Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Womack, Steve [R-AR-3]
- Committees
- Appropriations Committee
- Last action
- Jul 21, 2025
Bottom line
The bill funds essential transportation and housing programs for fiscal year 2026, while also enacting specific policy changes and reallocating existing funds.
What it actually does
This bill makes appropriations for the Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and several related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026. It allocates funds across numerous programs for infrastructure, aviation, rail, transit, motor carrier safety, highway safety, housing assistance, community development, and other related activities. The bill also includes various policy directives, rescissions of prior year funds, and transfers of funds between accounts and from prior infrastructure acts.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill provides critical funding necessary to maintain and improve the nation's transportation infrastructure, ensure public safety, and address pressing housing needs. They emphasize the importance of stable funding for federal agencies and programs that support economic growth, job creation, and the well-being of communities across the country. The inclusion of Community Project Funding allows members to direct resources to specific local priorities.
Opponents contend
Opponents may contend that the bill contains excessive spending, contributes to the national debt, or includes policy riders that are controversial or unrelated to the core function of appropriations. Concerns might also be raised about specific funding cuts, transfers, or rescissions that could negatively impact certain programs or regions, or about the process by which certain policy directives are included in an appropriations measure.
The bill is 50 pages long and highly detailed, requiring significant time for a thorough review. Given the short legislative windows for appropriations, the time available for detailed public and congressional scrutiny may be limited relative to its complexity.
Title I, Office of the Secretary
Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary Appropriations
This section appropriates $204,568,000 for the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, detailing allocations for various sub-offices such as the General Counsel, Policy, Budget and Programs, and Civil Rights. It also authorizes transfers between these offices with specific congressional notification and approval requirements, and allows for the crediting of user fees up to $2,500,000.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this funding is essential for the effective leadership, policy development, and administrative oversight of the entire Department of Transportation, ensuring efficient operation and strategic direction for national transportation initiatives.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that certain administrative offices receive disproportionate funding or that the transfer authorities could lead to less transparent allocation of resources without sufficient congressional oversight.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the need for flexible administrative funding with the desire for congressional control over specific allocations and transfers within the Secretary's office.
Title I, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations
Federal Aviation Administration Operations Funding
This provision appropriates $13,752,000,000 for the operations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), with $13,040,600,000 derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. It specifies minimum amounts for aviation safety and air traffic organization activities, and includes provisos regarding staffing reports, user fees, and funding for the contract tower program. It also establishes the Office of the Assistant Administrator for Rulemaking and Regulatory Improvement.
Title I, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Infrastructure Programs
Highway Infrastructure Programs and Community Project Funding
This section appropriates $1,369,433,091 for various highway infrastructure programs, with a significant portion ($954,433,091) dedicated to Community Project Funding (earmarks) specified in the accompanying report. It also allocates $200,000,000 for Tribal transportation programs and $200,000,000 for Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight and Highway Projects, specifically for public parking for commercial motor vehicles. Notably, some funds are derived by transfer from unobligated balances of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
Title I, Federal Railroad Administration, Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Grants
This section appropriates $538,402,000 for consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvement grants. Of this, $38,402,000 is for Community Project Funding, and $500,000,000 is for discretionary grants. A significant portion of the discretionary grant funds are derived by transfer from unobligated balances of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) for Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Grants. The provision expands eligible projects to include railroad systems planning and project development activities, and broadens eligible recipients to include holding companies of Class II or Class III railroads.
Title I, Federal Transit Administration, Transit Formula Grants
Federal Transit Administration Formula Grants
This section provides $14,642,000,000 from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund for various Federal public transportation assistance programs. These funds are allocated through formula grants to support transit operations, capital projects, and planning activities as authorized under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code.
Title II, Public and Indian Housing, Tenant-Based Rental Assistance
Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (Section 8 Vouchers)
This section appropriates a total of $35,267,941,000 for tenant-based rental assistance, primarily for renewals of expiring Section 8 contracts. It includes specific allocations for administrative expenses for public housing agencies ($1,975,124,000), tenant protection assistance ($374,876,000), and renewal of Section 811 vouchers ($742,941,000). A notable provision is $30,000,000 for new incremental voucher assistance for eligible youth, designated as "The First Lady Melania Trump Youth Foster to Independence Initiative."
Title II, Public and Indian Housing, Public Housing Fund
Public Housing Operating and Capital Funds
This section appropriates $7,334,257,000 for public housing, with $4,975,000,000 for operating subsidies and $2,286,257,000 for capital improvements. It includes $25,000,000 for need-based allocations to PHAs facing financial shortfalls and $30,000,000 for emergency capital needs, including safety and security measures. It also allows the Secretary to waive certain limitations on capital fund usage for operating activities.
Title II, Community Planning and Development, Community Development Fund
Community Development Block Grant and Economic Development Initiative
This section appropriates $5,641,731,519 for community development activities. It allocates $3,300,000,000 for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, with restrictions on its use for for-profit entities. It also includes $30,000,000 for activities authorized under the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act (related to opioid crisis) and $2,311,731,519 for the Economic Development Initiative (EDI), primarily for Community Project Funding (earmarks).
