Preserving the continuity, vitality, and quality of life of exurban and rural red America should be a top priority for conservative policymakers.

Instead, red America faces a multifront assault on land use and development. Corrupt local Republican politicians and their developer donors are pushing data centers, solar and wind farms, and Section 8 housing for foreign labor. Now, Congress has sent President Trump a uniparty housing bill — the Obamacare of housing — that will open the floodgates for the federal government, globalists, and special interests to force more of that transformation on red communities.

Conservatives need communities that remain intact, counties that can govern themselves, and neighborhoods that are not remade by federal bribes and developer schemes.

After years of negotiations, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) just sent the largest housing bill in recent memory to the president’s desk. Only five Senate Republicans voted against it. Every Democrat supported it. Trump had signaled he would sign the bill — but only after Congress passes the SAVE America Act.

The bill is being sold as a magic wand to lower housing prices. In reality, it expands the Housing and Urban Development and Federal Housing Administration programs that helped fuel the housing bubble through artificial subsidies.

Conservatives are being told the bill bars corporate ownership of residential homes. But that provision was tacked on at the 11th hour, accounts for only 19 of the bill’s 381 pages, and is riddled with loopholes. Worse, the bill’s main provisions incentivize overdevelopment and Section 8 expansion in red America, negating whatever limited utility the corporate ownership provision might have.

The result is more social transformation than the partial corporate ownership ban claims to prevent.

Obama-style zoning incentives

Section 107 sets the tone by creating a federal zoning standard for “directing local reforms,” including “mechanisms to encourage adoption” of loose zoning rules — all in the name of increasing housing inventory. It also creates a national standard for developers and builders to request special zoning and appeal denials of variances.

That may sound appealing when discussing onerous regulations in blue states. But in red America, already overbuilt since COVID, this bill will create a federal standard that pressures communities to drop one of their few remaining tools of self-defense against the transformation of their neighborhoods.

The rest of the bill offers incentives to communities that follow this national standard. Inevitably, that will encourage localities to rezone not just for housing but also for other uses, including data centers.

HUD should not exist. It certainly should not dictate zoning policy to rural America.

The zoning guidelines would push communities to “reduce minimum lot sizes and setbacks,” increase the number of “duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes,” and promote “transit-oriented development.” Nothing good will come from federal incentives that effectively impose Section 8-style housing and density mandates on suburbs, exurbs, and rural towns.

RELATED: Another tax credit won’t fix what Sunday schools used to teach

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Grant money as a weapon

Ask any conservative living in red America under RINO leadership — which describes much of America — and he will tell you that one of the greatest threats to the character of his county comes from developers working with corporatist GOP politicians, usually their donors, to transform the neighborhood through overdevelopment.

This bill does not directly mandate adoption of the zoning standards. It does something almost as dangerous: It offers local communities and developers incentives that will function like a mandate.

Section 207, written by pro-Hamas Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), creates new competitive HUD grants for states, localities, tribes, and other entities for planning, zoning reform, barrier reduction, and implementation to increase “affordable” housing supply.

Some grants will go toward reducing environmental barriers, which is how Warren got Republicans to support the bill. But much of the remaining criteria is rooted in urbanizing more of America.

The funds are contingent on adopting plans to rezone and “increase the availability of affordable housing and access to affordable housing.” In practice, this provision places a loaded gun to the head of communities that want to keep out Section 8. Nothing gets between local politicians and grant funds.

Section 208 goes further by granting funds to communities that have already demonstrated measurable progress in expanding housing supply at all costs. Eligibility criteria include localities that build more multiunit housing, reduce lot sizes, create “zoning overlays for mixed-income housing,” and use “local tax incentives or public financing for attainable housing.”

Want to densify your suburb and destroy single-family neighborhoods? This bill is for you.

Then comes the Community Development Block Grant program. Rather than following through on every Trump budget proposal’s promise to abolish this program, the bill expands it. Worse, it creates a zero-sum reallocation within the existing CDBG formula by shifting money from low-growth communities to high-growth communities.

Build more homes, and you get rewarded. Build fewer, and you get punished.

That will either shift more money to blue areas, which make up the lion’s share of places needing more inventory, or incentivize red areas to overdevelop.

Subsidizing the next bubble

No bad housing bill would be complete without provisions expanding the FHA’s authority to extend even more loans to people who cannot afford houses, thereby fueling the next housing bubble.

Section 213 allows the FHA to insure larger loans for apartment buildings, enabling more and bigger multifamily projects to be financed with FHA insurance.

