Ten senators voted “no” on major bipartisan legislation Thursday that proponents say is the most significant effort to address housing costs in decades.
Most of its opponents were conservative Republicans who oppose the ban on large investors buying single-family homes included in the bill. But one Democrat also voted no for the same reason.
More generally, the bill would loosen some federal housing regulations and encourage states and cities to ease land-use rules. The bill is meant to increase the housing supply to improve affordability. It now faces an uncertain future in the House, thanks to opposition from conservatives and mixed signals from President Donald Trump.
Here is the list of “no” votes. The Washington Examiner asked all of the offices of the senators for comment and will update this story with responses.
The nine Republicans
Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC)
Budd has not yet explained his “no” vote.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Cruz had several problems with the legislation. He said the provision banning the development of a central bank digital currency should have been permanent, rather than for only five years.
He also criticized some of the details of the institutional investor ban.
“I agree with President Trump that large banks should not be buying single-family homes,” Cruz said. “Unfortunately, this legislation goes beyond that principle and restricts those hoping to build new rental housing for Americans by requiring build-to-rent homes to be sold within seven years. Restricting the supply of newly built rental units should not be enshrined in law.”
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI)
In a brief interview with the Washington Examiner, Johnson said he opposed the bill for many reasons.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)
Last week, Lee tweeted criticism that the bill contains only a temporary ban on the Federal Reserve issuing a digital currency.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL)
In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Scott said he opposed the bill because it would add to the deficit. “It sets up a process to spend a whole bunch of money, we’re running deficits,” he said. He said his “no” vote didn’t have to do with the institutional investor provision.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC)
Tillis opposed the bill over the large investor provision. “My God, when did conservative Republicans start carrying Elizabeth Warren’s banner on housing strategy?” Tillis said.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL)
A spokesperson for Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) said that voting legislation, not housing policy, should be the priority for the Senate.
“Like President Trump, Coach Tuberville thinks the Save America Act is our number 1 priority and doesn’t think we should be wasting our time on anything else,” a spokesperson said in a statement.
Sen. Todd Young (R-IN)
Young said that while there are positives in the bill, there are other parts that he doesn’t think are good for the housing market.
“The bill we voted on today contains some positive reforms, but it also contains provisions that won’t increase the supply of housing or help lower costs,” Young said. “Congressional action on housing is long overdue, and I am hopeful additional changes can be made to address the clear barriers to building more housing, including encouraging localities to look critically at burdensome zoning regulations.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Paul took issue with the institutional investor ban and explained his vote in a lengthy post on social media.
“Since many of the houses owned by institutional investors are rented, banning this class of investors may decrease the number of rental houses thus raising rents,” he wrote.
Also, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voted “no” on a procedural vote on the legislation on Wednesday night, but later voted for final passage on the housing bill. “Yesterday, I basically made a statement with my no vote there on cloture, because I wanted an amendment process,” she said. Murkowski said she had wanted to get in a few tribal housing provisions into the legislation and that the need in the tribal housing space is “extreme.”
The one Democrat
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI)
Schatz used a Senate floor speech on Wednesday to criticize the bill’s ban on large investors buying homes, saying it would prevent firms from developing build-to-rent houses and thus hurt the supply of housing.
