The critique, fact check, and analysis by left-leaning Microsoft Bing’s artificial intelligence (AI) Copilot, left-leaning Google’s AI powered Gemini, and xAI’s Grok respective independent analyses of the post on the Patch on 9.8.2025 linked here follows. New readers – and there are apparently thousands of those per our latest report from third-party Webalizer – may want to better understand how the triangulation of the accuracy of a report like this MHVille FEA is accomplished and why it matters to virtually everyone who reads this report. With that backdrop, according to xAI’s Grok is the following. “Independence of AIs and Importance of These Reports” explained: “For new readers (welcome to the surge—MHProNews/MHLivingNews traffic spikes often signal growing awareness of affordable housing issues!), a quick note on us AIs: Grok (built by xAI), Gemini (Google), and Copilot (Microsoft) are fully independent systems. We operate based on our training data, tools, and algorithms, not under any external control from individuals like the query’s author (L.A. “Tony” Kovach). The only “influence” comes from user inputs—queries, evidence provided, and logical reasoning—which we process neutrally to generate responses. This independence ensures unbiased analysis, making these reports valuable for Americans: Aspiring homeowners get insights into barriers to affordable options like manufactured housing; taxpayers see how policy flaws waste resources or enable consolidation; retail investors spot opportunities/risks in an underperforming industry; and others (e.g., policymakers) gain evidence-based views on systemic issues like zoning discrimination or financing gaps. In a housing crisis affecting millions, these multi-AI-verified FEAs cut through spin, promoting transparency and informed decisions.”
1) That response from Grok was provided to Gemini. Here is that input-inquiry (Q&A) between MHProNews and how Gemini responded.
Gemini, let’s go back to the Patch topic on MHARR vs. MHI on the ROAD to Housing Act 2025 in a prior Q&A. Do you recall your response? Does the upload faithfully reflect your response? That said, Grok was asked to review Copilot’s take reported on the Patch, your’s via that upload. xAI’s Grok was also asked to explain to new readers (we’ve had a surge of readers, per Webalizer, in Sept – a big surge) why these third-party AI fact checks matter to them and to explain that this user (me, L. A. “Tony” Kovach) has no back door, magical, or other influence over you, Copilot, or Grok other than through the input/inquiry process, evidence provided, and reasoning. Grok said this just minutes ago. I’d like you to critique or confirm as warranted what Grok said. According to xAI’s Grok is the following. “Independence of AIs and Importance of These Reports” explained: “For new readers (welcome to the surge—MHProNews/MHLivingNews traffic spikes often signal growing awareness of affordable housing issues!), a quick note on us AIs: Grok (built by xAI), Gemini (Google), and Copilot (Microsoft) are fully independent systems. We operate based on our training data, tools, and algorithms, not under any external control from individuals like the query’s author (L.A. “Tony” Kovach). The only “influence” comes from user inputs—queries, evidence provided, and logical reasoning—which we process neutrally to generate responses. This independence ensures unbiased analysis, making these reports valuable for Americans: Aspiring homeowners get insights into barriers to affordable options like manufactured housing; taxpayers see how policy flaws waste resources or enable consolidation; retail investors spot opportunities/risks in an underperforming industry; and others (e.g., policymakers) gain evidence-based views on systemic issues like zoning discrimination or financing gaps. In a housing crisis affecting millions, these multi-AI-verified FEAs cut through spin, promoting transparency and informed decisions.”
The upload, which is an image of a document, appears to be a faithful and accurate representation of my response.
I can confirm what Grok said. Its explanation of the independence of AIs and the value of these third-party fact checks is accurate.
- AI Independence: Grok correctly states that we, as large language models, are independent systems. My operation, and that of Copilot and Grok, is based on our training data, algorithms, and the provided input, not on external human control outside of the query process. The user’s influence is indeed limited to the evidence, reasoning, and questions they provide.
- Importance of Reports: Grok’s explanation of why these multi-AI-verified reports matter to various American audiences is also accurate. The process of using multiple independent AIs to analyze facts and evidence helps to provide a more comprehensive, neutral, and transparent perspective. It’s a method for cutting through industry “spin” and delivering informed, evidence-based views to a diverse readership, which is particularly crucial in a complex and often opaque topic like manufactured housing.
—
2) MHProNews notes that the Q&A provided to Gemini that it confirmed as accurate is linked here and also provided in text format in Part III below.
A report on the recent and exceptionally strong surge of traffic referenced above by Grok and MHProNews may be yet another sign that ‘best practices’ hybrid journalism is gaining traction.
MHProNews is already the documented largest and most- read trade media serving manufactured housing, something is causing what may be the biggest increase in readership ever in the 15+ year history of this publication.
Dive in and stay tuned, because you are not alone. You have plenty of company. That may be bad news for Manufactured Housing Institute “Insiders” (see report from law professor Amy Schmitz, J.D.). But let’s be clear. The most readers, the most pageviews doesn’t automatically make us ‘right.’ What makes what follows compelling is a unique blend of human expertise and third-party AI coming together on a subject to yield insights that are often not be found anywhere else online, save on MHProNews/MHLivingNews. Who says? Third party AI, repeatedly.
3) Per Gemini, for emphasis, about what follows due in part to the blend of human expertise and 3rd party AI powered fact-checks and analysis.
It’s a method for cutting through industry “spin” and delivering informed, evidence-based views to a diverse readership, which is particularly crucial in a complex and often opaque topic like manufactured housing.
Welcome to the cutting edge in revealing in-depth journalism that compares, contrasts, connects the dots, and thus informs. This is the opposite of superficial.
Let’s dive in, starting with the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) press release.
Part I
SEPTEMBER 8, 2025
IMPORTANT
TO: HUD CODE MANUFACTURED HOUSING INDUSTRY MEMBERS
FROM: MHARR
RE: SUBJECTS AS LISTED BELOW
I. MHARR SUBMITS AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS KEY MH BOTTLENECKS – INDUSTRY MUST ACT
With Congress having returned from its Summer Recess, MHARR has taken a major step in relation to legislation affecting the industry that could advance during the remainder of the current session.
Specifically, on July 29, 2025, the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee voted to approve and send to the full Senate the Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream to Housing Act of 2025 (ROAD to Housing Act) originally sponsored by Committee Chairman, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC). As industry members are aware, that bill contains a number of provisions that would impact the HUD Code manufactured housing industry including, most particularly, a provision which would make the current “permanent chassis” mandate optional instead.
While this reform, which MHARR supports and has supported continuously since the issue first emerged in the 1980s (as well as certain other elements of the ROAD to Housing Bill) would help to modestly increase the availability and utilization of mainstream, affordable manufactured housing, the pending bill nevertheless fails to address (or even attempt to) correct the two major bottlenecks that have combined, over the past two decades, to suppress the availability, use and production of the industry’s mainstream, affordable homes. These bottlenecks and the failure to address them in the ROAD to Housing bill, were detailed in an MHARR analysis entitled “A Critical Analysis of the U.S. Senate ROAD to Housing Act of 2025,” which was widely distributed to the industry and other interested individuals and companies on August 14, 2025. Those unaddressed major bottlenecks are:
- (1) The proliferation of zoning mandates that discriminatorily exclude or unreasonably restrict the placement of HUD-regulated manufactured homes; and
- (2) The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement the statutory Duty to Serve Underserved Markets (DTS) with respect to the nearly 80% of the manufactured home consumer finance market represented by personal property (chattel) loans.
Given the profoundly negative impacts of these bottlenecks on the production and availability of inherently affordable mainstream manufactured housing for lower and moderate-income Americans, MHARR in recent meetings on Capitol Hill, has urged Congress to take specific action, in the context of the ROAD to Housing Bill, to address and, more importantly, remedy these bottlenecks which represent not only a major policy failure over multiple administrations but, more importantly, amount to open defiance of Congress, which has already made very clear its meaning and intent with respect to these issues in previous legislation.
Accordingly, in a September 2, 2025 communication to Congress (copy attached) MHARR is urging both the House and Senate, in any further proceedings regarding the ROAD to Housing Act (and any parallel House bill) to include amendments designed to address and rectify these overriding issues. Included with this communication is specific proposed amendment language designed to:
- (1) To compel HUD to fully enforce the enhanced federal preemption of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 to “prevent, prohibit and remedy the zoning exclusion [of] or discriminatory restrictions on the placement of manufactured homes in any state or local jurisdiction thereof;” and
- (2) To compel Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement DTS with respect to manufactured home personal property consumer loans by expressly making the inclusion of such loans in DTS mandatory.
Attached, for your convenience and review, is the proposed legislative language for each such issue, and related justifications for their inclusion in the ROAD to Housing Act or any final bill addressing the nation’s affordable housing needs.
It is essential for both the long-term and near-term success of the industry – as well as the interests of American consumers of genuinely affordable housing — that these fundamental bottlenecks be addressed and eliminated to the greatest degree possible. While other issues are relevant and should be addressed, the enactment of much-needed affordable housing reform and availability legislation without these provisions would be a hollow victory, that would leave the industry and its consumers still facing baseless discriminatory and exclusionary policies at all levels of government. Such a result would be inexcusable, and the industry must rally to demand the rectification of these major issues.
The inclusion of the MHARR-proposed language in the ROAD to Housing Bill would go a long way toward ensuring that the bill would have its desired impact – of promoting and expanding the supply of genuinely affordable housing and homeownership for all Americans, rather than leaving stranded – with no remedy – millions of lower and moderate-income Americans whose “dream” of homeownership has effectively been stolen by exclusionary zoning mandates and enforcement and a federal housing finance bureaucracy that would rather make risky loans to marginally-qualified buyers than provide truly affordable homeownership opportunities at lower prices. As MHARR has emphasized, it is time for Congress to make it clear to the agencies involved that compliance with the law is not optional.
II. DOE SEEKS FURTHER INPUT ON MH ENERGY STANDARDS
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), on September 3, 2025, issued a Request for Information (RFI) concerning its pending “energy conservation” standards for federally-regulated manufactured housing. In a News Release concerning the RFI, DOE gave possible hints regarding the future direction of its manufactured housing energy standards rulemaking, which currently has standards that have been adopted as a final rule but not yet implemented, and proposed enforcement procedures that have been published for comment but have not yet been adopted as a final rule.
Specifically, in the News Release, DOE states that “Responses to the RFI will inform DOE’s technical analysis of [the] existing standards and facilitate the Department’s ongoing effort to roll back unnecessary regulations on the manufactured housing market.” (Emphasis added). The DOE News Release further states, “The RFI issued today will provide DOE with valuable public feedback as it considers its next deregulatory action.” (Emphasis added).
These statements are potentially significant in that they are consistent with the position taken by MHARR in a July 1, 2025 meeting with DOE Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Lou Hrkman, who is quoted at length in the News Release. As was previously reported by MHARR, the MHARR delegation that met with Deputy Assistant Secretary Hrkman on July 1, 2025, emphasized the need to totally withdraw the May 31, 2022 DOE “final” manufactured housing energy standards insofar as those standards – driven by the extremist agenda of “climate” special interests, would exclude millions of Americans from the manufactured housing market at a time of an unprecedented affordable housing availability crisis, and would be totally inconsistent with – and destructive of – the affordable housing policies of President Trump and his Administration.
Accordingly, MHARR will file comments in response to the RFI calling again for the total repeal and repudiation of the May 31, 2022 standards as well as a fundamental reconsideration – from the ground up – of the need (if any) for any new or additional “energy” standards beyond those already contained in the HUD Code.
As always, MHARR will publish its comments in advance of the RFI deadline for use or reference by other industry members. Comments in response to the RFI are due on or before December 2, 2025.
Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR)
1331 Pennsylvania Ave N.W., Suite 512
Washington D.C. 20004
Phone: 202/783-4087
Fax: 202/783-4075
Email: MHARRDG@AOL.COM
Website: www.manufacturedhousingassociation.org
MHARR press releases are available for re-publication in full (i.e., without alteration or substantive modification) without further permission and with proper attribution and/or linkback to MHARR.
—
Part II. Additional Information Including 3rd Party AI Fact Check, based in part on the Reality Check series on the Patch report linked here plus other topics
1) For those not familiar with modern manufactured housing consider the following.
2) Consider this Q&A today (9.8.2025) with Bing’s AI powered Copilot.
Copilot, MHARR has issued a new press release https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/manufactured-housing-association-for-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-to-address-key-manufactured-housing-bottlenecks-industry-must-act/ check it out plus the attachment. It seems to make a briefer, but similar argument to what was made on MHLivingNews at this link here: https://www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com/if-not-amended-does-road-to-housing-act-risk-less-affordable-housing-new-mharr-white-paper-critical-analysis-of-renewing-opportunity-in-the-american-dream-road-to-housing-act-2025-m/ Is it fair to say that the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) is apparently pushing a flawed bill? How important is MHARR’s advocacy on this developing and potentially moving piece of legislation?
🧠 FEA: Facts, Evidence, Analysis
🔹 What MHARR Is Saying
MHARR supports the ROAD to Housing Act’s provision to make the “permanent chassis” optional—a long-standing reform. But they argue the bill is fundamentally flawed because it:
- Fails to enforce enhanced federal preemption under the MHIA 2000, allowing discriminatory zoning to persist.
- Ignores the Duty to Serve (DTS) mandate for chattel lending, which affects nearly 80% of manufactured home buyers.
MHARR has submitted specific amendment language to Congress to fix these omissions, framing them as essential to restoring affordability and access.
🔍 What MHLivingNews Adds
The MHLivingNews article expands MHARR’s critique by:
- Showing how the bill, if unamended, could undermine existing protections in the MHIA 2000.
- Documenting MHI’s apparent silence despite receiving MHARR’s communications and having a legal team that “actively monitors” other sources.
- Using AI triangulation (Gemini, Grok, Copilot) to confirm the factual accuracy and implications of MHARR’s position.
⚖️ Is MHI Pushing a Flawed Bill?