Outside the Northeast, home prices are already beginning to tumble from COVID-era overbuilding, and builders are desperate to sell. In June, 35% of builders cut prices, while 62% used sales incentives to attract buyers. America does not need to expand HUD’s reach into local communities to incentivize what is already happening.

Ironically, this bill is being sold as a way to prevent corporations from transforming neighborhoods by purchasing too many homes. But almost every other provision accelerates an even greater transformation.

Section 1001 supposedly bans very large corporate investors from buying more single-family houses. But it carves out practical exceptions for new construction, build-to-rent developments, meaningful renovation programs, and certain pathways that help renters eventually buy homes.

In other words, the same corporations will enjoy even more subsidies to build Section 8 rentals in the suburbs under the bill’s extremely limited ban than they enjoyed before it.

RELATED: Home builders say immigration reform is essential to ease housing affordability crisis

Lindsey Nicholson/UCG/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

No one is home

This is why Congress should not rush through a bill of this magnitude on the suspension calendar without debate.

Then again, nobody is home in the so-called conservative movement to flag a bill this large. Obamacare could pass overnight, and the loudest voices on the right might not even notice.

The bill’s supporters claim they are solving a housing crisis. In reality, they are giving HUD, developers, corporate investors, and local Republican sellouts more tools to transform red America.

Conservatives do need homes. They need communities that remain intact, counties that can govern themselves, and neighborhoods that are not remade by federal bribes and developer schemes.

That is the home conservatives must ultimately construct. Where is the bill to expedite that construction?

​Affordable housing, Donald trump, Elizabeth warren, Housing and urban development, Obamacare, Opinion & analysis, Rural america, Section 8, Senate, Tim scott, Red america, Development, Grants 

When Trump won the presidency in 2024, several celebrities made good on their promise to evacuate the United States — but that’s not stopping them from coming back.

Rosie O’Donnell famously fled to Ireland with her 13-year-old child, Clay, immediately after Trump’s win, and returned this June for the Tony Awards.

While O’Donnell had no issues getting back into the States, she made it clear that she was “worried” that it would be “problematic” the first time she returned on a secret trip in February.

“I worried the first time I came back, whether that would be problematic, and I came alone without my child, who is 13 and has autism. She’s my youngest of five,” she told Page Six in an interview. “I wanted to make sure that if anything happened, it didn’t happen in her presence, so it was fine — as it should be.”

O’Donnell explained that Trump “can’t really arrest American citizens without cause” and speaking out against him is “using freedom speech” and “is not a reason to be arrested in America.”

BlazeTV host Jeff Fisher points out that O’Donnell also called Trump an “a-hole and a con man.”

“That’s so surprising for her,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray adds.

But O’Donnell isn’t the only one.

While Ellen DeGeneres also made a big show of moving to the U.K. after Trump’s election, she purchased land in California after the move.

“They’d already sold both their homes in Los Angeles, both their mansions in L.A.,” Gray explains, “and so they had to go back home, and they bought a new mansion in Los Angeles where she spent her birthday this year.”

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Pat gray, Jeff fisher, Ellen degeneres, Donald trump, Rosie o’donnell, America, Liberal, Pat gray unleashed 

Second lady Usha Vance had a humorous rejoinder to a fashion critic politicizing her pregnancy style in the New York Times.

The vice president’s wife was the subject of fashion scrutiny over the dress she wore and how it related to the “paradigm-shifting” politics of the administration.

Fashion critic Vanessa Friedman described Vance’s ‘stretchy coral dress that hugs her stomach’ before launching full-bore into the deep end.

Vance responded by ridiculing the attempt to find deep political significance in her fashion choices.

“Now that we know the political significance of my $8.75 coral maternity dress from Old Navy, can’t wait to hear what the New York Times has to say about my elastic-waistband pants and compression socks!” she joked in the post on the X platform.

“In the meantime, enjoy my pregnancy fashion (or lack thereof) and a good story with your kids,” she added, with a video link to a storybook reading with her husband.

New York Times fashion critic Vanessa Friedman described Vance’s “stretchy coral dress that hugs her stomach” before launching full-bore into the deep end.

“That three such prominent women in the MAGA movement were pregnant at pretty much the same time was, indubitably, a coincidence. But for an administration that has such an intuitive and strategic understanding of the power of aesthetics that an unspoken dress code in which men outfit themselves in the image of the president has developed, it has also become a telling one,” Friedman wrote.

“Together, the women have created a notably consistent, and somewhat paradigm-shifting, picture of the White House’s family and fertility platform,” she added.

Vance also posted the receipt proving she paid $8.75 for the bright coral-colored Old Navy dress — on sale from $49.99 to $12.49 and reduced further with a discount.

Paradigms have rarely been shifted at such bargain prices.