Title II, Community Planning and Development, Homeless Assistance Grants
Homeless Assistance Grants and Rescissions
This section appropriates $4,158,000,000 for homeless assistance programs, including $290,000,000 for Emergency Solutions Grants and $3,858,000,000 for the Continuum of Care program and rural housing stability assistance. It also includes $10,000,000 for the national homeless data analysis project. Notably, it rescinds all unobligated funds from prior year appropriations for paragraph (4) under this heading for fiscal year 2025. The provision also includes directives on prioritizing certain projects and allowing youth to self-certify homelessness.
Title IV, Sec. 425
Prohibition on Contravention of Executive Orders and Rules
This section prohibits the use of funds in contravention of a long list of specific Executive Orders and Federal Register notices, identified by number and date. These EOs and rules cover a wide range of policy areas, implying a legislative intent to block or affirm specific administrative actions taken by the executive branch.
Title IV, Sec. 427
Prohibition on Funding for Automated Traffic Enforcement Cameras
This section prohibits the use of any funds made available by this Act to purchase, install, maintain, or operate automated traffic enforcement cameras for red-light, speed, or stop sign enforcement.
Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to transfer funds from specific financial assistance programs (university transportation centers, drone infrastructure inspection grant program) to a central account for the costs of award, administration, or oversight of any DOT financial assistance programs, to remain available until expended.
Title I, Sec. 108(a)-(c)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for administrative flexibility, allowing the Department to centralize and manage overhead costs for various grant programs more efficiently.
Case for: Supporters argue this improves administrative efficiency, allowing DOT to better manage grant oversight and reduce fragmentation of resources across operating administrations. It ensures funds are available for critical administrative functions.
Case against: Critics might argue that such broad transfer authority reduces congressional oversight over how administrative funds are spent for specific programs, potentially diverting resources from direct program activities.
Estimated impact: Potentially millions of dollars in administrative funds can be centralized and reallocated, impacting the operational efficiency of DOT's grant programs.
Directs $1,000,000,000 for FAA Facilities and Equipment to be derived by transfer from unobligated balances of amounts previously appropriated for highway infrastructure programs (IIJA Public Law 117-58) and another $1,000,000,000 from unobligated balances of FAA facilities and equipment funds from IIJA.
Title I, Federal Aviation Administration, Facilities and Equipment, paragraph (2) and (3)
Why it matters:This is a tactical maneuver to reallocate existing infrastructure funds to different priorities within the transportation sector, potentially to address urgent FAA needs without new appropriations or to shift spending from slower-moving highway projects.
Case for: Proponents argue that reallocating unobligated IIJA funds to FAA Facilities and Equipment addresses critical modernization needs for the national airspace system, ensuring these funds are put to use where they are most needed and can be obligated efficiently.
Case against: Critics might argue that this diverts funds from their original intent under the IIJA, potentially undermining long-term highway infrastructure goals or signaling a shift in federal investment priorities without a broader policy debate.
Estimated impact: A total of $2,000,000,000 is reallocated, significantly impacting both highway and aviation infrastructure funding streams.
Allocates $30,000,000 for new incremental voucher assistance to assist eligible youth, designated as "The First Lady Melania Trump Youth Foster to Independence Initiative."
Title II, Public and Indian Housing, Tenant-Based Rental Assistance, paragraph (6)
Why it matters:The naming of a program after a First Lady is a political maneuver, often intended to associate a policy with a specific political figure or administration. Placing it within a large appropriations bill helps ensure its passage without standalone debate on the naming or specific policy details.
Case for: Proponents argue that this initiative provides crucial housing assistance to vulnerable youth, particularly those transitioning from foster care, helping them achieve independence and avoid homelessness. The specific designation highlights a commitment to this demographic.
Case against: Critics might argue that naming a federal program after a political figure, especially a First Lady, is inappropriate for an appropriations bill and can be seen as politicizing a social welfare program. They may also question the specific criteria or effectiveness of the initiative compared to existing programs.
Estimated impact: $30,000,000 in new housing vouchers for eligible youth.
Prohibits the use of funds by HUD to administer or enforce the final rule entitled "30-Day Notification Requirement Prior To Termination of Lease for Nonpayment of Rent" published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 101270).
Title II, General Provisions—Department of Housing and Urban Development, Sec. 238
Why it matters:This is a policy rider designed to block a specific administrative action by HUD. Placing it in an appropriations bill is a common tactic to prevent a regulation from taking effect without a standalone legislative debate.
Case for: Proponents of this prohibition likely argue that the 30-day notification rule imposes undue burdens on landlords, potentially exacerbating housing supply issues or making it harder to manage properties. They might believe it interferes with existing lease agreements or state/local laws.
Case against: Opponents would argue that the HUD rule is a crucial tenant protection, providing vulnerable renters with adequate time to address nonpayment issues or find alternative housing, thereby preventing sudden evictions and homelessness. Blocking it undermines tenant rights.
Estimated impact: Prevents a federal tenant protection rule from being enforced, impacting landlord-tenant relations and eviction processes nationwide for HUD-assisted housing.