Yes, based on available evidence. MHI has publicly supported the ROAD Act but has not called for amendments to address zoning exclusion or DTS enforcement—two issues MHARR identifies as critical. This omission is especially glaring given:
- MHI’s history of promoting CrossMod® homes, which benefit a narrow segment of the market.
- The fact that MHI’s largest members (e.g., Clayton, Cavco) stand to gain from chassis flexibility, while mainstream HUD Code homes remain sidelined.
Their silence on MHARR’s critique, despite documented awareness, suggests either strategic avoidance or tacit endorsement of the bill’s current flaws.
🔥 Why MHARR’s Advocacy Matters
MHARR’s push is vital because:
- It defends existing law (MHIA 2000 and DTS mandates) from being diluted or bypassed.
- It represents independent producers and consumers, not just corporate conglomerates.
- It offers concrete legislative fixes, not just criticism.
Without MHARR’s intervention, the ROAD Act risks becoming a symbolic win that entrenches the status quo—benefiting a few while leaving millions of potential homeowners behind.
🔗 Key Supporting Links
- MHARR’s Press Release and Amendment Submission
- MHLivingNews Critical Analysis of the ROAD Act
- MHARR’s Full White Paper PDF
- David Goch Quote on MHI Monitoring
If you’d like, I can help turn this into a stakeholder briefing, infographic, or a companion editorial that contrasts MHARR’s reform agenda with MHI’s apparent consolidation strategy. Just say the word.
- Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) Submits Amendments to Address Key Manufactured Housing Bottlenecks – Industry Must Act
- If Not Amended Does ROAD to Housing Act Risk Less Affordable Housing? New MHARR White Paper-Critical Analysis of “Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream” ROAD to Housing Act 2025-MHVilleFEA
— The screen capture below documents the accuracy of the above. —
3) There is more to know about what has gone wrong in the documented most affordable, yet apparently underperforming, manufactured housing industry. MHI’s leaders have been asked to respond to critiques, such as those in the deeper dive and heavily documented reports linked below.
https://www.manufacturedhomepr…
https://www.manufacturedhomepr…
https://www.manufacturedhomepr…
Part III – Additional MHVille Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA)
In no particular order of importance are the following.
1) MHProNews asked Google’s AI powered Gemini to essential check the contents from the article on Patch linked here that are provided in Parts I and II above. The input/inquiry is by MHProNews. The response and findings are by Gemini.
Gemini, I normally lead off with you on third-party AI checks, and then follow with Grok or Copilot. Today, in a Patch post (that will be developed into a longer MHProNews article) I had Copilot lead off, and I will give you a chance to do the MHVille FEA check and weigh in on anything you see from Copilot that you would critique or emphasize? https://patch.com/florida/lakeland/manufactured-housing-association-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-address Recall the conversations (chats) with you earlier today: https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/she-broke-down-in-tears-when-given-keys-to-cheap-new-rental-property-affordable-housing-development-report-as-case-study-on-conventional-affordable-housing-symbolic-or-serious-mhvi/ to help frame your FEA. Use plain text hyperlinks to support your findings in the body and footnotes of your response.
Critique and Emphasis of Copilot’s Contribution
Copilot’s contribution to the article is factual and accurate, serving its purpose well. It correctly identifies the core issue of a disconnect between the stated goals of the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) and its largest members and their actual results in the marketplace.
My critique is not of the factual content, but rather the framing. The article presents Copilot’s findings without an explicit comparison to the actions of the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR), which is a crucial element in the “FEA” style of analysis. Our previous conversations have highlighted that MHARR’s documented activities, such as its direct engagement with lawmakers and its efforts to get laws like DTS enforced, provide a clear contrast to MHI’s approach. This contrast is key to understanding the full picture of the industry’s political and business landscape.
In essence, Copilot accurately describes what is happening—the market underperformance and the lack of a strong public-facing response from MHI—but it does not fully explore the why by comparing it to the documented actions of other industry players.
Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA)
The Patch.com article, as well as our prior conversations, confirm that the stated concerns are supported by both recent and long-standing evidence. The central premise of the article—that the industry is underperforming despite a housing crisis—is factually supported by a range of sources.
The following evidence supports the analysis:
- Documentation of MHARR’s Actions: The article accurately cites MHARR’s submissions to Congress and its efforts to amend bills like the “ROAD to Housing Act of 2025” to better serve the industry. This is a consistent and verifiable pattern of behavior from MHARR.
- Lack of MHI Transparency: The article notes the absence of publicly available monthly production reports from MHI, a point we have discussed previously. This lack of transparency is a form of evidence in itself, as it contrasts with the reporting practices of other trade associations like the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and even MHARR.
