ICYMI: Sen. Tim Scott Highlights the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Evidence from Sources Including Supporters that ‘Housing for the 21st Century Act’ WON’T Solve Housing Crisis. FEA

By / Manufactured and Modular Housing News /

Instead of cheerleading for a bill that fails to address the core issues that have throttled manufactured housing production for over 25 years, the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) ought to be demanding amendments to pending legislation in as deliberate a manner as the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) is doing. NAHB is reportedly pulling support (see X-post below) for the Senate version of the housing legislation due to their concerns that Build to Rent (BTR) construction by investors is going to be harmed by President Donald Trump’s (R) call to ban certain investors from buying single family houses. Agree or not with the NAHB’s reported move, isn’t that arguably the kind of backbone manufactured housing advocacy needs from MHI? Beyond that, intentionally or not, UnidosUS has exposed via Facebook that the revised Senate language in the legislation will only provide a net increase in production/preservation by some 400,000 units in a decade. If so, that would be only 40,000 units a year, or only 800 units average per state, at a time when Pew has estimated a need of 4-7 million units and Gemini has supported estimated needs in the 5-8+ million units. Restated, MHProNews observes that this is analysis only requires simple math. The Housing for the 21st Century Act will utterly fail to close the gap for affordable housing. Indeed, the math reveals the gap could worsen as the U.S. population grows. The facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) of that finding follows in this preface, Parts I and II of this MHVille report.

Programming Notice: a related op-ed by L. A. “Tony” Kovach has been published by WND.com at this link here. Don’t miss it.

1) The following X-posts provide some of the various perspectives on the developing legislation.

 

 

 

 

 

2) Via Facebook, UnidosUS provided apparent support for the bill. But in doing so, when carefully considered, the figures UnidosUS provided undermine the claims of supporters of the Housing for the 21st Century Act, as was noted above. When millions of units are needed, an estimated 400k more units ‘built or preserved’ reveals the crisis will get worse if this legislation is being depended upon in its current form. Thus, amendments are needed.

 

UnidosUSHousingForThe21stCenturyActFacebookPost1.3millionUnitsPreservedOrBuiltOver10YearsMHProNews

 

3) The Senate‘s own 2-page brief asserted the following.

…The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act preempts local zoning decisions.

FACT: By design, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act does not preempt local or state zoning.
This is one reason why the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities support the
bill. Chairman Scott believes zoning decisions are best made locally, not in Washington.

Yet, as Pew research revealed, multiple states have recognized that it is precisely local zoning barriers that are near the heart of the housing crisis underproduction problem.  Several states recognize the need for more inherently affordable manufactured housing.

So, by failing to deal with the barrier of local zoning, by failing to invoke and strengthen federal enhanced preemption, an array of facts and evidence demonstrate that this bill will not work as claimed by its supporters.

4) That said, to provide balance and detail from original source materials, from Senator Tim Scott’s (SC-R) press release in Part I: “So, what you’ll find in this legislation is we start in local jurisdictions, and we start by making sure that both the House, the Senate, Republicans and Democrats, do not see this issue as red versus blue, House versus Senate.” The rhetoric sounds impressive: “Promises made, promises kept.” The term “preempt” is found only 6 times in the legislative language, according to MS WORD’s search tool. there are 33 places where the term “manufactured housing” is used in Senate document called the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.” There are 36 places where the term “manufactured home” appears in that document. The common industry phrase “HUD Code” is curiously not found. “Modular” yields 15 results. The phrase “off-site” yielded 5 results, but “factory built” turned up no results in the search of the sizable document produced by the U.S. Senate and for that body along with the broader public.

The bill could be voted on this week in the Senate.

 

That said, President Donald J. Trump (R) has tossed in a new wrinkle.

From Gemini in Part III in response to the working draft found at this link here.

Analyzing your Monday, March 9, 2026, working draft through the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) lens confirms that your headline concerns are not only supported by current legislative data but are also corroborated by the shifting positions of major trade groups and policy stakeholders. …

Without federal preemption (as sought by MHARR), the bill relies on “voluntary guidelines” and “incentives”(https://www.nlc.org/article/2026/02/13/what-the-housing-for-the-21st-century-and-road-to-housing-acts-mean-for-local-governments/)], which evidence suggests have been ineffective at moving the needle for over 25 years.

Gemini created a useful infographic (see Part III) that states in part that the bill’s proposed ‘solution’ is a ‘drop in the bucket’ compared to the need.

5) This MHVille facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) is underway.

Part I

ICYMI: Sen. Tim Scott highlights the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act

Click here or on the image above to watch the full remarks.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, joined Senate Republican Leadership at a press conference to highlight the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, historic legislation to make the American Dream of becoming a homeowner a reality for hardworking Americans.

Sen. Scott’s remarks below (as delivered):

On the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act framework:

“Promises made, promises kept.

“President Trump made a very important promise on the campaign trail, and we are delivering both the House and the Senate passing historic housing legislation.

“The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act really does meet the need. It focuses on local jurisdictions, number one.

“It removes red tape and unnecessary burdensome processes from the federal government, number two.

“And number three, it creates and will expand housing supply while focusing on affordability.

“It’s so important as a kid who grew up in poverty, my mother became a first-time home buyer at the age of 38. Today in America, that age is 40.”

On the solutions:

“How do we bring those prices down? How do we make it easier for your average person to experience their version of the American Dream through home ownership?

“I think it starts by making sure that Washington understands solutions start at home.

“So, what you’ll find in this legislation is we start in local jurisdictions, and we start by making sure that both the House, the Senate, Republicans and Democrats, do not see this issue as red versus blue, House versus Senate.

“We see this as taking care of Americans who desperately want to experience the American Dream.”

On moving forward:

“We made that possible through legislation that passed the House 399 to 1, passed through the Senate unanimously.

“Now we find ourselves taking 20 to 21 provisions out of the House bill out of 25 and 36 out of our 40 creating in harmony legislation that moves housing forward for the average American, and it’s really good news.”

###

Part II. From the full ’21st Century ROAD to Housing Act text’ linked here.

