A Democratic bill with 7 Republican cosponsors · See all 13 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Unleashing Needed Local Options to Construct and Keep Housing Act or the UNLOCK Act. It was introduced in the House of Representatives on September 3, 2025. The legislation amends the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Its main purpose is to expand new home construction. Specifically, it allows certain entities that receive funds under section 106 to use those funds for building new residential housing for low- and moderate-income people. This construction can happen with or without the help of neighborhood-based nonprofits or other public and private nonprofits.
Yes· 3 of 23
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill is explicitly tailored to support the construction of new residential housing for low- and moderate-income persons.
- Scored +7
Does this make housing cost less?
The bill directly authorizes the use of existing funding streams for constructing new residential housing for low- and moderate-income persons.
- Scored +6
Is this likely to reduce homelessness?
Increasing the supply of low- and moderate-income housing helps address housing scarcity and homelessness.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 2 allows metropolitan cities, urban counties, States, local governments, insular areas, and tribal entities to use their funding for the construction of new residential housing for low- and moderate-income persons. This could be considered a positive outcome because it directly supports building new homes for people who need them, and it allows groups like neighborhood-based nonprofits or other public and private nonprofits to assist in this effort.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based on the provided text, there are no specific sections or provisions identified that outline negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill is explicitly tailored to support the construction of new residential housing for low- and moderate-income persons. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Increased housing supply can help moderate-income households find more attainable housing options. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Metropolitan cities and urban counties are explicitly authorized to use funds for new housing construction. Would children be better off under this? — Stable and affordable housing provides a better environment for children and families. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Tribal entities are explicitly included as recipients eligible to use funds for new housing construction. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees on fixed incomes can benefit from additional affordable housing choices. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Units of general local government and rural areas can utilize these expanded housing provisions. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors on fixed or moderate incomes can benefit from expanded affordable housing construction. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults struggling to find affordable housing will benefit from increased residential construction. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Low- and moderate-income minority communities often face housing shortages and stand to benefit from increased construction. Would business owners be better off under this? — Construction companies and nonprofits partnering with local governments stand to benefit from new building projects. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Hispanic communities with high proportions of low- and moderate-income households can benefit from new housing initiatives. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged individuals with moderate incomes may find more housing options available. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — New housing developments can incorporate accessible units for individuals with disabilities. Would union members be better off under this? — Increased residential construction projects can lead to more jobs for construction and trade union workers. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans who fall into low- and moderate-income brackets may benefit from expanded affordable housing options.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — The bill directly authorizes the use of existing funding streams for constructing new residential housing for low- and moderate-income persons. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Increasing the supply of low- and moderate-income housing helps address housing scarcity and homelessness. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Providing more affordable housing options helps reduce the financial burden on low-income households.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — Expanding new residential construction using federal funds creates jobs in the construction and housing sectors. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Increasing housing supply can positively impact local economic activity and development.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The legislation permits local governments and tribal entities to use funds for new housing development, benefiting rural and tribal areas.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Provides states and local governments with increased flexibility in deciding how to use their community development block grant funds.
- 4/6/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 10/3/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/15/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 9/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/3/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Cleo FieldsDemocrat · Louisiana
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Mike FloodRepublican · Nebraska
Adam GrayDemocrat · California
James HimesDemocrat · Connecticut
Josh HarderDemocrat · California
Michael LawlerRepublican · New York
Zachary NunnRepublican · Iowa
Maria SalazarRepublican · Florida
Eric SorensenDemocrat · Illinois
Andrea SalinasDemocrat · Oregon
William TimmonsRepublican · South Carolina
Steve WomackRepublican · Arkansas