Titus rips bill that ‘doesn't do anything about affordable housing'
'That bill doesn't do anything about affordable housing and certainly doesn't require anybody to pay for the infrastructure that's going to be needed for that growth,' Rep. Dina Titus told state lawmakers about a measure the overwhelming majority of them support. (Nevada legislative stream screengrab)
U.S. Rep. Dina Titus told state lawmakers Wednesday that efforts to open up more federal lands for development 'doesn't do anything about affordable housing,' and warned of the consequences Nevadans will face as a result of economic and budget policies being pursued by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans.
U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and U.S. Rep. Susie Lee, both Democrats, reintroduced the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, commonly referred to as the Clark County Lands Bill, in March.
The measure would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada that Cortez Masto and Lee say could lead to development of more affordable housing.
Opponents warn the bill is a recipe for unsustainable urban sprawl that will not significantly address the housing shortage.
In a statement emailed to Nevada Current, Titus said she is opposed to the lands bill as it is currently written, saying it will make 'land available to developers to build more homes that average Nevadans cannot afford.'
'There is no requirement for set-asides for affordable housing in new developments,' in the legislation, Titus said in the email. 'Affordable housing should be the goal of a lands bill, not incidental to it.'
Titus sponsored a version of the bill with Cortez Masto in 2021. In a statement, her office said 'it has become clearer since 2021 that developers want to build more expensive homes in the 'ex-urbs,'' and 'the cost of providing infrastructure has become prohibitively expensive' especially considering the impact of Trump's tariffs on building materials.
State lawmakers recently passed a resolution backing the passage of the federal bill, which Titus took aim at while addressing them in Carson City.
'You're supporting a lands bill and think that's a silver bullet for affordable housing,' Titus said to legislators. 'That bill doesn't do anything about affordable housing and certainly doesn't require anybody to pay for the infrastructure that's going to be needed for that growth.'
When asked about Titus' comments to state lawmakers, Lauren Wodarski, a spokesperson for Cortez Masto, said the senator has repeatedly called for an 'all of the above approach' to address the housing crisis.
She also noted the legislation is supported by 'affordable housing organizations and local governments who all agree it is necessary to make more land available for housing development in Southern Nevada.'
In her email to the Current, Titus also underscored the point she made to state lawmakers that the lands bill does not take into account 'the cost of providing infrastructure to outlying developments, which taxpayers rather than developers would be required to pay for.' She also said the legislation would 'create new burdens on our limited water supply.'
Another 'major flaw' of the federal lands bill is that 'it encourages expensive urban sprawl when there are lands within our existing urban area that could be developed without distant and costly extensions of infrastructure,' Titus noted.
A local analysis by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern and the regional planning collaborative known as Southern Nevada Strong has shown significant infill land available.
The study, released in February, found 78,285 acres that 'were identified as vacant or underutilized land' and 'approximately 85% (69,300 acres) was classified as vacant, while the remaining 15% was deemed underutilized.'
Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has long pushed for more federal land to be opened up as a solution to develop housing.
Lombardo sent several letters to the Biden administration last year that blamed the administration for its role in the housing crisis, saying it wasn't doing enough to make more federal land available for housing development.
Assembly Joint Resolution 10, which also calls on the federal government to release federal lands, passed April 17, 36-6, with overwhelming support from Democrats and unanimous support from Republicans.
Six Democratic Assemblymembers, Natha Anderson, Venicia Considine, Tanya Flanagan, Selena La Rue Hatch, Cinthia Moore, and Howard Watts, voted against the resolution.
The measure has not been voted on in the Senate.
Titus, who herself served in the Nevada Legislature for two decades prior to winning election to federal office, spent most of her address to state lawmakers warning of a 'tsunami' of challenges coming to Nevada as a result of actions already taken by Trump as well as policies Trump is pushing the Republican held Congress to enact.
Trump's sweeping global tariffs will will increase the price not only of consumer goods, but also the cost of housing, Titus said.
'If you're going to put tariffs on construction materials like steel, lumber and aluminum and you're going to try to build affordable housing, those prices are going to go up,' she said.
Trump's many tariffs currently in effect include a global 25% levy on aluminum, lumber, and steel.
'Again, that's going to hurt Nevadans and make it harder at a time we need more housing for people to get into a house,' Titus said.
Republicans in Congress have also proposed sweeping cuts to various federal programs including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP.
Trump has issued multiple executive orders curtailing, halting or ending altogether federal funding for a host of federal programs.
