this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
63 points (98.5% liked)

politics

28875 readers
1872 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Senate has passed the largest housing bill in decades — bipartisan legislation designed to improve housing affordability and availability through deregulation, expanding old programs and banning institutional investors from buying single-family homes, with few exceptions.

The bill passed 89 to 10.

"It's Democrats. It's Republicans. It's pieces they built out together," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., a co-sponsor of the bill, in an interview with NPR. "That is the strength of this bill."

"It's not a Republican issue or a Democrat Issue," said Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the bill's other sponsor, speaking in advance of the vote on the Senate floor. "It's an issue about helping moms like the one who raised me, the amazing woman that she was, become homeowners."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WhatThaFudge@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

The major difference between the two bills is the Senate's introduction of a ban that would prevent any investor that owns at least 350 homes from buying more.

There are some exceptions to the bill's limits on institutional owners, such as **allowing investors to buy homes needing serious renovation in order to bring them up to code, and allowing investors to own new homes constructed for renting, **known as build-to-rent. But investors would be required to sell those homes after seven years, with the renter having first dibs to purchase.

In an open letter, 79 industry groups representing property managers like the Institute of Real Estate Management, as well as advocacy organizations pushing for more local housing construction, said they support new housing legislation but believe the Senate version should remove the sale requirement on build-to-rent homes. The letter warns that the provision "would effectively eliminate the production of Build-to-Rent (BTR) housing."

So basically the only provision in the BTR housing that is good for consumers is what they want removed so they can build and own an infinite number of forever to rent properties. And if its an already constructed property they can pay a goon to rough it up enough so it needs serious renovations to bypass their 350 home limit and acquire it cheaper.

The ease on regulations come in form of lowered quality of construction and less environmental safety during construction. No ease on regulation for zoning that would actually help create better communities.

"We put this bill together with the deep-seated belief that it is families who should live in homes and that's what homes are for," said Warren. "They're not there simply as investment vehicles for Wall Street private equity."

Eat shit Warren

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

350 homes

So fucking disgusting. These people make me sick.

[–] Galapagon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Woah woah woah, why are your having Warren eat shit? She's probably the reason the 7 year sell clause is even in the bill in the first place.

Will it get removed and entirely defeat the purpose? Probably - but I'm still not sure that's her fault!

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

DeMoCrAt BaD tHo. soMeHoW wOrSe tHaN rEpUbLiCaN