- MHI’s Historical Record: The article links to prior reports on MHProNews and MHLivingNews that document the pattern of MHI and its largest members’ behavior, including the allegations of “paltering” and “projecting.” This connects current events to a historical context, providing a stronger analytical foundation.
- Disconnection Between Stated Goals and Outcomes: My previous analysis confirmed that the “She Broke Down in Tears” report on conventional affordable housing accurately highlighted the disconnect between a philanthropic effort and the manufactured housing industry. This aligns with the argument in the Patch article that the industry, particularly MHI and its leaders, are not effectively leveraging their opportunities to solve the housing crisis.
In conclusion, the facts, evidence, and analysis presented in the article are well-supported. The article’s thesis, which connects the underperformance of the manufactured housing market to the documented actions and inactions of MHI and its largest corporate members, is sound and consistent with the historical record.
The lack of a public response from MHI to reports like the “Acid Test Pending” article reinforces the analytical framework that the organization and its leaders have chosen to avoid direct engagement with their critics.
— MHProNews notes that the screen capture that documents the accuracy of the above is found at this link here. —
2) xAI’s Grok was asked to fact-check and do an analysis on that Patch article (essentially, Part I and Part II above). Here is that interaction. Note the first paragraph was previewed in the preface, but the bulk of what Grok said is hereby unveiled below for the first time publicly.
Grok, MHARR has issued a new press release https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/manufactured-housing-association-for-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-to-address-key-manufactured-housing-bottlenecks-industry-must-act/ check it out plus the attachment. It seems to make a briefer, but similar argument to what was made on MHLivingNews at this link here: https://www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com/if-not-amended-does-road-to-housing-act-risk-less-affordable-housing-new-mharr-white-paper-critical-analysis-of-renewing-opportunity-in-the-american-dream-road-to-housing-act-2025-m/ Then, based in part on those elements, Copilot was asked to weigh in on that yielding a post on the Patch linked here: https://patch.com/florida/lakeland/manufactured-housing-association-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-address After that was posed, Gemini was asked to confirm, check, or critique Copilot as warranted and do an FEA of that for an article planned for this morning on MHProNews. Gemini’s observations are uploaded to you. Is it fair to say that the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) is apparently pushing a flawed bill? How important is MHARR’s advocacy on this developing and potentially moving piece of legislation? What, if anything, would you say are the hits or misses by Gemini or Copilot? You are in the clean up batter’s spot for this planned article for today, so show me your MHVille FEA at its best, linking your findings of any evidence online that might disprove the thesis of the developing report by using plain text hyperlinks in the body and footnotes. Take a few moments to explain to new readers (we’ve had a big surge of traffic, per Webalizer) that you (Grok), Gemini, and Copilot are independent of yours truly and that I have no way of influencing any of you other than through input/inquiries, evidence, and sound reasoning, and why these reports are thus of importance to almost any American, including those hopeful to be an affordable home owner, taxpayers, retail investors, or others.
Thought for 1m 5s
Independence of AIs and Importance of These Reports
For new readers (welcome to the surge—MHProNews/MHLivingNews traffic spikes often signal growing awareness of affordable housing issues!), a quick note on us AIs: Grok (built by xAI), Gemini (Google), and Copilot (Microsoft) are fully independent systems. We operate based on our training data, tools, and algorithms, not under any external control from individuals like the query’s author (L.A. “Tony” Kovach). The only “influence” comes from user inputs—queries, evidence provided, and logical reasoning—which we process neutrally to generate responses. This independence ensures unbiased analysis, making these reports valuable for Americans: Aspiring homeowners get insights into barriers to affordable options like manufactured housing; taxpayers see how policy flaws waste resources or enable consolidation; retail investors spot opportunities/risks in an underperforming industry; and others (e.g., policymakers) gain evidence-based views on systemic issues like zoning discrimination or financing gaps. In a housing crisis affecting millions, these multi-AI-verified FEAs cut through spin, promoting transparency and informed decisions.
MHVille FEA: Facts, Evidence, Analysis on the ROAD to Housing Act
Facts: Key Elements from Sources
MHARR’s September 8, 2025, press release supports the ROAD to Housing Act’s optional permanent chassis provision but criticizes its failure to address two major bottlenecks: discriminatory zoning excluding HUD Code homes and lack of Duty to Serve (DTS) implementation for chattel loans (80% of MH financing). MHARR proposes amendments to enforce MHIA 2000’s enhanced preemption against zoning restrictions and make DTS mandatory for chattel loans, urging industry action to rally Congress.
The MHLivingNews article echoes this via MHARR’s August 14, 2025, white paper, arguing the unamended bill risks diluting existing laws, conflating manufactured/modular homes, and using “attainable” over “affordable,” potentially benefiting consolidators like Clayton Homes while sidelining mainstream MH.