Elon Musk, the billionaire head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, has also cut swaths of federal funding, positions and projects.
Noting about 30% of Nevada total state government funding comes from the federal government, Titus warned state lawmakers they will be forced to deal with the consequences of federal cuts.
'As y'all have to deal with every day, Nevada requires a balanced budget,' Titus said. 'You're going to have to deal with what's coming on May 1,' she said, referring to the date when the state Economic Forum will set its final budget limits that legislators and the governor must meet when they approve a budget for the upcoming biennium.
'When you get the economic forecast May 1, you'll be hearing how much funds will be cut and how much you can spend. I'm not too optimistic,' Titus said, adding 'it's likely you'll be back in a special session when you figure out just how much it is you're going to have to cut or pay for or eliminate.'
'You have to deal with this firestorm somehow,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC Sports
20 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
Missouri Senate passes plan to keep Chiefs at Arrowhead Stadium
There's nothing like a ticking clock to get things done. The Missouri Senate, faced with the inevitability of the Chiefs and Royals leaving for Kansas, passed on Thursday morning a plan to keep both teams from leaving. The consensus was reached at a time when many doubted the ability of the Senate to strike a deal. The legislation, which devotes more than $1.5 billion to the football and baseball stadiums, was crafted at a special session called by governor Mike Kehoe. To get there, Senate Republicans increased the aid package for recent St. Louis tornadoes from $25 million to $100 million. This lured enough Democrats to support such a large expenditure for a pair of private businesses that arguably don't need to be subsidized by taxpayers. Ultimately, the stadium effort prevailed by a vote of 19-13. The GOP-controlled House is expected to adopt the plan on Monday. For the Chiefs, Missouri will kick half of the $1.15 billion needed for renovations to Arrowhead Stadium. This doesn't mean the deal is done. The Chiefs could still choose to go to Kansas, where a new stadium would be built. While the team's lease runs through 2030, Kansas has said its offer expires on June 30. If so, the Chiefs will be making a decision sooner than later.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk didn't have to defeat the swamp, he had to defeat Maga and he failed
Elon Musk's mistake, it seems, was believing Republicans and Donald Trump when they told him they cared about America's debt. Just a week or so ago, when Musk was taking leave of the White House, he had a ceremony in which Trump praised him and his efforts, and gave him a pretty model of a key, saying he could come back any time. But now Musk has broken ranks and broken silence, calling Trump's only significant piece of legislation a sham. Musk's right. It is. But it might be too late to save America's fiscal position. For a hundred and thirty days, Musk and his boys prowled the bureaucracy, looking for fat to trim. They got access to databases and to bank accounts. They found – in their own estimation – hundreds of millions of dollars of, for instance, redundant annual subscriptions for unused software. And they were used as a battering ram and an excuse for many very dubious cuts, some of which will cost lives: cuts to USAID, cuts to disease prevention, cuts to things that cost very little but have such extraordinary externalities in terms of keeping African birth rates manageable by decreasing child mortality that cutting them is the falsest of false economies. But let's take Musk at his word. He wants to cut the budget so the US government can control its debt. Interest rates are rising – returning to historically normal levels. This is murder, it's death, it's failure, to countries like Britain and America who are currently borrowing more than ever before and running unsustainable deficits on top of that borrowing. Debt interest will drown us. Our states will collapse. Everything will cost more than it has ever cost. This is inevitable without a sound fiscal policy. But most Republicans only say they care about that in an election year. They want to increase spending in their districts. They want their favoured groups to get subsidies. They all have squeaky wheels in mind that need the grease. Trump's headline piece of legislation, the Big Beautiful Bill, is guaranteed to jack up American borrowing to end of the world levels. Musk correctly calls the bill a 'disgusting abomination.' He correctly says that those with conscience must 'kill the bill.' He threatened those Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted for the bill with primary challengers; he said they have betrayed their country and there will be consequences. But apart from three all House Republicans voted for the bill. Even a man as rich as Musk can't fund that many primary opponents. There is safety in numbers, particularly if you are exploding the national debt for selfish, short-term reasons of your own popularity. Musk is right. America's national debt is terribly large. He's right that the federal budget is insane and needs radical surgery. He's correct that the trend in American fiscal policy is one of deranged adding to the debt at all times. Correct, too, that democracy dies when the people – or the vested interests – discover they can vote themselves more money until the state capsizes. (The same thing has been happening in Britain since the First World War.) But Musk was wrong when he believed Donald Trump or those of his surrogates. Trump has declared corporate bankruptcy a number of times. He is continually receiving cash injections from supporters, from people who want things. His previous presidency precipitously increased America's national debt, even as – for most of those four years – the economy boomed and roared ahead. Trump loves debt. Trump loves borrowing. He'll borrow until the end. Musk ought to have learnt that lesson by now. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Speaker Johnson, the Blue Dogs are here to throw you a bone
