Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE)
Accelerating Home Building Act of 2025
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 "Accelerating Home Building Act of 2025" aims to address the housing supply crisis by providing grants to local governments and other eligible entities to establish and use pre-reviewed designs for mixed-income housing. The goal is to streamline the approval process for construction and increase the production of affordable housing. The bill authorizes appropriations of $15,000,000 for each fiscal year from 2027 through 2031 to carry out these grants.
Yes· 3 of 31
- Scored +6
Does this make housing cost less?
Provides grants to establish pre-reviewed designs for mixed-income housing to directly tackle the housing supply crisis.
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Directly targets the creation of mixed-income housing for households earning up to 80 percent of area median income.
- Scored +4
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?
Young adults forming new households face severe housing shortages and will benefit from increased affordable options.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Is this likely to slow the rise in prices?
Authorizes $15 million annually in new federal appropriations for housing grants.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Affordable Housing (Sections 2, 3, and 4): By providing grants for pre-reviewed designs for mixed-income housing, the bill aims to increase the supply of affordable housing, addressing the housing shortage and reducing the number of cost-burdened households. "Affordable housing" is defined in Section 3 as housing costing no more than 30% of a household's monthly income for those earning not more than 80% of the area median income.
-
Streamlined Permitting Processes (Sections 2 and 4): The bill seeks to simplify and expedite the permitting process for developers through the use of pre-reviewed designs, potentially leading to faster and more predictable housing development. This could make new home construction more accessible.
-
Development in High Opportunity Areas (Section 4): The Secretary will consider the presence of high opportunity areas when reviewing grant applications, potentially leading to more affordable housing being built in areas with better access to jobs, schools, and services.
-
Support for Rural Areas (Section 4): The bill sets aside a minimum of 10 percent of grant funds for eligible entities located in rural areas, addressing the unique housing challenges in these communities.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Repayment of Grant Funds (Section 4): If pre-reviewed designs are not approved within 5 years of receiving the grant (unless extended by the Secretary), the Secretary may require the eligible entity to return the grant funds. This could discourage some entities from applying or create pressure to approve designs quickly, potentially overlooking important local considerations.
-
Limited Scope (Section 3): The definition of "covered structure" limits the types of housing projects eligible for the program to low-rise and mid-rise structures with not more than 25 dwelling units. This might exclude larger, potentially more cost-effective housing developments from benefiting from the streamlined approval process.
-
Dependence on Local Implementation (Section 4): The success of the bill depends on how effectively local entities implement the pre-reviewed designs and reduce barriers to housing development. If local regulations and permitting processes remain complex, the impact of the grants could be limited.
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? — Directly targets the creation of mixed-income housing for households earning up to 80 percent of area median income. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Expands the housing supply and helps mitigate surging homeownership and rental costs. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults forming new households face severe housing shortages and will benefit from increased affordable options. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Allocates a guaranteed minimum of 10 percent of grant funding specifically for rural communities. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Infill development and streamlined urban permitting directly address housing shortages in metropolitan areas. Would business owners be better off under this? — Local developers and small business homebuilders benefit from faster and more predictable permitting processes. Would children be better off under this? — Stable and affordable housing environments benefit the well-being and development of children. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Helps middle-aged households facing high homeownership or rental cost burdens. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Explicitly includes Indian tribes among the eligible entities capable of receiving grant funding. Would retired people be better off under this? — Supports diverse housing structures like duplexes and cottages that appeal to retirees seeking downsized options. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Encourages accessible housing types like accessory dwelling units and cottages which can support aging in place. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Promoting mixed-income housing in high opportunity areas helps expand housing access for minority populations. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Supports broader access to affordable housing options in high opportunity communities. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Immigrant families looking for affordable housing options benefit from increased housing supply. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Pre-reviewed designs can incorporate universal design principles to assist individuals with disabilities. Would students be better off under this? — Helps college graduates and students find more affordable housing options near job and education centers. Would union members be better off under this? — Increased residential construction activity supports jobs for construction labor unions. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans facing housing instability can benefit from overall increases in affordable housing stock. Would women be better off under this? — Single mothers and women disproportionately affected by housing cost burdens benefit from increased affordable options.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — Provides grants to establish pre-reviewed designs for mixed-income housing to directly tackle the housing supply crisis. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Increasing the availability of affordable housing helps alleviate cost burdens on low-income households. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Increasing overall housing supply helps alleviate severe housing cost burdens that contribute to homelessness. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Focusing development on high opportunity areas can help foster more integrated and equitable communities.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — Streamlining permitting and promoting housing construction creates jobs in the residential construction sector. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Addressing housing supply shortages can improve overall local economic dynamism and labor mobility. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Smaller homebuilders and developers benefit from streamlined, predictable pre-reviewed design approvals. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Authorizes $15 million annually in new federal appropriations for housing grants.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Mandates a 10 percent set-aside of grant funds specifically for eligible entities located in rural areas. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Encouraging infill development utilizes existing infrastructure and can reduce urban sprawl.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires recipients to report on housing production metrics and encourages publicizing designs via websites. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Provides resources to local governments to tailor building designs to their own local zoning standards. Does this give the federal government more power? — Introduces a new federally funded grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
- 7/21/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Bernie MorenoRepublican · Ohio