Liz Warren hustles Trump with a housing bill from hell

What is it about the National Defense Authorization Act that makes it a dumping ground for every dumb liberal pet project?
First the Trump administration pushed an AI data-center amnesty that would have stripped states of authority over massive, power-hungry facilities. Then lawmakers tried to slip in Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s housing bill, a package built to subsidize Section 8 tenants and builders and to fuel the very forces driving the current housing bubble. After a backlash, both provisions came out of the NDAA. Now congressional leaders plan to pass the Massachusetts Democrat’s housing bill on its own.
The real crisis comes from government debt and the inflation it fuels. This is not a shortage of lumber or land. It is a monetary chokehold created by government policy.
Earlier this year, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.) worked with Warren to move S. 2651, an omnibus housing package that expands every federal program Trump previously vowed to cut. They attached the legislation to the Senate’s NDAA, then lobbied House conservatives to adopt it in their version of the defense bill. At the last minute, House leaders stripped the language. The House Financial Services Committee now plans to mark up the bill next week.
Here’s the trouble: The bill misdiagnoses the housing crisis. It treats high prices as a supply shortage instead of a government-fueled asset bubble and inflationary pricing distortion.
The result is predictable. Its 40 provisions would expand Section 8, loan subsidies, “affordable housing” grants, and even looser mortgage programs for people priced out of the market. Every one of these items pours accelerant on the factors that drove the 2008 bubble and the post-COVID spike.
Government subsidies for overbuilding and for buyers who cannot afford homes created the crisis. Yet like a dog returning to its vomit, Scott, the president, and Senate Democrats are endorsing Warren’s 2020 campaign platform to revive the same model. The bill promises builders and activist groups federal cash in exchange for regulatory concessions. The trade-off is disastrous.
Section 202 creates a new federal grant program to fund local housing projects in designated zones — a warmed-over version of the community-engineering schemes Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development pushed a decade ago.
Meantime, Section 209 establishes a $200 million yearly fund at HUD to award “innovative housing reforms” to localities that reshape zoning to favor dense, subsidized units.
Conservatives would call these incentives an invitation to replicate failed urban policies in red suburbs. The bill rewards grifting nonprofits and community organizers who treat federal housing programs as political infrastructure.
At the same time, the administration is pushing rules that limit red-state zoning authority to clear the way for data-center construction while promoting Section 8 expansion with new incentives and zoning guidance. It revives, in effect, Obama’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing regime — the same racial-gerrymandering tool Trump killed in his first term. Supporting the Scott-Warren bill would revive it in practice.
Worse, the bill rests on a false premise. America doesn’t have a housing shortage. According to Redfin, as of October sellers outnumbered buyers by 36.8% — about 529,000 more sellers — the largest gap since 2013. Census data shows about 148 million housing units for roughly 134 million households, a surplus of around 14 million units. When Trump took office, the vacancy count stood near 11 million, yet prices were far more affordable.
The real crisis comes from government debt and the inflation it fuels. Construction costs surged with inflation. Interest rates spiked to service that debt, creating an interest-rate cliff that locked millions of homeowners into sub-3% mortgages. They cannot sell without doubling their monthly costs. High rates froze the existing inventory in place. This is not a shortage of lumber or land. It is a monetary chokehold created by government policy.
RELATED: Why the kids are not all right — and Boomers still pretend nothing’s wrong

Federal housing policy adds another layer. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac long prioritized “access to credit” over price stability. By guaranteeing high-risk loans and encouraging low down payments, they allow buyers to bid more than their incomes justify. Subsidized credit lifts prices for sellers, not buyers.
S. 2651 makes the problem worse by expanding the Community Development Block Grant and similar programs, encouraging activist groups and corporate developers to overbuild units no one can afford without subsidies. That process pushes prices upward and strengthens corporate buy-ups of suburban neighborhoods.
The administration previously acknowledged these distortions. In Trump’s FY 2021 budget, the Office of Management and Budget proposed eliminating CDBG and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, arguing that states and localities were better positioned to address affordability challenges. This new bill reverses that logic entirely.
The Federal Reserve’s rate whiplash — a decade of near-zero borrowing costs followed by sudden hikes — froze supply by trapping owners inside artificially cheap mortgages. Washington’s policies created the gridlock. The inventory exists. Monetary policy quarantined it.
What the administration needs to do is allow prices to fall back toward alignment with median incomes. That adjustment would restore affordability without new federal intervention. Instead, the FHFA is pushing lower credit-score requirements for subsidized mortgages. That mistake will repeat the pattern of enticing families into overpriced homes they cannot sustain.
Housing policy should stop trying to prop up inflated prices. The market must correct. A federal “solution” built around 40 expansionary programs will intensify the crisis, not solve it. Doing nothing would spur more affordability than this bipartisan blunder.
Cassidy told reporters that the legislative package is not meant to 'tear up unions' or clash with the bills introduced by the Hawley, Moreno, and Marshall wing.

Photo by Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images
Major college fires worker after posts celebrating Charlie Kirk's assassination. It's just the tip of ugly leftist iceberg.
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination last week, leftists far and wide who didn't like the words or politics of the TPUSA founder let loose on social media and celebrated Kirk's horrific death from a gunshot at an outdoor student event at Utah Valley University.
One of those anti-Kirk voices is a Clemson University employee — and the South Carolina public college suspended that unnamed worker Saturday.
'After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination.'
"Clemson University continues to thoroughly review the inappropriate social media content posted by employees in response to the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk," the school said in its Saturday statement. "As stated previously, the University will take decisive and appropriate action in cases where speech is not protected under the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment."
The Post and Courier said assistant music professor Melvin Earl Villaver Jr. allegedly posted remarks about Kirk’s death. The paper noted in a separate story that one screenshot appearing to reference Kirk states, "Today was one of the most beautiful days ever."
U.S. Rep. Russell Fry (R-S.C.) was livid over the alleged posts and called out Villaver: "Celebrating Charlie Kirk's death is sick. What kind of depraved person thinks this is acceptable? Our tax dollars should not pay him another damn dime. I call on Clemson to fire him immediately!"
Screenshots included with Fry's takedown showed comments and retweets allegedly from Villaver saying:
RELATED: Charlie Kirk hater goes nuclear on supporter of slain activist — then pays price after allegedly unleashing physical attacks
Well, Clemson on Monday afternoon announced that "following an immediate and deliberate investigation into inappropriate social media content, Clemson today terminated an employee due to their social media posts." The school's statement did not name the employee or say what the posts were about.
The Post and Courier said Villaver could not be reached for comment; the X account @MelvinEarlMusic — from which the paper said his alleged remarks and reposts were cited — now "doesn't exist."
But WHNS-TV reported that Clemson called a special Board of Trustees meeting scheduled for Monday afternoon after facing backlash over comments believed to be made by some employees and professors about Kirk’s death.
The paper, citing a university spokesperson, reported that the remarks attributed to Villaver were not the only ones to draw criticism.
Indeed, the school's Monday statement on X added the following: "After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination."
Prior to the firing announcement, U.S. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) wrote the following X post: "Your First Amendment rights do not include a right to a job! Clemson's professors were completely inappropriate. The vile and disgusting celebration of a murder must compel the university to take clear and immediate action."
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also called on Clemson to commence firings: "Free speech doesn't prevent you from being fired if you're stupid and have poor judgement. The despicable, inappropriate and classless statements about a tragic event should not diminish a great university like @ClemsonUniv. However, in my opinion, those who made these despicable, inappropriate and classless statements should be good candidates for termination by this public university."
RELATED: Professor who shared vile response to Kirk's assassination receives lesson about consequences: 'Sick people'
As readers of Blaze News are no doubt aware, the number of reports about people from all walks of life spouting off inappropriate comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination seem to be piling up at an astronomical rate.
What's more, it doesn't seem to be ending well for many of them:
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!