RELATED: White House hammers Jen Psaki over comments on Usha Vance: ‘Circle back on that, moron’

In this round, the second lady easily knocked out the Gray Lady.

Vance announced in January her pregnancy with the couple’s fourth child. The baby will be the first to be born to a sitting vice president.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​New york times, White house, Usha vance, Usha vance pregnant, Fashion critic, Politics 

The MyPillow founder and CEO is sleeping easy after reaching a settlement with Dominion Voting Systems over allegations regarding the 2020 election.

Dominion, which is now known as Liberty Vote, filed the defamation lawsuit against Mike Lindell in 2021 and sought $1.3 billion in damages.

‘I can now run for governor, win governor.’

On Monday, five years later, Lindell’s attorneys and the company filed to end the lawsuit with prejudice after settling out of court. The “with prejudice” condition restricts the same lawsuit from being filed in the future.

Liberty Vote said in a statement only that “the parties have agreed to a confidential settlement to this matter.”

Lindell is running for governor of Minnesota, and the latest polling showed that he is the leading Republican in the race. In March the party endorsed Kendall Qualls, an Army veteran and former health care executive.

Lindell said in a statement to WCCO-TV that the end of the lawsuit was a “big relief” for him.

“I can now run for governor, win governor, and not have to have in the back of my mind a worry about a $1.3 billion lawsuit,” he added.

Lindell was previously ordered to pay $2.3 million to a Dominion employee for defamation and ordered to pay DHL $780,000 in Jan. 2025. A federal judge also ruled that Lindell had defamed the Smartmatic voting machine company. A court has yet to determine if the case meets the “actual malice” standard that could lead to Lindell paying damages to Smartmatic.

He issued a defiant response in Jan. 2021 to the Dominion lawsuit threat.

Dominion had similarly sued former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and ended the lawsuit in Sept. 2025 with an undisclosed settlement.

RELATED: Mike Lindell says the FBI confiscated his cell phone at drive-thru of a Hardee’s

The three top Republican primary candidates are all seeking the endorsement from President Donald Trump, who has said only that Lindell “deserves” to be governor.

Whoever wins the Republican primary on August 11 will run against Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) in the general election.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Mike lindell, Politics, Minnesota, 2020 election, Defamation, Dominion voting systems 

FIFA officials are refusing to back down on their first “Pride Match” for the World Cup despite objections from Iran and Egypt, Islamic nations where homosexuality is illegal.

The two countries are scheduled to compete in the match at Seattle Stadium on Friday, which will also include soccer- and rainbow-themed events with the LGBTQ+ community.

‘Whether that is Iran, Egypt, Qatar, Bosnia … or, frankly, the United States of America, we can all do better when it comes to inclusion’

“We are here to ensure that everybody who comes to visit, and anybody who’s watching this game, understands that we celebrate people, their sexual identity, their sexual orientation, and we are an inclusive and safe place to visit and live in,” said Pride Match co-chair Jen Barnes to the Seattle Times.

The match will be followed by the Seattle Pride Parade the following day in the downtown of the city.

FIFA says that fans will be allowed to bring in Pride flags to the stadium, as well as other flags advocating sexual orientation and gender identity.

The Iranian regime considers homosexuality a crime punishable up to death, while Egypt outlaws homosexual activities under laws banning “indecency.”

In December both Iran and Egypt objected to participating in the LGBTQ+ match, but neither pulled out of the contest.

Hedda McLendon, the senior vice president of legacy for the host committee in Seattle, told the Times that they were not pressured by FIFA to change their planned celebration.

“It was always about inclusion and visibility,” she said, “and whether that is Iran, Egypt, Qatar, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Australia, or, frankly, the United States of America, we can all do better when it comes to inclusion and LGBTQ visibility.”

According to California state Sen. Scott Wiener (D), both of the countries demanded that Pride flags be banned from the Pride match, but FIFA denied the demands.

RELATED: Pride activist outraged at CA city officials for canceling festival — then officials fire back

“Hard no to these violent, repressive regimes,” he added. “And huge gratitude & respect to the LGBTQ Egyptians & Iranians — in these countries & in diaspora — who fight so hard, putting their lives at risk, to shed light on & to end this violent repression.”

“If Iran and Egypt don’t want to see Pride flags at their match in Seattle, that’s just too damn bad,” responded transgender activist Charlotte Clymer on social media. “LGBTQ folks were intentionally erased in Qatar in 2022 due to ‘respect for local culture.’ Seattle supports LGBTQ people. Respect the local culture.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​World cup, Homosexuality, Lgbtq agenda, Pride parade, Seattle, Politics