Over the last few weeks, Americans have been hearing endless mentions of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Although the Republicans' reconciliation proposal is certainly big — so big it would add over $4 trillion to our national debt — it is by no means beautiful. There is no way to hide the ugly reality of this bill. It allows for $2.8 trillion in new borrowing over the 10-year budget window, adds $3.3 trillion to the already more than $36 trillion national debt, and cuts over $700 billion from federal health care spending, primarily Medicaid. By 2034, our debt-to-GDP ratio would be at 125 percent. Interest payments could exceed $2 trillion a year, making it impossible to pay off the debt. Considering we already spend more on servicing our debt than on stewarding American defense capabilities and health care, we are accelerating down an unsustainable and dangerous path. Unrestrained fiscal policy has plagued the U.S. for decades, and it has not been limited to one side of the aisle. While members of Congress sit insulated on Capitol Hill and alternate between irresponsible tax cuts and excessive spending, life gets worse for everyday Americans. Moody's recently lowered the U.S. long-term credit ratings to AA1 from AAA. At the same time, the world is moving further and further away from the American dollar. This means Americans are left with a smaller economy, less economic mobility, and a lower standard of living. As we know all too well, excessive borrowing leads to inflation and drives up interest rates, making it harder for Americans to finance a home, start a business, and put food on the table. This is unsustainable and has to change very quickly. Don't just take it from us: In a recent Wall Street Journal editorial, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) wrote called it 'essential that Congress deviate from its current path. Under every scenario now being considered, federal debt continues to skyrocket from its current level of almost $37 trillion.' So far in the 119th Congress, the majority hasn't shown much of an appetite to deviate from this trajectory. In order to hand out tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy, the Republican reconciliation package would make devastating cuts to food assistance programs, health coverage, and other federal resources that hard-working Americans rely on to make ends meet. Is it so important to our colleagues across the aisle to give a handout to their mega-wealthy buddies that they would strap everyday Americans with even more crushing debt? The national debt and our federal government's spending deficit may seem like far-off, intangible concepts when D.C. bureaucrats and television talking heads drone on about them for weeks on end. But the American people know perfectly well how debt adds up. Our constituents have to balance their budgets every month — why can't the federal government do the same? The truth is, we can. For decades, Congress has chosen not to do so, perhaps because it isn't politically expedient or it just takes too much hard work. Regardless, Congress and our federal government broadly are derelict in our duty to responsibly manage the government's finances. Since our coalition was founded in the 1990s, the cornerstone of the Blue Dogs' work has been our relentless focus on fiscal responsibility. For years, Blue Dogs supported legislation to curb reckless spending, hold both Democrats and Republicans accountable to our constituents, and require that Congress balance the budget. We had a willing partner in President Bill Clinton, who remains the most recent example of real fiscal discipline in the federal government. Now, as then, Blue Dogs know that the American people have one demand for their legislators as prices continue to rise and reckless fiscal policy threatens their livelihoods: 'It's the economy, stupid!' As this cry goes unanswered by a majority in Congress that proposes to drive our national debt to truly harrowing heights, Americans who work hard to pay their bills and take care of their families are losing confidence in their government. Each day this irresponsible spending continues, young Americans' dreams that they can achieve the economic prosperity their parents did slip further and further away. The Blue Dogs' vision to solve this problem is proving that our government can work. We believe that change is not only possible but essential. It doesn't have to be this way. There's another way forward: a bipartisan, commonsense way that pays down our debt while extending tax cuts to working Americans who need them most. Evidently, our offers to Republican leadership to work together on this fell on deaf ears this time. But with costs rising, confidence in government is sinking. Americans are eager for change, and we remain committed to using a steady hand to deliver pragmatic policies that most Americans agree on. In that spirit, our offer still stands. We are eager to work with our Republican colleagues to solve the issues facing our country and deliver results to the American people. We ask our colleagues: Will you work with us to deliver results? The authors are all members of the House Blue Dog Coalition. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