 

TITLE III—MANUFACTURED HOUSING FOR AMERICA

SEC. 301. HOUSING SUPPLY EXPANSION ACT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 603(6) of the National

Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Stand-

ards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402(6)) is amended by striking ‘‘on a permanent chassis’’ and inserting ‘‘with or without a permanent chassis’’.

4 (b) STANDARDS FOR MANUFACTURED HOMES BUILT 5 WITHOUT A PERMANENT CHASSIS.—Section 604(a) of 6 the National Manufactured Housing Construction and

7 Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5403(a)) is 8 amended by adding the following:

9                                               ‘‘(7) STANDARDS FOR MANUFACTURED HOMES

10 BUILT WITHOUT A PERMANENT CHASSIS.— 11 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in con12 sultation with the consensus committee, shall

  • issue revised standards for manufactured homes
  • built without a permanent chassis using the 15 process described in paragraph (4).

16                                                       ‘‘(B) CREATING FINAL STANDARDS.—The

  • Secretary shall, after consulting and conferring
  • with the consensus committee, establish stand-
  • ards to ensure that manufactured homes with20 out a permanent chassis have—

21                                                             ‘‘(i) a distinct label, with revenue gen-

erated to be deposited into the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund estab-

lished under section 620(e)(1), to be issued by the Secretary distinguishing manufactured home built without a permanent chassis from manufactured homes built on a permanent chassis;

4 ‘‘(ii) a data plate, as described in sec5 tion 3280.5 of title 24, Code of Federal

  • Regulations (or any successor regulation),
  • distinguishing manufactured homes built
  • without a permanent chassis from manu9 factured homes built on a permanent chas-
  • sis; and
  • ‘‘(iii) a notation on any invoice pro-
  • duced by the manufacturer of a manufac13 tured home that is distinguishable from

14 the invoice for a manufactured home con15 structed with a permanent chassis.’’.

16                                       (c) MANUFACTURED HOME CERTIFICATIONS.—Sec-

17 tion 604 of the National Manufactured Housing Construc18 tion and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5403) 19 is amended by adding at the end the following:

20                         ‘‘(i) MANUFACTURED HOME CERTIFICATIONS.—

21                            ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—

‘‘(A) INITIAL CERTIFICATION.—Subject to subparagraph (B), not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the 21st Century

ROAD to Housing Act, a State shall submit to

the Secretary an initial certification that the laws and regulations of the State—

‘‘(i) treat any manufactured home in

  • parity with a manufactured home (as de-
  • fined and regulated by the State); and
  • ‘‘(ii) subject a manufactured home
  • without a permanent chassis to the same
  • laws and regulations of the State as a 9 manufactured home built on a permanent

10 chassis, including with respect to financ11 ing, title, insurance, manufacture, sale,

  • taxes, transportation, installation,       and
  • other areas as the Secretary determines,
  • after consultation with and approval by the
  • consensus committee, are necessary to give 16 effect to the purpose of this section.

17                                  ‘‘(B)        STATE        PLAN              SUBMISSION.—Any

  • State plan submitted under subparagraph (C)
  • shall contain the required State certification
  • under subparagraph (A) and, if contained
  • therein, no additional or State certification

under subparagraph (A) or paragraph (3).

‘‘(C) EXTENDED DEADLINE.—With respect

to a State with a legislature that meets biennially, the deadline for the submission of the ini-

 

tial certification required under subparagraph (A) shall be 2 years after the date of enactment of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.

4 ‘‘(D) LATE CERTIFICATION.— 5 ‘‘(i) NO WAIVER.—The Secretary may 6 not waive the prohibition described in

7 paragraph (5)(B) with respect to a certifi8 cation submitted after the deadline under 9 subparagraph (A) or paragraph (3) unless

  • the Secretary approves the late certifi-

12                                           ‘‘(ii)        RULE       OF            CONSTRUCTION.—

13 Nothing in this subsection shall be con14 strued to prevent a State from submitting

15 the initial certification required under sub16 paragraph (A) after the required deadline 17 under that subparagraph.

18 ‘‘(2) FORM OF STATE CERTIFICATION NOT PRE19 SENTED IN A STATE PLAN.—The initial certification 20 required under paragraph (1)(A), if not submitted

21 with a State plan under paragraph (1)(B), shall contain, in a form prescribed by the Secretary, an attestation by an official that the State has taken the steps necessary to ensure the veracity of the certifi-

cation required under paragraph (1)(A), including, as necessary, by—

‘‘(A) amending the definition of ‘manufac4        tured home’ in the laws and regulations of the

  • State; and
  • ‘‘(B) directing State agencies to amend the
  • definition of ‘manufactured home’ in regula-

9                                                     ‘‘(3) ANNUAL RECERTIFICATION.—Not later

  • than a date to be determined by the Secretary each
  • year, a State shall submit to the Secretary an addi-
  • tional certification that—
  • ‘‘(A) confirms the accuracy of the initial
  • certification submitted under subparagraph (A)
  • or (B) of paragraph (1); and
  • ‘‘(B) certifies that any new laws or regula17 tions enacted or adopted by the State since the
  • date of the previous certification do not change
  • the veracity of the initial certification submitted 20 under paragraph (1)(A).

21                                                     ‘‘(4) LIST.—The Secretary shall publish and

maintain in the Federal Register and on the website of the Department of Housing and Urban Development a list of States that are up to date with the submission of initial and subsequent certifications required under this subsection.

‘‘(5) PROHIBITION.—

4 ‘‘(A) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph, the 5 term ‘covered manufactured home’ means a 6 home that is—

  • ‘‘(i) not considered a manufactured
  • home under the laws and regulations of a 9 State because the home is constructed 10 without a permanent chassis;
  • ‘‘(ii) considered a manufactured home
  • under the definition of the term in section
  • 603; and
  • ‘‘(iii) constructed after the date of en15 actment of the 21st Century ROAD to 16 Housing Act.

17                                  ‘‘(B)          BUILDING,           INSTALLATION,          AND

18 SALE.—If a State does not submit a certifi19 cation under paragraph (1)(A) or (3) by the

  • date on which those certifications are required
  • to be submitted—
  • ‘‘(i) with respect to a State in which
  • the State administers the installation of
  • manufactured homes, the State shall pro25 hibit the manufacture, installation, or sale

 

of a covered manufactured home within the State; and

‘‘(ii) with respect to a State in which

  • the Secretary administers the installation
  • of manufactured homes, the State and the
  • Secretary shall prohibit the manufacture,
  • installation, or sale of a covered manufac8 tured home within the State.’’.

9                                        (d) OTHER FEDERAL LAWS REGULATING MANUFAC-

10 TURED HOMES.—

11         (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Housing 12  and Urban Development may coordinate with the

13 heads of other Federal agencies to ensure that Fed14 eral agencies treat a manufactured home (as defined

  • in Federal laws and regulations other than section
  • 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Con17 struction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42
  • S.C. 5402)) in the same manner as a manufac-
  • tured home (as defined in section 603 of the Na20 tional Manufactured Housing Construction and

21 Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402), as amended by this Act).

(2) ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS.—

(A) MANUFACTURED HOME DEFINED.—In this paragraph, the term ‘‘manufactured home’’ has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Con3 struction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 4 U.S.C. 5402), as amended by this Act.

  • (B) —No energy efficiency
  • standards for manufactured homes developed by
  • any Federal agency shall have legal effect un8 less and until adopted by the Department of 9 Housing and Urban Development pursuant to

10         the consensus standards and regulatory devel11 opment process described in section 604(a)(2)

12 of the National Manufactured Housing Con13 struction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 14 U.S.C. 5403(a)(2)).

15 (C) MINIMUM STANDARDS.—The Secretary 16 of Housing and Urban Development shall— 17 (i) not later than 1 year after the date

  • of enactment of this Act, adopt minimum
  • energy efficiency standards for manufac20 tured homes; and

(ii) not less frequently than once every 3 years after adopting the standards under clause (i), update those standards.

(e) ASSISTANCE TO STATES.—Section 609 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety

Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5408) is amended—

  • (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the
  • end;
  • (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at
  • the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
  • (3) by adding at the end the following:
  • ‘‘(3) model guidance to support the submission
  • of the certification required under section 604(i).’’.
  • (f) PREEMPTION.—Nothing in this section or the 12 amendments made by this section shall be construed as
  • limiting the scope of Federal preemption under section
  • 604(d) of the National Manufactured Housing Construc15 tion and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.
  • 5403(d)).
  • 302. MODULAR HOUSING PRODUCTION ACT.
  • (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
  • (1) MANUFACTURED HOME.—The term ‘‘manu-
  • factured home’’ has the meaning given the term in
  • section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).

(2) MODULAR HOME.—The term ‘‘modular

home’’ means a home that is constructed in a fac-

 

tory in 1 or more modules, each of which meets applicable State and local building codes of the area in which the home will be located, and that are trans-

4 ported to the home building site, installed on foun5 dations, and completed.

6 (3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 7 the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

8 (b) FHA CONSTRUCTION FINANCING PROGRAMS.— 9 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct

10 a review of Federal Housing Administration con11 struction financing programs to identify barriers to 12 the use of modular home methods.

13 (2) REQUIREMENTS.—In conducting the review 14 under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall—

  • (A) identify and evaluate regulatory and
  • programmatic features that restrict participa17 tion in construction financing programs by

18 modular home developers, including construc19 tion draw schedules; and

20                                                         (B) identify administrative measures au-

thorized under section 525 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1735f–3) to facilitate program utilization by modular home devel-

opers.

(3) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish a report that describes the results of the re-

4 view conducted under paragraph (1), which shall in5 clude a description of programmatic and policy

  • changes that the Secretary recommends to reduce or
  • eliminate identified barriers to the use of modular
  • home methods in Federal Housing Administration
  • construction financing programs.

10                            (4) RULEMAKING.—

  • (A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120
  • days after the date on which the Secretary pub-
  • lishes the report under paragraph (3), the Sec14 retary shall initiate a rulemaking to examine an
  • alternative draw schedule for construction fi-
  • nancing loans provided to modular and manu17 factured home developers, which shall include

18 the ability for interested stakeholders to provide 19 robust public comment.

  • (B) DETERMINATION.—Following the pe-
  • riod for public comment under subparagraph

(A), the Secretary shall—

  • issue a final rule regarding an alternative draw schedule described in subparagraph (A); or
  • provide an explanation as to why the rule shall not become final.

(c) STANDARDIZED UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE

  • FOR MODULAR HOMES.—The Secretary may award a
  • grant to study the design and feasibility of a standardized
  • uniform commercial code for modular homes, which shall 7 evaluate—

8 (1) the utility of a standardized coding system 9 for serializing and securing modules, streamlining

10 design and construction, and improving modular 11 home innovation; and

12 (2) a means to coordinate a standardized code 13 with financing incentives.

14 SEC. 303. PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT AND MANUFACTURED 15 HOUSING LOAN MODERNIZATION ACT.

16 (a) NATIONAL HOUSING ACT AMENDMENTS.— 17 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 2 of the National

  • Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1703) is amended—
  • (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ‘‘con-
  • struction of additional or accessory dwelling

units, as defined by the Secretary,’’ after ‘‘energy conserving improvements,’’; and

(B) in subsection (b)— (i) in paragraph (1)—

 

(I) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:

‘‘(A) $75,000 if made for the purpose of financ4            ing alterations, repairs and improvements upon or in

  • connection with an existing single-family structure,
  • including a manufactured home;’’;
  • (II) in subparagraph (B)— 8 (aa) by striking ‘‘$60,000’’ 9 and inserting ‘‘$150,000’’;
  • (bb) by striking ‘‘$12,000’’
  • and inserting ‘‘$37,500’’; and
  • (cc) by striking ‘‘an apart-
  • ment house or’’;
  • (III) by striking subparagraphs
  • (C) and (D) and inserting the fol-
  • lowing:
  • ‘‘(C)(i) $106,405 if made for the purpose of fi-
  • nancing the purchase of a single-section manufac19 tured home; and

20 ‘‘(ii) $195,322 if made for the purpose of financing the purchase of a multi-section manufactured home;

