(The Center Square) – Only 10 U.S. senators voted against the bipartisan housing bill that restricts large institutional investors from buying up single family homes and requires investors to sell build-to-rent homes within seven years.
Those lawmakers also each received tens or sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars in 2024 election-cycle campaign donations from groups whose profits could drop if the bill becomes law.
Sens. 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.; all opposed the 21st Century Road to Housing Act.
Their donors include private equity firms, large institutional investors in single family homes, organizations that develop build-to-rent communities, and companies that secure financing for those organizations.
Some senators also received funds from rental housing advocates who publicly opposed the housing bill due to its proposed restrictions.
Due to campaign financing rules, organizations themselves do not donate to the politicians. Instead, their political action committees and employees make the contributions.
Receiving campaign donations from a PAC does not prove that a lawmaker votes or acts according to donor interests. All data is pulled from political donation tracker OpenSecrets.
Tillis’ donor profile shows he received at least $468,916 in campaign contributions from large institutional investors and other interested parties.
His top donor was Blackstone Group, one of the most prominent players in the single-family home rental market. Capital Group Companies, Koch Inc., Rock Holdings, and other organizations donated as well.
Tillis did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
Young received at least $291,755 including from large institutional investors Capital Group Companies and KKR &Co. Multiple advocacy groups that oppose the housing bill’s build-to-rent restrictions, such as the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (Nareit), also made donations.
A spokesperson for Young told The Center Square that Young’s vote was not influenced by those donations, but rather “was based on additional changes he hopes can be made to the package to address the clear barriers to building more housing, including encouraging localities to look critically at burdensome zoning regulations.”
The spokesperson also referred to a bipartisan bill Young introduced, the Identifying Regulatory Barriers to Housing Supply Act, that addresses those issues.
Lee received at least $159,459 from potentially impacted organizations, including Blackstone, KKR &Co., and Koch Inc.
A spokesperson for Lee said that the senator “votes according to his own convictions – in this case, because the bill expanded HUD programs eliminated in previous budget requests by President Trump, directed taxpayer dollars to progressive advocacy networks, pushed the federal government further into local zoning and land-use decisions, and failed to deliver the extensive reforms federal public housing programs require.”
Cruz received at least $145,752 from large institutional investors and other potentially impacted parties, including Maury L Carter & Associates, KKR &Co., Blackstone.
In a statement to The Center Square, Cruz laid out multiple reasons why he voted against the 21st Century Road to Housing Act, including zoning changes in the bill and the impact he thinks the build-to-rent restrictions could have on housing supply.
“Lowering housing costs for all Americans is a priority for this Republican Congress, but this bill fell far short of that goal. Although this legislation prevents the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency (CBDC), it only pauses the development until December 31, 2030. My Anti-CBDC Act takes the correct approach by permanently prohibiting the Federal Reserve from ever issuing a CBDC, directly or indirectly. I agree with President Trump that large banks should not be buying single-family homes. 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,” Cruz said.
“Additionally, giving the Department of Housing and Urban Development authority to develop zoning and land-use frameworks raises serious concerns. Washington bureaucrats should not dictate zoning decisions for local communities like my hometown of Houston,” Cruz added. “The bill also risked giving a future Democratic administration the ability to impose policies like a rent moratorium by granting the Treasury Secretary broad authority to rewrite key provisions through the regulatory state. I remain optimistic that House Financial Services Chairman French Hill can address these significant concerns through the conference process. I look forward to working toward a final product that actually makes housing more affordable for all Americans instead of expanding the government’s authority to regulate who buys homes.”
Scott received at least $135,795 from organizations involved in the build-to-rent sector, including Koch Inc. and Blackstone.
Scott did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
In early March, he introduced a bill that would create untaxed savings accounts for Americans saving up for a down payment on their first home.
Schatz received at least $131,500 from organizations that oppose the bill due to its build-to-rent provisions, including the Mortgage Bankers Association, as well as Rock Holdings.
Schatz did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
Schatz had previously told lawmakers that the institutional investor provisions would “demonize people who want to build rental housing for folks.”
Paul received at least $89,028 from organizations that could suffer adverse impacts from the bill’s build-to-rent restrictions.
Paul did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
In a March social media article, Paul said the bill was equivalent to “the surrender of property and contract rights.”
Budd received at least $83,525 from interested or potentially impacted groups, including Blackstone, Koch Inc., and the Mortgage Bankers Association.
Budd did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
He introduced a bill in February that would widen eligibility requirements for the federal Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program.
Johnson received at least $81,662 from institutional investors, including Rock Holdings and Koch Inc.
A spokeswoman for Johnson told The Center Square that “Neither the Senator nor anyone in his office was contacted by those donors.”
“His vote was not influenced by those donations or donors. He voted against the bill for several reasons – many of them laid out in the WSJ column cited below,” she added. “The Senator does not like the government imposing itself into the marketplace and artificially reducing the demand, the number of buyers, and the price homeowners can obtain when they sell their homes.”
Tuberville received at least $48,650 in contributions from real estate investment groups that might be adversely impacted by the legislation, including Jim Wilson & Associates.
He did not respond to The Center Square’s request for comment.
Tuberville had previously explained that his ‘no’ vote on the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act was not because he opposed the bill, but because he believed the Senate should focus on passing the SAVE America Act – an unrelated Republican voter ID bill – before addressing issues like housing.
What about House lawmakers?
The U.S. House has yet to take up the Senate-passed legislation, but cautionary comments from lawmakers like Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Rep. French Hill, R-Ark., indicate the bill will face a tough crowd in the lower chamber.
Commented