Skip to content

Bipartisan Housing Bill Faces Backlash Over Institutional Investor Restrictions

A controversial housing bill gains momentum—but 10 senators, backed by millions in investor donations, stand in its way. Who's really pulling the strings?

The image shows a poster with text that reads "In every single congressional district, at least 30%...
The image shows a poster with text that reads "In every single congressional district, at least 30% of eligible borrowers were fully approved for debt relief" and a logo in the bottom right corner. There are also a few people wearing hats in the background.

Bipartisan Housing Bill Faces Backlash Over Institutional Investor Restrictions

A bipartisan housing bill aimed at restricting large institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes has faced opposition from a small group of senators. The 21st Century Road to Housing Act would also force investors to sell build-to-rent properties within seven years. Only 10 senators voted against the proposal, despite its broad support in the chamber. The senators who opposed the bill include five Republicans and one Democrat: Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.). Many of these lawmakers received significant campaign contributions from groups that would be directly affected by the legislation.

Campaign finance records show that Sen. Thom Tillis led the group, collecting at least $468,916 from large institutional investors and related organisations. Blackstone Group, a major player in the build-to-rent sector, was his top donor. Sen. Ted Cruz received at least $145,752 from firms like Blackstone, KKR & Co., and Maury L Carter & Associates. Sen. Rick Scott took in $135,795 from similar sources, including Koch Inc. Other opponents also benefited from donations tied to the industry. Sen. Todd Young received $291,755, while Sen. Mike Lee collected $159,459. The funds came from private equity firms, institutional investors in single-family homes, and companies financing build-to-rent developments. These groups have publicly opposed the bill, arguing it would cut into their profits. No members of the U.S. House of Representatives have yet taken a public stance on the legislation. No alternative proposals or specific concerns about the bill's restrictions have been raised so far.

The bill now moves forward with most senators backing its restrictions on institutional investors. The 10 opposing senators received substantial donations from industry groups that stand to lose financially if the law passes. The House has remained silent on the issue, leaving its future uncertain.

Read also:

Latest