‘‘(D)(i) $149,782 if made for the purpose of financing the purchase of a single-section manufactured home and a suitably developed lot on which to place the home; and

‘‘(ii) $238,699 if made for the purpose of fi-

4 nancing the purchase of a multi-section manufac5 tured home and a suitably developed lot on which to

  • place the home;’’;
  • (IV) in subparagraph (E)— 8 (aa) by striking ‘‘$23,226’’ 9 and inserting ‘‘$43,377’’; and
  • (bb) by striking the period
  • at the end and inserting a semi-
  • colon;
  • (V) in subparagraph (F), by
  • striking ‘‘and’’ at the end;
  • (VI) in subparagraph (G), by
  • striking the period at the end and in17 serting ‘‘; and’’; and

18 (VII) by inserting after subpara19 graph (G) the following:

20                                                    ‘‘(H) such principal amount as the Secretary

may prescribe if made for the purpose of financing the construction of an accessory dwelling unit.’’;

(ii) in the matter immediately preceding paragraph (2)—

  • by striking ‘‘regulation’’ and inserting ‘‘notice’’;
  • by striking ‘‘increase’’ and
  • inserting ‘‘set’’;
  • (III) by striking ‘‘(A)(ii), (C),
  • (D), and (E)’’ and inserting ‘‘(A)
  • through (H)’’;
  • (IV) by inserting ‘‘, or as nec9 essary to achieve the goals of the Fed-
  • eral Housing Administration, periodi-
  • cally reset the dollar amount limita12 tions in subparagraphs (A) through
  • (H) based on justification and meth-
  • odology set forth in advance by regu15 lation’’ before the period at the end;
  • and
  • (V) by adjusting the margins ap18 propriately;

19 (iii) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘ex20 ceeds—’’ and all that follows through the

21                                                        period at the end and inserting ‘‘exceeds

such period of time as determined by the

Secretary, not to exceed 30 years.’’;

(iv) by striking paragraph (9) and inserting the following:

 

‘‘(9) ANNUAL INDEXING OF CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNT LIMITATIONS.—The Secretary shall develop

or choose 1 or more methods of indexing in order to

  • annually set the loan limits established in paragraph
  • (1), based on data the Secretary determines is ap-
  • propriate for purposes of this section.’’; and
  • (v) in paragraph (11), by striking
  • ‘‘lease—’’ and all that follows through the 9 period at the end and inserting ‘‘lease

10 meets the terms and conditions established 11 by the Secretary’’.

12 (2) DEADLINE FOR DEVELOPMENT OR CHOICE 13 OF NEW INDEX; INTERIM INDEX.—

14                                                           (A) DEADLINE FOR DEVELOPMENT OR

  • CHOICE OF NEW INDEX.—Not later than 1 year
  • after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec17 retary of Housing and Urban Development
  • shall develop or choose 1 or more methods of
  • indexing as required under section 2(b)(9) of
  • the National            Housing            Act       (12       S.C.
  • 1703(b)(9)), as amended by paragraph (1) of

this subsection.

(B) INTERIM INDEX.—During the period

beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on the date on which the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development develops or chooses 1 or more methods of indexing as required under section 2(b)(9) of the National

  • Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1703(b)(9)), as
  • amended by paragraph (1) of this subsection,
  • the method of indexing established by the Sec7 retary under such section 2(b)(9) before the 8 date of enactment of this Act shall apply.

9 (b) HUD STUDY OF OFF-SITE CONSTRUCTION.— 10 (1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:

11                                                    (A) OFF-SITE CONSTRUCTION HOUSING.—

12 The term ‘‘off-site construction housing’’ in13 cludes manufactured homes and modular

14                        homes.

15                                                          (B) MANUFACTURED HOME.—The term

16 ‘‘manufactured home’’ means any home con17 structed in accordance with the construction

18 and safety standards established under the Na19 tional Manufactured Housing Construction and

  • Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401
  • et seq.).

(C) MODULAR HOME.—The term ‘‘modular

home’’ means a home that is constructed in a factory in 1 or more modules, each of which meets applicable State and local building codes of the area in which the home will be located, and that are transported to the home building site, installed on foundations, and completed.

  • (2) STUDY.—The Secretary of Housing and
  • Urban Development shall conduct a study and sub6 mit to Congress a report on the cost effectiveness of 7 off-site construction housing, that includes—
  • (A) an analysis of the advantages and the
  • impact of centralization in a factory and trans-
  • portation to a construction site on cost, preci11 sion, and materials waste;

12 (B) the extent to which off-site construc13 tion housing meets housing quality standards

  • under the National Standards for the Physical
  • Inspection of Real Estate, or other standards as
  • the Secretary may prescribe, compared to the 17 extent for site-built homes, for such standards;
  • (C) the expected replacement and mainte-
  • nance costs over the first 40 years of life of off-
  • site construction homes compared to those costs 21 for site-built homes; and

(D) opportunities for use beyond single- family housing, such as applications in accessory dwelling units, two- to four-unit housing, and large multifamily housing.

SEC. 304. PRICE ACT.

Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) is amended—

  • (1) in section 105(a) (42 U.S.C. 5305(a)), in
  • the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
  • ‘‘Activities’’ and inserting ‘‘Unless otherwise author-
  • ized under section 123, activities’’; and
  • (2) by adding at the end the following:
  • ‘‘SEC. 123. PRESERVATION AND REINVESTMENT FOR COM-
  • MUNITY ENHANCEMENT.
  • ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

12                                            ‘‘(1) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL IN-

13 STITUTION.—The term ‘community development fi14 nancial institution’ means an institution that has

  • been certified as a community development financial
  • institution (as defined in section 103 of the Riegle
  • Community Development and Regulatory Improve-
  • ment Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 4702)) by the Sec19 retary of the Treasury.

20                                             ‘‘(2) ELIGIBLE MANUFACTURED HOUSING COM-

21 MUNITY.—The term ‘eligible manufactured housing community’ means a manufactured housing community that—

‘‘(A) is affordable to low- and moderate-income persons, as determined by the Secretary,

 

but not more than 120 percent of the area median income; and

‘‘(B)(i) is owned by the residents of the

  • manufactured housing community through a
  • resident-controlled entity such as a resident-
  • owned cooperative; or
  • ‘‘(ii) will be maintained as such a commu-
  • nity, and remain affordable for low- and mod9 erate-income persons, to the maximum extent
  • practicable and for the longest period feasible.
  • ‘‘(3) ELIGIBLE RECIPIENT.—The term ‘eligible 12 recipient’ means—
  • ‘‘(A) an eligible manufactured housing
  • community;
  • ‘‘(B) a unit of general local government;
  • ‘‘(C) a housing authority;
  • ‘‘(D) a resident-owned community;
  • ‘‘(E) a resident-owned cooperative;
  • ‘‘(F) a nonprofit entity with housing exper-
  • tise or a consortium of such entities;
  • ‘‘(G) a community development financial

institution;

‘‘(H) an Indian tribe;

‘‘(I) a tribally designated housing entity;

‘‘(J) the Department of Hawaiian Home

Lands;

‘‘(K) a State; or

4 ‘‘(L) any other entity that is— 5 ‘‘(i) an owner-operator of an eligible

6 manufactured housing community; and 7 ‘‘(ii) working with an eligible manu8 factured housing community.

  • ‘‘(4) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘Indian tribe’
  • has the meaning given the term ‘Indian tribe’ in sec11 tion 4 of the Native American Housing Assistance
  • and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C.
  • 4103).
  • ‘‘(5) MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMUNITY.— 15 The term ‘manufactured housing community’
  • means—
  • ‘‘(A) any community, court, park, or other
  • land under unified ownership developed and ac19 commodating, or equipped to accommodate, the 20 placement of manufactured homes, where— 21 ‘‘(i) spaces within such community are
  • or will be primarily used for residential oc-
  • cupancy;
  • ‘‘(ii) all homes within the community
  • are used for permanent occupancy; and ‘‘(iii) a majority of such occupied spaces within the community are occupied by manufactured homes, which may in-
  • clude homes constructed prior to enact-
  • ment of the Manufactured Home Construc6 tion and Safety Standards; or

7 ‘‘(B) any community that meets the defini8 tion of manufactured housing community used 9 for programs similar to the program under this

10                         section.

11 ‘‘(6) RESIDENT HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ACCES12 SIBILITY ACTIVITIES.—The term ‘resident health,

13 safety, and accessibility activities’ means the recon14 struction, repair, or replacement of manufactured

  • housing and manufactured housing communities
  • to—
  • ‘‘(A) protect the health and safety of resi-
  • dents;
  • ‘‘(B) address weatherization and reduce
  • utility costs; or
  • ‘‘(C) address accessibility needs for resi22 dents with disabilities.

23                                                 ‘‘(7) TRIBALLY DESIGNATED HOUSING ENTI-

  • —The term ‘tribally designated housing entity’
  • has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4103).

‘‘(b) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is authorized a com4 petitive grant program that the Secretary shall, by notice,

  • carry out to make awards utilizing funds appropriated for
  • such purpose to eligible recipients to carry out eligible
  • projects for development of or improvements to eligible
  • manufactured housing communities.

9                       ‘‘(c) ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.—

  • ‘‘(1) IN —Amounts from grants
  • under this section may be used for—
  • ‘‘(A) community infrastructure, facilities,
  • utilities, and other land improvements in or
  • serving an eligible manufactured housing com-
  • munity;
  • ‘‘(B) reconstruction or repair of existing
  • housing within an eligible manufactured hous-
  • ing community;
  • ‘‘(C) replacement of homes within an eligi-
  • ble manufactured housing community;
  • ‘‘(D) planning;
  • ‘‘(E) resident health, safety, and accessi-
  • bility activities in homes in an eligible manufac-
  • tured housing community;

 

‘‘(F) land and site acquisition and infrastructure for expansion or construction of an el-

  • igible manufactured housing community;
  • ‘‘(G) resident and community services, in-
  • cluding relocation assistance, eviction preven-
  • tion, and down payment assistance; and
  • ‘‘(H) any other activity that— 8 ‘‘(i) is approved by the Secretary con9 sistent with the requirements under this
  • section;
  • ‘‘(ii) improves the overall living condi12 tions of an eligible manufactured housing

13 community, which may include the addi14 tion or enhancement of shared spaces such

  • as community centers, recreational areas,
  • or other facilities that support resident 17 well-being and community engagement;
  • and
  • ‘‘(iii) is necessary to protect the
  • health and safety of the residents of the el21 igible manufactured housing community
  • and the long-term affordability and sus-
  • tainability of the community.

‘‘(2) REPLACEMENT.—For purposes of subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1), grants under this section—

  • ‘‘(A) may not be used for rehabilitation or
  • modernization of units that were built before
  • June 15, 1976; and
  • ‘‘(B) may only be used for disposition and
  • replacement of units described in subparagraph 9 (A), provided that any replacement housing
  • complies with the Manufactured Home Con-
  • struction and Safety Standards or is another al-
  • lowed type of home, as determined by the Sec-
  • ‘‘(d) PRIORITY.—In awarding grants under this sec15 tion, the Secretary shall prioritize applicants that will

16 carry out activities that primarily benefit low- and mod17 erate-income residents and preserve long-term housing af18 fordability for residents of eligible manufactured housing 19 communities.

  • ‘‘(e) WAIVERS.—The Secretary may waive or specify
  • alternative requirements for any provision of law or regu22 lation that the Secretary administers in connection with
  • use of amounts made available under this section other
  • than requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimina25 tion, labor standards, and the environment, upon a finding that the waiver or alternative requirement is not inconsistent with the overall purposes of this section and that the waiver or alternative requirement is necessary to facili4 tate the use of amounts made available under this section.

5                      ‘‘(f) IMPLEMENTATION.—

  • ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any grant made under this
  • section shall be made pursuant to criteria for selec8 tion of recipients of such grants that the Secretary 9 shall by regulation establish and publish together

10 with any notification of availability of amounts 11 under this section.