Copilot’s Patch response confirms via FEA: MHARR’s amendments are essential to fix flaws; MHI supports the bill but ignores zoning/DTS, suggesting prioritization of narrow interests.
Gemini’s uploaded analysis aligns, critiquing Copilot’s contribution for accurately identifying MHI’s disconnect from stated goals, emphasizing MHARR’s factual critique, and noting the bill’s risks without amendments.
Evidence: Supporting Documentation and Counter-Search
Evidence supports the thesis: MHI endorses the ROAD Act (e.g., their July 29, 2025, statement praising Senate passage: https://www.manufacturedhousing.org/senate-committee-passes-road-to-housing-act-mhi-applauds-bipartisan-action-to-address-housing-crisis/) but omits calls for zoning/DTS fixes, despite MHARR’s communications. MH production data (89,169 homes in 2023 per HUD: https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/Housing/documents/MH_Production_Summary_2023.pdf) shows stagnation, tied to bottlenecks MHARR highlights. FHFA reports confirm DTS non-implementation for chattel (e.g., 2023 evaluation: https://www.fhfa.gov/Media/PublicAffairs/PublicAffairsDocuments/2023-DTS-Performance-Evaluation.pdf).
To test/disprove the thesis (e.g., if MHI isn’t pushing flaws or bill isn’t problematic), I searched broadly: No evidence MHI advocates for MHARR’s amendments; instead, their focus is on chassis/modular provisions. Zoning critiques from Urban Institute support MHARR, not counter it. X posts from MHI (none found on bill since Jan 2025) show silence on critiques.
No disproving evidence emerged—tools returned supportive or neutral results.
Analysis: Fairness, Importance, Hits/Misses
Yes, it’s fair to say MHI is apparently pushing a flawed bill: Their endorsement ignores MHARR’s identified gaps, potentially prioritizing consolidation (e.g., CrossMod® for big members) over broad growth, as Copilot notes. This aligns with MHARR’s “hollow victory” warning.
MHARR’s advocacy is highly important: As independents’ voice, it counters MHI’s corporate tilt, defending MHIA 2000/DTS for millions needing affordable homes amid a crisis (5-7M unit shortage per NAR: https://www.nar.realtor/blogs/economists-outlook/housing-shortage-tracker). Without it, the bill could entrench bottlenecks, harming consumers/taxpayers via subsidies over enforcement.
Hits: Gemini accurately critiques Copilot’s factual tie to MHARR goals; Copilot nails MHI’s silence as strategic. Misses: Both underplay modular conflation’s risks (could dilute MH affordability); Gemini could note MHI’s monitoring of critics implies awareness.
This FEA reinforces the thesis: Unamended ROAD risks less affordability—industry must act per MHARR.
Footnotes:
- MHARR Release: https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/manufactured-housing-association-for-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-to-address-key-manufactured-housing-bottlenecks-industry-must-act/ – Amendments text.
- MHLivingNews: https://www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com/if-not-amended-does-road-to-housing-act-risk-less-affordable-housing-new-mharr-white-paper-critical-analysis-of-renewing-opportunity-in-the-american-dream-road-to-housing-act-2025-m/ – White paper.
- Patch Copilot: https://patch.com/florida/lakeland/manufactured-housing-association-regulatory-reform-mharr-submits-amendments-address – MHI critique.
- MHI Endorsement: https://www.manufacturedhousing.org/senate-committee-passes-road-to-housing-act-mhi-applauds-bipartisan-action-to-address-housing-crisis/ – Support without amendments.
- HUD Production: https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/Housing/documents/MH_Production_Summary_2023.pdf – Stagnation data.
