Becca Balint (D-VT)
Community Housing Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with 16 Democratic cosponsors · See all 16 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 Community Housing Act of 2026 aims to tackle the national housing crisis through massive investments in affordable housing supply, rental support, and rural programs. The bill appropriates tens of billions of dollars for programs like the Housing Trust Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund to build and preserve affordable homes. It repeals the Faircloth Amendment to allow public housing authorities to increase their number of housing units. The legislation also establishes offices and grant programs focused on community land use, zoning reform, and shared equity housing models. Additionally, the bill provides specific financial assistance for rural homeowners and renters, and expands contributions from Government-Sponsored Enterprises toward affordable housing.
Yes· 3 of 40
- Scored +9
Does this make housing cost less?
The bill injects tens of billions of dollars into the Housing Trust Fund, HOME program, and shared equity housing initiatives.
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Extensive investments in the Housing Trust Fund and rental support directly target low-income housing needs.
- Scored +7
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Includes dedicated funding for rural rental housing, preservation of section 515 properties, and low-interest rural home loans.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -4
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The legislation significantly increases federal spending through multiple new and expanded housing appropriations.
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill appropriates tens of billions of dollars in new mandatory spending for housing programs without offsetting revenues.
- Scored -2
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Large-scale federal appropriations absent explicit offsets weigh negatively on fiscal balance.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Housing Trust Fund Appropriations: Section 101 appropriates $44,500,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036 to the Housing Trust Fund, which provides a dedicated, permanent source of funding for affordable housing. This is positive because it injects significant capital into building and preserving homes for people who need them.
-
Capital Magnet Fund Appropriations: Section 103 appropriates $1,500,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036 to the Capital Magnet Fund. This funding expands financing for nonprofits and Community Development Financial Institutions to develop, rehabilitate, and purchase affordable housing in distressed communities.
-
Eviction Protection Grant Program: Section 201 appropriates $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036 for the Eviction Protection Grant Program. This directly benefits struggling renters by helping fund legal and related protections against eviction.
-
Housing Choice Voucher Downpayment Program: Section 203(b) appropriates $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036 to provide downpayment assistance under section 8(y)(7) of the United States Housing Act of 1937. This assists individuals and families using housing vouchers to transition into homeownership.
-
Rural Homeownership Loans: Section 203(a) appropriates billions of dollars for direct loans under section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949 and caps the annual interest rate payable on these direct loans at no lower than 1.0 percent. This makes purchasing a home much more financially attainable for rural Americans.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased Fees on Government-Sponsored Enterprises: Section 102 increases the basis point fee for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from 4.2 basis points to 10 basis points. While intended to fund housing programs, increasing fees on these mortgage enterprises can potentially drive up mortgage and housing financing costs for everyday homebuyers.
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? — Extensive investments in the Housing Trust Fund and rental support directly target low-income housing needs. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Includes dedicated funding for rural rental housing, preservation of section 515 properties, and low-interest rural home loans. Would farmers be better off under this? — Provides specific rural rental assistance, preservation programs, and agricultural worker housing support. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Explicitly prioritizes accessible housing units and supportive services for individuals with disabilities. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Preserves affordable multifamily housing options often utilized by fixed-income seniors. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Supports municipal zoning reforms, public housing development, and community land trusts in urban areas. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Downpayment assistance and affordable rental options help younger demographics enter the housing market. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Directs investments to distressed communities and addresses historical housing segregation disparities. Would children be better off under this? — Stable affordable housing positively impacts childhood development, health, and educational continuity. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Expands affordable housing access in underserved and urban communities with diverse populations. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Expands opportunities for affordable homeownership and family housing options. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Zoning reforms and downpayment programs improve housing accessibility for middle-income buyers. Would retired people be better off under this? — Assists retirees on fixed incomes by preserving long-term affordable housing options. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Expands access to affordable rental and rural housing resources that veterans often utilize. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Improves overall affordable housing supply and rental stability. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Increases access to public housing units and anti-displacement resources for immigrant families. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Fair housing provisions and targeted supportive housing assist vulnerable LGBTQ individuals experiencing homelessness. Would men be better off under this? — Broadly benefits male renters and homebuyers struggling with housing costs. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Expands housing assistance programs that can benefit rural and tribal communities. Would union members be better off under this? — Labor standards applied to housing construction projects support construction trade union employment. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Broadly improves housing affordability and availability across various regions. Would women be better off under this? — Single mothers and women experiencing housing instability benefit significantly from rental assistance and eviction protections. Would business owners be better off under this? — Benefits developers, contractors, and community development financial institutions with increased capital. Would students be better off under this? — Helps lower-income young adults and students secure stable, affordable rental housing. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Increased GSE basis point fees and potential tax scrutiny on secondary homes could create minor financial headwinds. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Regulatory changes and potential taxes on secondary or vacation homes could marginally impact high-net-worth investors.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — The bill injects tens of billions of dollars into the Housing Trust Fund, HOME program, and shared equity housing initiatives. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Substantial investments in affordable housing supply and rental assistance directly target homelessness reduction. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Expands rental support, eviction protections, and low-income housing programs to assist vulnerable households. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — Promotes accessible housing options and universal design principles for people with disabilities. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Aims to reduce housing segregation and directs resources toward distressed and underserved communities.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Provides specific loan programs, rental preservation, and financial assistance tailored to rural communities. Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — Coordinates housing development grants with public transportation availability to support sustainable growth. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Zoning reform grants encourage location-efficient, transit-oriented development which can lower carbon footprints.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Creates new federal offices, grant programs, and reporting requirements for state and local land use policies. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Funds eviction protection programs that ensure legal representation and due process for struggling tenants. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Mandates reporting and program evaluations regarding affordable housing initiatives and secondary home taxes.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Includes resources and grants that benefit community developers, nonprofits, and small entities involved in housing. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Provides eviction protection grants and legal assistance resources for struggling renters. Is this likely to create jobs? — Funding for housing construction and preservation initiatives supports job growth in the construction and development sectors. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Investments in housing supply and community development can stimulate local economic activity. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The legislation significantly increases federal spending through multiple new and expanded housing appropriations. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Large-scale federal appropriations absent explicit offsets weigh negatively on fiscal balance. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill appropriates tens of billions of dollars in new mandatory spending for housing programs without offsetting revenues.
- Healthcare
- Does this do more about addiction and overdose deaths? — Establishes an interagency task force to coordinate substance use disorder treatment within affordable housing settings.
- 9/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/6/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/30/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 13 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Alma AdamsDemocrat · North Carolina
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Sylvia GarciaDemocrat · Texas
Daniel GoldmanDemocrat · New York
Val HoyleDemocrat · Oregon
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Jonathan JacksonDemocrat · Illinois
James McGovernDemocrat · Massachusetts
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
LaMonica McIverDemocrat · New Jersey
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Ilhan OmarDemocrat · Minnesota
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Melanie StansburyDemocrat · New Mexico
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan