So Speaker Johnson said that he's going to send that bill to the white House

today. And the reason why that's important is

that it starts a ten day clock. The President Trump can essentially has

three choices. He can either sign the bill.

He can veto the bill, or he can do nothing.

And if he does nothing, that the bill then automatically becomes law.

And I think that's where, you know, two of these scenarios are going to play

out. He's either going to sign the bill or

the bill is going to become law. I don't see the President Trump going to

veto this bill, because even though this bill, uh, you know, he called it Senator

Elizabeth Warren's bill, like you noted, it's overwhelmingly bipartisan.

And it gives both sides of the aisle the opportunity to go ahead of the midterms

and say, we care about affordability, because that is the biggest driver of

this bill is that it's an affordability housing bill.

So that's why I think the bill ultimately becomes law.

Well, Nathan, that argument was perfectly cogent, which is why I think

I'm going to put some money down on he vetoes it.

I mean, why wouldn't he? If that's classic Trump.

Well, so President Trump's real motivation here is to try and get

Congress, like you said, passed the Save America Act.

This is the bill that deals with citizen, uh, you know, seriously.

Citizenship voting. He even said that just a few moments ago

in true social in response to the Supreme Court.

Now, what I think ultimately happens here is that, you know, they're trying

to get Save America act through reconciliation.

Long story short, is it's not going to work.

But if they try and get something tied to grants and the idea here, right now

is that you offer $4 billion in grants to states to incentivize to implement

the Save America Act. That could be a pathway forward for

essentially Speaker Johnson to say to the white House, look, we're doing what

you've asked. We're doing it within the role of what

we can get through. Congress signed the bill.

I think that's what President Trump will ultimately agree to, but we'll see.

He can always veto it, because nobody expected him last week to say that he

wasn't going to sign it either. Okay, so here's my question about this

housing bill. How effective is it because there's an

affordability crisis in the country. Um, and the this is a federal bill.

So it tries to do things at the federal level.

But there's a I mean, states have their own laws and regulations and rules.

So does this bill. If it becomes law, really move the

needle. So there's a short term.

And then there's a long term aspect to this from the short term.

If you're listening to us right now in New York City.

Is it going to decline the price of homes or make it more affordable?

No. You're not really going to see much of a

short term impact on this. This is essentially just messaging from

the short term side from the long term side.

Yeah, it's incrementally better for the housing.

You know we've done some analysis. Call it 1 to 3% growth in terms of new

homes. Long story.

You know talking about the next 3 to 5 years.

But you're really looking at markets like Austin, Texas of Birmingham,

Alabama, rather than New York City or Washington, D.C.

at the end of the day, this bill was mostly from the investment side talking

about negatives. There was some original language in here

that would actually sort of make the build to rent communities unfeasible

going forward. That was scary for some of the single

named, uh, single family home REIT's out there, like Invitation Homes and MH.

But ultimately there's so many exemptions in this bill.

You know, that really scary headline isn't really all that much of an impact

for them.