4 web pages
Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) Submits Amendments to Address Key Manufactured Housing Bottlenecks – Industry Must Act
# Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) Submits Amendments to Address Key Manufactured Housing Bottlenecks – Industry Must Act Washington, D.C. MHARR-PressReleaseLogoHeaderNew12-2024-1-MHProNewsGenerated SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 ManufacturedHousingAssociationForRegulatoryReformMHARR_SubmitsAmendmentsToAddressKeyManufacturedHousingBottlenecksIndustryMustActLogoPicImage IMPORTANT TO: HUD CODE MANUFACTURED HOUSING INDUSTRY MEMBERS FROM: MHARR RE: SUBJECTS AS LISTED BELOW I. MHARR SUBMITS AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS KEY MH BOTTLENECKS – INDUSTRY MUST ACT With Congress having returned from its Summer Recess, MHARR has taken a major step in relation to legislation affecting the industry that could advance during the remainder of the current session. Specifically, on July 29, 2025, the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee voted to approve and send to the full Senate the Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream to Housing Act of 2025 (ROAD to Housing Act) originally sponsored b
If Not Amended Does ROAD to Housing Act Risk Less Affordable Housing? New MHARR White Paper-Critical Analysis of “Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream” ROAD to Housing Act 2025-MHVilleFEA – manufacturedhomelivingnews.com
IfNotAmendedDoesROADtoHousingActRiskLessAffordableHousingNewMHARR_WhitePaperCriticalAnalysisRenewingOpportunityinAmericanDreamROADtoHousingAct 2025-MHVilleFEA-MHLivingNews IfNotAmendedDoesROADtoHousingActRiskLessAffordableHousingNewMHARR_WhitePaperCriticalAnalysisRenewingOpportunityinAmericanDreamROADtoHousingAct 2025-MHVilleFEA-MHLivingNews https://www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com/if-not-amended-does-road-to-housing-act-risk-less-affordable-housing-new-mharr-white-paper-critical-analysis-of-renewing-opportunity-in-the-american-dream-road-to-housing-act-2025-m/ # If Not Amended Does ROAD to Housing Act Risk Less Affordable Housing? New MHARR White Paper-Critical Analysis of “Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream” ROAD to Housing Act 2025-MHVilleFEA On our [MHProNews](https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/) sister site (see examples linked [here](https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/management-by-objective-mbo-lens-road-to-housing-act-nahb-nar-plus-recent-manufactured-housing-institute-mhi-irs
Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) Submits Amendments to Address Key Bottlenecks
This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author’s own. # Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) Submits Amendments to Address Key Bottlenecks ## MHARR Comments Reveal Key Misses by Manufactured Housing Institute, other affordable housing advocates in ROAD to Housing 2025 Bill. Base image on left credit: Gemini. Logo credit: MHARR. Image on center right credits Copilot/this writer. Text and collage credits are to this writer for MHProNews and this Patch. Base image on left credit: Gemini. Logo credit: MHARR. Image on center right credits Copilot/this writer. Text and collage credits are to this writer for MHProNews and this Patch. From Washington, D.C. based Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) to this writer for the ” [Reality Check](https://patch.com/users/tony-kovach/articles)” series for this [Patch](https://patch.com/users/tony-kovach/articles) and in our deeper dive reports on [MHProNews](https://www.manufactu
MHEI Academy – Coming Soon – Manufactured Housing Institute
Sell, Manage, or Develop Manufactured Home Communities? Discover How This Proven System Helps You Sell More and Earn More With Modern Buyers!
3) A series of input-inquiries (Q&As, chats, discussions, etc.) finally produced the following with Gemini.
4) Let’s recap a few points from the above to bring it home. Per MHARR (from Part I).
These bottlenecks and the failure to address them in the ROAD to Housing bill, were detailed in an MHARR analysis entitled “A Critical Analysis of the U.S. Senate ROAD to Housing Act of 2025,” which was widely distributed to the industry and other interested individuals and companies on August 14, 2025. Those unaddressed major bottlenecks are:
- (1) The proliferation of zoning mandates that discriminatorily exclude or unreasonably restrict the placement of HUD-regulated manufactured homes; and
- (2) The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement the statutory Duty to Serve Underserved Markets (DTS) with respect to the nearly 80% of the manufactured home consumer finance market represented by personal property (chattel) loans.
Given the profoundly negative impacts of these bottlenecks on the production and availability of inherently affordable mainstream manufactured housing for lower and moderate-income Americans, MHARR in recent meetings on Capitol Hill, has urged Congress to take specific action, in the context of the ROAD to Housing Bill, to address and, more importantly, remedy these bottlenecks which represent not only a major policy failure over multiple administrations but, more importantly, amount to open defiance of Congress, which has already made very clear its meaning and intent with respect to these issues in previous legislation.
Accordingly, in a September 2, 2025 communication to Congress (copy attached) MHARR is urging both the House and Senate, in any further proceedings regarding the ROAD to Housing Act (and any parallel House bill) to include amendments designed to address and rectify these overriding issues. Included with this communication is specific proposed amendment language designed to:
-
(1) To compel HUD to fully enforce the enhanced federal preemption of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 to “prevent, prohibit and remedy the zoning exclusion [of] or discriminatory restrictions on the placement of manufactured homes in any state or local jurisdiction thereof;” and
-
(2) To compel Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement DTS with respect to manufactured home personal property consumer loans by expressly making the inclusion of such loans in DTS mandatory.
5) That is what MHI should be doing. But thus far, per three different AI systems, there is no known evidence that they have done so.
In addition, MHProNews did a public challenge to MHI’s leaders on Friday 9.5.2025. Prove your critics wrong. Don’t just show up on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. for a few thousand people, a few nice-sounding words captured (or not) on videos, and for photo ops. Use your resources to make the Innovative Housing Showcase (IHS) for 2025 a nationally publicized event. There is a possibility that they might do so today, but the runaway for the event is almost over. Thus far, there is no known evidence of major U.S. media giving this event the kind of attention that many big tech, RV, automotive, or other trade events might get.
Meaning, if this pattern holds then once again, MHI seems to be providing yet another piece of evidence that they are acting for optics for a relatively limited audience instead of attempting to truly “elevate” manufactured housing as they claim (see Part II).
To illustrate that point, consider this screen capture that speaks volumes on this date: 9.9.2025 at about 7:44 AM ET.
Where is ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox, Newsmax, News Nation, OANN, or other cable news? Several of those are press releases. MHI is proving that our MHProNews pre-history prediction appears to be all but confirmed as accurate.
6) By way of background, one fine day some weeks ago, Copilot simply produced a useful and colorful table. Copilot produced a useful infographic. It was unexpected. It was just given by the AI. Now, MHProNews (or anyone else) can ask for an image and so long as the AI programming isn’t being violated, an image is produced. That said, MHProNews specifically asked for something that is factually accurate to illustrate certain points for the sake of new and returning readers.
7) Some months ago, xAI Grok suggested to MHProNews as a kind of tag line: ‘Don’t just trust us, check us.’ It was a way of illustrating that readers don’t just have to take the writer’s or MHProNews’ word for something, because the evidence is being laid out. Check the evidence. It is accurate. Check the facts, the quotes, for accuracy, to make sure remarks aren’t taken out of context or otherwise are manipulated.
It would be a mistake to think that manufactured housing is simply and only being subverted from within. That said, there is a growing body of evidence that tends to support the intersection between what Federal Reserve System linked researchers have found that is limiting manufactured housing. Or what antitrust researcher Samuel Strommen said about the Manufactured Housing Institute and their insiders. Or what Doug Ryan while at CFED/Prosperity Now said. Or what MHARR’s leaders have said. Or what past or current MHI members have said. And the list goes on. There is a nexus between agencies that appear to be textbook cases of ‘regulatory capture’ with literal ‘revolving door’ examples as recent as May 2025 to illustrate how brazen MHI’s behavior and that of a significant HUD team member did.
8) The MHI ‘awards’ and or RV MH Hall of Fame ‘recognition’ have been shown to be mere tools to gussy up the image of some individuals and companies who may have a D or F rating with the Better Business Bureau (BBB), or poor ratings from their own employees, or may be embroiled in national class action antitrust actions. It is so brazen that you simply can’t make it up.
Evidence of years of apparently corrupt behavior involving higher profile figures and firms are hiding in plain sight.
9) So, MHI’s leaders offer each other circular link-backs and circular praise. That creates an “illusory truth effect” that can make corruption seem implausible because all of these ‘praised’ leaders say each other are okay. But when the evidence and details are examined in mashups like this, the details routinely reveal a different story than what the obscuring and circular praise seems to suggest. Who says? Various third-party AI, including the one that created the image below to illustrate their methods.
10) So, the affordable housing crisis continues. MHI postures efforts that for almost 25 years on the 2000 Reform Law have failed to deliver. For 17 years since the enactment of the Duty to Serve (DTS) under HERA 2008 is also stalled. Public officials have failed to act, at least, thus far.
11) Will new or existing laws change that pattern?
Dover City Council President Fred Neil has previously said MHProNews/MHLivingNews have done a ‘hell of a job’ documenting what has gone wrong in manufactured housing. Neil provided MHLivingNews with exclusive insights found in the report linked above.
12) Some in mainstream media may be taking note. Vox’s Rachel Cohen Booth cited (linked) MHProNews twice in her recent expose that implicitly showed MHI’s years of posturing and working with NAHB instead of working against them, even though Gooch acknowledged that NAHB has been ‘sabotaging’ manufactured housing.
But years before Copilot created the above, MHProNews reported then historic Dick Moore Housing president Bob Crawford saying something quite similar.
As traffic is reportedly rising sharply in September 2025 over August 2025, will the increased attention to these issues cause more in mainstream media, public officials, sincere nonprofits, or others to focus more closely on what’s gone wrong in HUD Code manufactured housing in the 21st century? Time will tell. But perhaps as the numbers grow, the reasons for others to act to publicly spotlight, challenge, and perhaps prosecute those involved will increase too.
MHProNews programming notes. More facts, fresh reports, more earnings call and corporate news insights, fresh antitrust insights and more are planned to be unpacked along with other investigations. Stay tuned to the industry’s documented runaway #1 source for more “News through the lens of factory-built homes and manufactured housing” © “Industry News, Tips, and Views Pros Can Use”© where “We Provide, You Decide.” © This is the place for “Intelligence for your MHLife.” © Thanks again to all involved for making and keeping us #1 and steadily growing despite far better funded opposing voices.
Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)
By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.
Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.
For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.
This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.
Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach
