and slaps limits on Wall Street investors from buying up houses, now goes to the House, which hopes to vote on it in the next few days. Then, it would go to Trump’s desk to be signed into law.

load all comments

Steve 19 points 4 hours ago

That article is trash.
It offers no details about what the bill actually says or does, just what the senators say it does. It's only reporting the horse race aspects of it's passage, which is the least important part.

save

path: 0 24389936, hotness: undefined, score: 19, children: 5

TheTechnician27 6 points 3 hours ago

It's only reporting the horse race aspects of it's passage, which is the least important part.

That's because you can go right now to the legislation they hyperlinked if you want to know the text of the bill. The fact that the article is reporting on the politics surrounding a bill and giving a broad overview of what it does doesn't make it "trash"; it makes it not what you're specifically interested in, which is fine.

Which part of the 381-page document are you upset they weren't quoting from or deep-diving into?

save

path: 0 24389936 24390549, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 4

Steve 8 points 2 hours ago

Anything that verifies the claims the senators are making.
If you're a reporter trying to inform people about a bill that passed, you should have people read it and find out what it actually does, instead of just quoting the people who probably passed without reading it themselves.

My reading of the bill is useless, because I'm not a lawer, or trained in reading these sorts of legal documents. I can't tell what's important or not. And I don't have a week/month to understand it.

save

path: 0 24389936 24390549 24390872, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 1

TheTechnician27 2 points an hour ago

Anything that verifies the claims the senators are making.

The claim they cited from Republicans is just that it pushes back regulations, which is, like... Are you seriously asking for proof of that from a 381-page bill voted on 85–5 by a Republican-majority Senate? Is that some kind of specific, deeply controversial claim that needs interrogating in an article for a general audience? And the claims from Warren and Trump (for which their own agreement itself can be used as evidence) are that it pushes back on corporate ownership of houses:

The legislation would approve a series of funding and grant programs for constructing new homes. It would slash red tape and empower local governments to expedite reviews to build more housing. And a key section titled “Homes Are For People, Not Corporations” would restrict any “large institutional investor” from buying single-family homes.

At which point, you, a functioning, literate adult, can go to the bill's table of contents, find that it's Sec. 1001 (pp. 360–379), and read through it. If you're looking for an in-depth legal analysis: congratulations. That's cool. I hope somebody like LegalEagle makes one for you. Here's a summary of the bill's sections from the US House Financial Services Committee if that helps you at all.

That again doesn't make this article "trash"; it means you're looking for something deeper than what most people are.

save

path: 0 24389936 24390549 24390872 24391279, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0