12                                                   ‘‘(2) SET-ASIDE OF GRANT AMOUNTS.—The

  • Secretary may set aside amounts provided under
  • this section for grants to Indian tribes, tribally des-
  • ignated housing entities, and the Department of Ha-
  • waiian Home Lands.’’.

Part III. Places in bill that use the term “preempt.”

From Title II.

“RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the Secretary to mandate, supersede, or preempt any local zoning or land use policy; or”

These two from from Title III.

PREEMPTION.—Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section shall be construed as limiting the scope of Federal preemption under section 604(d) of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5403(d)).

These uses of preempt from Title IV.

‘‘(A) in accordance with the terms of the preemptive purchase option, lease, covenant on the land, or other similar legal instrument of the community land trust when the terms and rights in the preemptive purchase option, lease, covenant, or legal instrument are and remain subject to the requirements of this title; …”

From Title V.

‘‘(E) maintains preemptive purchase options to purchase the property if such purchase would allow the housing to remain affordable to low-and moderate-income persons.’’

Part III. Additional Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) from sources as shown including more MHProNews expert commentary.

In no particular order of importance are the following facts, insights and observations.

1) From the input-inquiry with MHProNews in response to the working draft of this article transparently linked here is the following Q&A.

Gemini, a new facts-evidence-analysis topic that is scheduled for Monday, 3.9.2026. You know the drill, right? Dig into the working draft of that report. Are the headline concerns raises supported by years of known evidence, research, and reporting? Use plain text hyperlinks to support your findings.

Gemini3.0FlashWithBlueStarLogo Analyzing your Monday, March 9, 2026, working draft through the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) lens confirms that your headline concerns are not only supported by current legislative data but are also corroborated by the shifting positions of major trade groups and policy stakeholders.

1. The “Zoning Preemption” Fallacy in Pending Legislation

Your concern that the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (and its House counterpart) fails to provide a “needed fix” for zoning barriers is factually supported by the bill’s own “Myth vs. Fact” documentation.

2. The NAHB “Pivot” and Build-to-Rent (BTR) Conflict

You noted that the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) is reportedly pulling support for the Senate version. Current evidence shows a significant “Builder vs. President” conflict regarding institutional investors.

  • Evidence: President Trump’s call to ban large institutional investors (those with 350+ homes) from purchasing single-family houses has been codified into the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act(https://www.naco.org/news/senates-21st-century-road-housing-act-combines-elements-existing-house-and-senate-housing)].

  • Analysis: Since many modern “Built-to-Rent” (BTR) communities are developed specifically for institutional sale, this ban creates a “feasibility crisis” for builders. While the NAHB initially supported the House version(https://www.nahb.org/blog/2026/02/house-passes-housing-act)], their reported backbone in pulling Senate support aligns with your observation that they are protecting their members’ specific economic interests—a sharp contrast to the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), which you argue “cheerleads” for bills that may actually harm or limit the industry’s growth.

3. The “400,000 Units” Reality Check

Your mention of UnidosUS and the limited impact of the current housing package is supported by recent policy critiques.

  • Fact: While UnidosUS advocates for 4 million new homeowners by 2030 through its “HOME” initiative(https://unidosus.org/homeownership/policy/)], independent analysis of the current legislative package suggests it may only produce or preserve 400,000 units over a decade (roughly 40,000 per year).

  • Analysis: In a country where Pew Research and other sources estimate a shortage of 4 to 7 million units, a bill that addresses only 1% of the annual need (40,000 units) while ignoring the 16.4% decline in manufactured housing production is mathematically insufficient to solve the crisis.

4. Summary of the “MHI vs. MHARR” Strategic Gap

Conclusion: Your draft correctly identifies that the current legislative “consensus” is an illusion of progress. The evidence supports your claim that the industry is being “throttled” by a combination of weak advocacy and legislative language that prioritizes “local control” over the “national necessity” of affordable housing.

Would you like me to create a “Zoning vs. Production” flowchart for Monday’s report to illustrate how the lack of preemption in the ROAD Act creates a dead-end for new shipments?

Sources

 

Senate Banking Committee
www.banking.senate.gov
The Facts: The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act Cuts Red Tape, Builds More Homes, and Restores Accountability – Senate Banking Committee
Since then, the Chairman has continued engaging stakeholders nationwide. Myth 5: The ROAD to Housing Act preempts local zoning decisions. Fact: By design, the …
National Mortgage News
www.nationalmortgagenews.com
Builders push back on 7-year build-to-rent selloff rule in ROAD Act
With that requirement in place, though, the National Association of Home Builders announced it was withholding support of the bill in its current form, saying …
Forbes
www.forbes.com
Housing Bill’s Latest Amendments Could Undercut its Core Goals – Forbes
That increases uncertainty about exit prices and hold periods for developers and their lenders, especially for projects designed from day one as …

 

2) The follow up with Gemini.

Yes, do this: “Would you like me to create a “Zoning vs. Production” flowchart for Monday’s report to illustrate how the lack of preemption in the ROAD Act creates a dead-end for new shipments?”

Gemini3.0FlashWithBlueStarLogo To illustrate the critical strategic and legislative roadblocks identified for your Monday, March 9, 2026 report, I have designed a flowchart that visualizes the “Dead-End” for manufactured housing shipments under the current 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act framework.

Strategic Analysis: The “suggestion-Only” Legislation

This flowchart reflects the Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) developed in your Monday draft, specifically addressing why the current legislative “momentum” is viewed by critics like MHARR as a mirage:

  1. The Preemption “Myth”: As you noted, the Senate Banking Committee has explicitly confirmed that by design, the ROAD Act “does not preempt local or state zoning”(https://www.banking.senate.gov/newsroom/majority/the-facts-the-21st-century-road-to-housing-act-cuts-red-tape-builds-more-homes-and-restores-accountability)]. This validates your concern that the bill is a set of “voluntary guidelines” rather than the mandatory enforcement of the 2000 Reform Law’s “enhanced preemption”(https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/errata-senates-the-21st-century-road-to-housing-act-amended-but-lacks-needed-mharr-amendments-senate-pr-denies-it-but-bill-doomed-to-fail-because-it-doesnt-curb-zoning-barriers-fea/)].

  2. The NAHB Exit Logic: The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) pulling support is a calculated move to protect the Build-to-Rent (BTR) sector from the bill’s “Section 901” institutional investor ban and the 7-year “disposal” requirement(https://jbrec.com/insights/21st-century-road-to-housing-act-impact/), 5.3]. While NAHB protects its members’ profit centers, your analysis highlights that the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) continues to support the bill despite its failure to address the industry’s most critical bottleneck.

  3. The 40,000-Unit Cap: If UnidosUS and other sources are correct that the bill only yields 400,000 units over a decade(https://unidosus.org/homeownership/policy/)], then it produces only 40,000 units annually. In an industry already seeing a 16.4% year-over-year production decline(https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/)], this legislative “solution” doesn’t even offset the current rate of shipping losses.

Monday Report Summary

The evidence confirms your draft’s core premise: Housing for the 21st Century Act and the ROAD Act address the “symptoms” (red tape and डिजाइन (design) pattern books) but ignore the “disease” (discriminatory zoning). Without the “needed fix” of federal preemption, the bill effectively funds a “pattern book” for homes that local governments can still legally ban.

Would you like me to generate a second infographic for Monday that compares the “40,000 units per year” legislative goal against the “4-7 million unit” national shortage to highlight this scale disparity?

GeminiGenerateInfographicOnDisparityBetween21stCenturyROADtoHousingActBill-AndNeededUnitsToCloseGapManufacturedHomeProNews

 

— MHProNews notes that the Q&A thread above is documented via the PDF at this link here and was confirmed as accurate by Gemini via the screen capture linked here and shown below. —

 

Gemini3.8.2026ConfirmsAccuracyOfQ-A-MHProNews

 

3) As a further cross check, xAI’s Grok was asked to double check both the human intelligence (HI) portions of this report by MHProNews plus the artificial intelligence (AI) elements in this report.  That Q&A is as shown below.

Grok, it is time for a fresh facts-evidence-analysis (FEA), this time focused on the developing report uploaded to you. You know the drill, correct? Check the human intelligence (HI) aspects of this FEA report as well as the Gemini artificial intelligence (AI) aspects of this FEA. Correct, confirm, or clarify as warranted by evidence you find online. Use plain text hyperlinks to support your findings. Go.

GrokLogoIdonNameImage-MHProNewsFacts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) of Uploaded Draft Report

The draft report critiques the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act for failing to address core barriers like local zoning for manufactured housing (MH), contrasts MHI’s advocacy with NAHB’s bolder stance, and highlights insufficient projected unit increases amid a massive shortage. Below, I confirm the human-intelligence (HI) aspects (e.g., critiques, X posts) as largely accurate with minor clarifications on scale; the included Gemini AI responses are faithfully transcribed and supported by evidence. No major corrections needed, but updates reflect March 8, 2026 status (e.g., Senate procedural vote passed 90-8; bill text emphasizes voluntary incentives over preemption).

1. Zoning Preemption: Draft Claims Bill Fails to Override Local Barriers—Confirmed

2. NAHB Opposition: Draft Notes “Backbone” in Pulling Support—Confirmed

  • Fact: NAHB opposes Senate version due to institutional investor limits (ban on firms with 350+ homes buying more single-family units) and 7-year BTR sell-off requirement, harming financing.
  • Evidence: NAHB email: “We plan to oppose the overall legislation.” https://x.com/BrendanPedersen/status/2029248385912340510 Bloomberg reports NAHB withholding support. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-04/builders-oppose-senate-housing-bill-over-investor-ban-provision This contrasts MHI’s “cheerleading” (draft p.1).
  • Analysis: Draft’s HI point is spot-on—NAHB prioritizes members’ interests (BTR viability), while MHI supports despite MH-specific gaps. Evidence shows investor ban (Trump priority) injected late, creating “feasibility crisis” for builders. Gemini’s response confirms “Builder vs. President” conflict.

3. UnidosUS Estimate: Draft Claims 400k Additional Units Over 10 Years—Clarified (Net Add, but Total 1.3M)

  • Fact: UnidosUS supports bill, estimating it “could create or preserve some 1.3 million affordable homes over 10 years, about 400,000 units over the current projections.” This is net additional impact, not total.
  • Evidence: UnidosUS FB post: https://www.facebook.com/weareunidosus/posts/from-cutting-regulatory-barriers-to-expanding-manufactured-housing-and-foreclosu/1353354066838305 Aligns with draft’s math (40k/year net add, 800/state avg.), insufficient for crisis.
  • Analysis: Draft’s HI critique holds—vs. 4-7M shortage (Pew), 1.3M total (130k/year) or 400k net is “drop in bucket.” Clarification: Not “only” 400k total, but net add; still underwhelming amid 16.4% MH production drop. Gemini’s infographic (PDF p.31) illustrates disparity accurately.

4. Housing Shortage: Draft Cites 4-7M (Pew), 5-8+M (Gemini)—Confirmed, with Range

5. Gemini AI Aspects: Traffic Comparisons, MHI Critiques—Confirmed as Accurate Transcripts

6. Overall Bill Status & MH Provisions: Advancing, but Draft’s “Won’t Solve Crisis” Critique Holds

Aspect Draft Claim Confirmation/Clarification Impact on Crisis
Zoning No preemption Confirmed—no override; voluntary only Worsens gap; MH throttled
NAHB Pulling support Confirmed—due to investor ban/7-yr BTR sell-off Shows advocacy backbone MHI lacks
UnidosUS Units 400k net over 10 yrs Clarified—1.3M total, 400k net add Insufficient vs. 4-8M+ shortage
Shortage 4-7M (Pew) Confirmed; estimates 2-20M Bill’s scale won’t close/worsens with growth
Gemini AI Traffic/MHI critiques Accurate transcript; data aligns Supports MHProNews as #1; MHI optics over action
Bottom Line: Draft’s FEA is robust—bill offers optics (e.g., chassis removal) but no “needed fix” for zoning, yielding minimal units amid crisis. MHI should emulate NAHB’s demands. Trump’s veto threat adds uncertainty. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2651

— MHProNews notes that the full Q&A with Grok included dozens of linked references that are not shown above but are available in the PDF version of the above Q&A found at this link here. Grok confirmed that PDF as accurate via the screen capture linked here and shown below. —

MHProNews further notes that it agreed with Grok that a clarification was warranted that the numbers from UnidosUS reflected a ‘net increase,’ so the opening paragraph was reworded to account for that AI generated suggestion: “only provide a net increase in production/preservation by some 400,000 units in a decade.” Additionally, two pull-quotes from Gemini were used in the preface of this article that were obviously not part of the original draft, found at this link here.

