Sara Jacobs (D-CA)
Restore Military Families’ Voices Act
A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Armed 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
The bill is known as the Restore Military Families' Voices Act. It amends title 10 of the United States Code concerning privatized military housing. Specifically, it changes the rules for nondisclosure agreements involving landlords and tenants. It also expands protections to stop retaliation against military housing tenants. Finally, it adds reporting requirements for the Inspector General regarding these protections.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +5
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?
Directly benefits active-duty military personnel and their families who rely on military housing.
- Scored +5
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?
Improves conditions and protections for active duty military families living in privatized housing.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Enhances transparency by requiring prompt notification of reprisal reports to Congress and military department secretaries.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2 stops landlords from even asking tenants, former tenants, or prospective tenants to sign nondisclosure agreements connected to housing units or housing services. This is a positive step because it stops people from being silenced about housing issues.
-
Section 3 broadens who tenants can report issues to without facing retaliation, including the Chief Housing Officer of the Department of Defense, an inspector general, and members of Congress. This is beneficial because it gives families more safe avenues to voice their concerns to officials we have voted for and hold them accountable.
-
Section 3 requires the Inspector General to notify the Secretary of the military department and the Armed Services committees within 10 business days of getting a reprisal report. This is good for transparency and keeps our elected and appointed officials aware of problems.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
Based strictly on the provided text, there are no explicit negative impacts or burdens identified for individuals or groups of people.
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 veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Directly benefits active-duty military personnel and their families who rely on military housing. Would children be better off under this? — Benefits military families with children living in privatized base housing. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Helps lower-income junior enlisted service members residing in privatized housing. Would men be better off under this? — Benefits male service members and military families living in privatized housing. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Protects middle-aged military personnel and their families. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Supports middle-class military families living in housing units. Would women be better off under this? — Benefits female service members and military spouses living in privatized housing. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Protects younger service members and their families living in military housing.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the individual right to speak freely? — Safeguards tenants from being silenced by housing providers through nondisclosure agreements. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Enhances transparency by requiring prompt notification of reprisal reports to Congress and military department secretaries. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Strengthens protections and reporting mechanisms against unfair retaliation by landlords. Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal oversight and reporting requirements regarding military housing complaints.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — Expands protections for military housing tenants against retaliation and prohibits silencing nondisclosure agreements. Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life? — Protects tenants' rights to report issues without fear of retaliation and bans restrictive nondisclosure agreements.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — Improves conditions and protections for active duty military families living in privatized housing.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Provides stronger consumer protection for military housing tenants by prohibiting landlords from requesting nondisclosure agreements.
- 6/9/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
- 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.