House THUD Subcommittee advances FY2026 transportation, housing bill over Democratic objections

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development favorably reported the fiscal 2026 transportation, housing and urban development (THUD) appropriations bill at a subcommittee markup, with members divided over substantial reductions to housing and transit funding.

The bill’s discretionary allocation is $89.9 billion, described by the subcommittee majority as a roughly 5% reduction from FY2025 and, when accounting for fewer housing receipts and member-designated projects, about $6 billion below FY2025 levels. The measure directs new spending priorities for the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) while trimming or eliminating numerous programs, according to opening remarks from the subcommittee chair.

Why it matters: Democrats on the subcommittee said the cuts would reduce rental assistance, weaken fair-housing enforcement and undermine ongoing rail and transit projects; Republicans said the bill restores fiscal discipline while prioritizing transportation safety and core infrastructure needs.

Republican members highlighted increases and priorities for transportation safety and air traffic control. The bill provides, as described on the record, $5.0 billion for Federal Aviation Administration facilities and equipment (nearly $2.0 billion above FY2025), funding to hire and train about 2,500 new air traffic controllers, $63.4 billion for highways and bridges through the Highway Trust Fund (a $1.3 billion increase), and targeted funds for Amtrak and freight rail including $925 million for the Northeast Corridor and $500 million for consolidated rail infrastructure and safety grants (CRISI). The bill also funds the essential air service program at $514 million and allocates increased support to maritime academies and strategic sealift programs.

Democratic members focused most of their criticism on the bill’s reductions to HUD programs and proposed use of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) funds. Representative James E. Clyburn, the subcommittee’s ranking member, said, “it is with regret that I am unable to support this bill as written,” and warned that the cuts would put rental assistance recipients at risk of eviction. Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro and other Democrats said the bill cuts Section 8 rental assistance by roughly $3.0 billion, eliminates the HOME Investment Partnerships program and would slash fair-housing activities and legal assistance used to prevent evictions and enforce civil rights.

Members on both sides referenced program eliminations and redirections: the majority said the bill eliminates or reduces 38 programs totaling $7.3 billion in savings and redirects more than $4.0 billion of IIJA-funded activities to what the majority described as core infrastructure projects. Democrats said the bill “robs” ongoing projects funded through IIJA and zeroes out or sharply reduces investments in Amtrak and other transit priorities; they warned that many shovel-ready or in-progress projects would lose funding and that the cuts would worsen the housing shortage.

Several members recounted constituent impacts. Representative Delivers (remarks recorded under that member’s statement) and others described families and seniors who rely on vouchers and local housing programs. Representative Quigley read a constituent’s account of how a housing choice voucher aided a cancer survivor and grandmother caring for grandchildren, saying that tens of thousands would be harmed by proposed cuts. Multiple Democrats noted national estimates cited in the debate: more than 771,000 people experiencing homelessness and a housing shortage of several million units, figures used on the record to frame the potential human impact of the reductions.

Procedure and vote: With no amendments offered, Representative Bice moved that the bill be favorably reported to the full committee. The motion passed on a recorded roll call, with the clerk tallying nine ayes and seven nays. The subcommittee then consented to permit staff to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and report before delivery to full committee members’ offices.

What was not decided: The markup recorded the subcommittee’s recommendation to the full committee; it did not finalize conference positions, appropriations in law, or any changes that might arise in full committee or during bicameral negotiations. Several Democrats urged further changes and said they would oppose the bill as it stood when it reaches later stages.

Ending: The subcommittee chair closed the markup after the recorded vote and the unanimous-consent approval for technical changes.