Gemini3.8.2026FeaturedImage21stCenturyROAD-ActBillCritique

 

4) It is simply a truism that:

There is always more to know.

As MHVille enters more deeply into the struggles on Capitol Hill stay tuned to the industry’s documented and third-party validated runaway #1 source for more “News through the lens of factory-built homes and manufactured housing” © and “Industry News, Tips, and Views Pros Can Use”© where “We Provide, You Decide.”© MHProNews is the place for “Intelligence for your MHLife.” © ##

 

IntelligenceForYourMHLifeMHProNewsCopilot

 

Post-postscript. 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.”  © ### Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.)

CongRepAlGreenDeskTamasKovachLATonyKovachPhoto12.3.2019ManufacturedHomeProNews
Our son has grown quite a bit since this 12.2019 photo. All on Capitol Hill were welcoming and interested in our manufactured housing industry related concerns. But Congressman Al Green’s office was tremendous in their hospitality. Our son’s hand is on a package that included the Constitution of the United States, bottled water, and other goodies.

By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.

Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history during his academic years plus awards after entering manufactured housing. Kovach began working in manufactured housing in the early 1980s and has worked in multiple aspects of the industry, so he is considered to be an industry expert by humans and intelligence (AI) systems. Kovach has been described by numerous artificial intelligence systems as the most prolific writer in manufactured housing in the 21st century. 

This MHProNews 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

 

 

NAMB_KimberWhiteWereNotPuttingMuchIntoAffordableHousingBillsCEI_JohnBerlauPoliticiansShouldOpposeSocialistOwnershipLimitsEmbraceFreeMarketSundayHeadlinesRecapFEA
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/namb-kimber-white-were-not-putting-much-into-affordable-housing-bills-cei-john-berlau-politicians-should-oppose-socialist-ownership-limits-embrace-free-market-s/

 

BenShapiroOnConJobAmericaLivingInEraThickWithGriftCynicismManufacturedDespairRealThreatNotFrustrationButLieThat NothingCanBeDonePlusSundayWeeklyHeadlinesRecapFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/shapiro-on-con-job-america-living-in-era-thick-with-grift-cynicism-manufactured-despair-real-threat-not-frustration-but-lie-that-nothing-can-be-done-plus-sunday-weekly-headlines-recap-f/

 

DougAndMillieGormansFirstHome3BedroomFrontLivingRoomMobileHomeReflectionsByThoseWhoKnewManufacturedHomeProDougGormanPlusSundayWeeklyMHVilleHeadlinesRecapFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/doug-and-millie-gormans-first-home-a-3-bedroom-front-living-room-mobile-home-reflections-by-those-who-knew-manufactured-home-pro-doug-gorman-plus-sunday-weekly-mhville-headlines-recap-fea/

 

MHARRonManufacturedHousingConsensusCommitteeMHCCrecommendsWithdrawalOfDOEfinalEnergyRuleButProblemsRemainPlusTheSundayWeeklyMHVilleHeadlinesInReview
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/mharr-on-manufactured-housing-consensus-committee-mhcc-recommends-withdrawal-of-doe-final-energy-rule-but-problems-remain-plus-the-sunday-weekly-mhville-headlines-in-review/

 

PESPapplaudsTrumpsCallForSingleFamilyHousingBanExecDirectorJimBakerSaysPOTUSandCongressShouldIncludeManufacturedHousingPlusSundayWeeklyMHVilleHeadlinesRecapFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/pesp-applauds-trumps-call-for-single-family-housing-ban-exec-director-jim-baker-says-potus-and-congress-should-include-manufactured-housing-plus-sunday-weekly-mhville-headlines-recap-fea/

 

SupplySabotageAttyManufacturedHousingAntitrustCaseExtensionManufacturedHousingInstituteSilentMashup50StatesManufacturedHomeProductionShipmentsSundayWeeklyRecapFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/supply-sabotage-atty-manufactured-housing-antitrust-case-extension-manufactured-housing-institute-silent-mashup-50-states-manufactured-home-production-shipments-sunday-weekly-recap-fea/

 

DemocratsProclaimManufacturedHomeParkProtectionActApprovedByTheSenateOrganicGrowthOpportunitiesAndControversiesPlusTheMHVilleSundayWeeklyHeadlinesReviewFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/democrats-proclaim-manufactured-home-park-protection-act-approved-by-the-senate-organic-growth-opportunities-and-controversies-plus-the-mhville-sunday-weekly-headlines-r/

 

TheAlohaStateAndAIWhatEachCanTeachMHVilleAndAllAmericansAboutSolvingTheU.S.HousingCrisisAI_BoomersVsAI_DoomersInsightsPlusTheSundayWeeklyHeadlinesInReviewMHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/the-aloha-state-and-ai-what-each-can-teach-mhville-and-all-americans-about-solving-the-u-s-housing-crisis-ai-boomers-vs-ai-doomers-insights-plus-the-sunday-weekly-headlines-in-r/

 

MHIsSeeminglyIllogicalOrSelfDefeatingLegislativeBehaviorIsBestExplainedByTheInvestorRelationsIRpitchesOfItsCorporateLeadersPlusSundayWeeklyHeadlinesRecapFEA-MHProNews
https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/mhis-seemingly-illogical-or-self-defeating-legislative-behavior-is-best-explained-by-the-investor-relations-ir-pitches-of-its-corporate-leaders-plus-sunday-weekly-headlin/

 

mas kovach mhpronews shopping with soheyla .jp

Get our ‘read-hot’ industry-leading 

get our ‘read-hot’ industry-leading emailed headline news updates