Without Trump’s signature, Congress’s major housing bill with Pa. and Va. roots still has no legal path

President Donald Trump was expected to sign the bipartisan bill into law on Wednesday, marking the most significant congressional action in decades to address the nation’s housing shortage, aspects of which were first piloted in Virginia.

Instead, Trump refused to sign the deal and vowed not to do so unless Congress passed the controversial Voting Access Act, but it’s possible the measure could still become law.

U.S. Senator from Virginia Mark Warner, a Democrat who transported provisions of the housing law, stressed on Thursday this potential path of development despite, as he put it, “Trump’s tantrum.”

Typically, a bill becomes law within 10 days without the president’s signature, while Congress is still in session. The Senate adjourned overdue Wednesday night and Warner is confident there will be enough votes to override any potential veto the president might issue.

“We were just about to celebrate the fact that something had been done, that we had addressed the concerns of the American people, and then he canceled the signing of the agreement,” Warner said on Thursday.

He pointed to the “irony” of Republican Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana praising the bill at a news event after learning the bill signing had been canceled.

“I hope President Trump will get over his tantrum and just go ahead (and sign it),” Warner said.

The The Path to 21st Century Housing Act was guided by sense. Tom Scott, RS.C. and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., along with U.S. Reps. French Hill, R-Ark. and Maxine Waters, D-Calif.

A key provision of the bill is consistent with Trump’s goal of limiting enormous investment firms from purchasing too many single-family homes.

This practice has suppressed the number of first-time homebuyers or contributed to rapid gentrification in some neighborhoods. The proposed safeguards were previously introduced at the state level in Virginia, but did not become state law.

Other parts of the federal statute reflect or are inspired by state laws in Virginia and elsewhere.

The provision to treat manufactured or factory-built homes in the same way as site-built homes in terms of zoning and financing is fundamental Virginia’s recent law which will come into force next month. It aims to enhance the availability of this type of housing in communities that want or need it.

Warner’s provision to encourage the redevelopment of underutilized or abandoned shopping malls into residential buildings is similar to “apartment close to work” bill introduced by Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico. The idea is to allow apartments and townhouses to be permitted in certain corridors located in commercial zones.

“They have water, electricity, often broadband, parking… These are places that can be transformed,” Warner explained about the modernization of aged hotels and shopping malls.

Although VanValkenburg’s manufactured housing bill has passed into law, his “housing near jobs” bill has yet to cross the finish line at the state level. If the federal bill becomes law, Warner’s similar concept would make this type of development a little easier across the country.

VanValkenburg said he’s excited to see lawmakers at all levels seeking housing solutions, especially in a decidedly partisan federal legislation.

“At a time when we all, rightfully so, have a lot of cynicism about Congress and its ability to act, this seems like bipartisan action on an issue that needs action,” said Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico.

Likewise, Pennsylvania Democratic state senator Nikil Saval was pleased that the federal bill included a concept he was defending in his state. The pilot program helps repair aging homes or alleviate health and safety problems and supports a job training program for people doing this type of work.

Bye. Senate Democrats lament federal housing bill stalled over Commonwealth ties

After leading legislative efforts in his state, Saval worked with his federal senator, John Fetterman introduce it in the countryhe said. Since then, various federal lawmakers have introduced similar bills.

Saval testified before Congress about a federal bill with roots in his state as it gained traction and was officially added to the Path to Housing Act.

“It’s really a dream to replicate this at the national level,” he said in a phone interview Thursday.

Warner, VanValkenburg and Saval see the federal housing bill as an achievement that both political parties can be proud of and as a set of targeted solutions to a national problem.

Trump’s last-minute withdrawal of support for the housing bill was portrayed as an attempt to pressure Congress to pass the Voting Access Act, which would require people to prove U.S. citizenship with a passport or certified birth certificate to vote.

The measure, which Trump has advocated for years, would also impose in-person voting and registration standards.

Supporters say it could strengthen confidence in elections, while opponents warn of the additional burdens it would place on people such as married women whose names have been changed or people who cannot afford to travel to apply for recent documents.

Despite the opposition from members of his party, Trump called the bill’s passage “national emergency” and said that his signature on the housing bill depends on whether the SAVE Act also reaches his desk.

Warner said Trump’s continued push for the SAVE America Act is because he is “still obsessed with the fact that he lost in 2020.” Trump maintained false claims of voter fraud and manipulation in the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Joe Biden.

Warner added that Virginia, like most U.S. states, already requires identification documents such as driver’s licenses or state IDs to vote, and which relate to claims of voter fraud as of 2020 has been refuted.

The president has 10 days to take action on the Roads to Housing Act, after which it will automatically enter into force. Since the Senate is not currently in session, Trump’s inaction could be considered “pocket veto.However, Congress could override it by a two-thirds majority in both houses.