The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a sweeping bipartisan housing reform package on Friday, marking one of the most decisive cross-party votes of the current congressional session. The legislation, known as the Housing for the 21st Century Act, passed by a vote of 390–9, signaling broad agreement among lawmakers that housing affordability and supply shortages have reached crisis levels nationwide. The bill aims to address multiple structural problems in the housing market, including high construction costs, restrictive zoning policies, limited access to development capital, and regulatory hurdles that builders say slow down or prevent new housing projects. Lawmakers from both parties described the vote as a rare but necessary moment of cooperation in a deeply polarized political environment, emphasizing that rising rents and home prices are affecting families in nearly every district across the country. With housing costs consuming larger portions of household incomes, supporters framed the legislation as a practical response to one of the most pressing economic concerns facing American voters.

At the core of the package are provisions designed to increase the overall housing supply, particularly in high-demand urban and suburban markets where job growth has outpaced residential construction. Economists across the political spectrum have argued that supply constraints are a primary driver of rising home prices and rental costs. The bill seeks to incentivize new construction by offering targeted federal grants to local governments that reform zoning regulations, reduce minimum lot size requirements, and streamline approval processes for multifamily housing developments. In addition, it includes tax incentives aimed at encouraging private investment in affordable housing projects, including expansions to existing low-income housing tax credit programs. Lawmakers supporting the measure emphasized that federal action cannot dictate local zoning decisions but can encourage reform by rewarding communities that modernize outdated policies. By reducing red tape and providing financial incentives, proponents argue the bill will unlock stalled projects and allow developers to respond more effectively to market demand.

Supporters of the legislation also highlighted reforms to federal housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The bill proposes modernizing certain HUD programs to improve efficiency, expand financing flexibility, and reduce administrative burdens that critics say have slowed affordable housing production. Additionally, it includes measures intended to empower local banks and community financial institutions to deploy capital more easily for housing development projects. Advocates contend that giving lenders greater flexibility will help stimulate construction in underserved communities, particularly in rural areas and smaller cities where financing gaps often stall development. In an op-ed published prior to the vote, bill sponsors argued that expanding supply is the most direct path to lowering housing costs. They maintained that when housing inventory increases, competition eases price pressure, ultimately benefiting both renters and prospective homebuyers. The legislation’s authors framed the bill not as a partisan victory, but as a structural reform package designed to correct long-term imbalances in the housing market.

Despite overwhelming support, opposition to the measure did emerge from a small group of lawmakers spanning ideological lines. Some conservative critics expressed concern about potential federal overreach, arguing that housing policy traditionally falls within the jurisdiction of state and local governments. They questioned whether federal incentives tied to zoning reforms could indirectly pressure municipalities into compliance. Others raised concerns about the fiscal impact of certain grant and tax credit expansions, warning that increased federal spending may not guarantee measurable improvements in affordability. On the progressive side, a handful of critics contended that the bill did not go far enough to provide direct protections for renters or expand tenant assistance programs. They argued that supply-side reforms alone may not sufficiently address the immediate challenges faced by low-income households struggling with rent burdens. Nevertheless, with only nine lawmakers voting against the bill, opposition remained limited, underscoring the bipartisan consensus that housing affordability demands action.

The legislation now advances to the Senate, where it is expected to undergo debate and potential amendments in the coming weeks. If approved by the Senate, the bill would proceed to President Donald Trump for signature. Housing affordability has become a defining issue in recent election cycles, with voters citing high rents, mortgage rates, and limited inventory as major financial stressors. Lawmakers from both parties acknowledged that while they may disagree on broader economic policy, the housing shortage presents a tangible problem that requires immediate and coordinated solutions. More than 50 organizations have endorsed the measure, including housing advocacy groups, industry associations, and free-market policy organizations. This wide coalition reflects the complexity of the issue, as housing shortages affect urban centers, suburban communities, and rural areas alike. The bipartisan support signals recognition that housing challenges cut across political boundaries and regional divides.

Speaker Mike Johnson praised the bill’s passage, framing it as part of a broader legislative agenda focused on affordability and economic relief. He stated that rising housing costs have placed homeownership out of reach for millions of Americans and that regulatory barriers have constrained supply growth. Johnson characterized the legislation as a critical step toward reducing unnecessary red tape, modernizing federal housing programs, and increasing private-sector participation in development efforts. He also linked the bill to broader Republican efforts to codify executive actions and pursue cost-of-living reforms. Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers who supported the bill emphasized its potential to ease market pressures and foster cooperation between federal, state, and local governments. As the Senate prepares to consider the measure, the outcome will determine whether this bipartisan effort becomes law. Regardless of the final result, the House vote represents one of the most substantial bipartisan agreements on housing policy in recent years, reflecting growing recognition that affordability, supply, and regulatory reform must be addressed collectively to stabilize the nation’s housing market.