PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 6, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10103 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10103 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10103 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10103 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-08-13 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The bill would create a pilot grant program for local governments to help landlords and tenants resolve disputes before an eviction case is filed, and authorize funding subject to appropriations. If a tenant chose to participate, both sides would have to take part in good faith for at least 30 days before formal eviction proceedings. Programs would include rental assistance or connections to it, mediation, and housing counselors. An exception would apply to evictions needed to prevent an imminent threat of physical harm.
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (hereafter referred to as the Secretary) shall establish a pilot program to provide grants to eligible entities to fund the establishment or expansion of pre-filing eviction diversion programs.
To be eligible for a grant under this section, an entity shall be a unit of general local government.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $300,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
A requirement that if the tenant chooses to participate in the eviction diversion program, that landlords and tenants participate in the program, in good faith, for a minimum of 30 days before the landlord initiates any formal eviction proceedings.
Dispute resolution procedures between the landlord and tenant with respect to a potential eviction, including— (A) direct rental assistance or the connection to rental assistance; (B) mediation services; (C) assigning a housing counselor to the tenant;
An exception to participation in the program for evictions necessary to prevent an imminent threat of physical harm.
Section 1 would name the legislation the Stable Homes Act.
This Act may be cited as the Stable Homes Act.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development would have to establish the pilot within one year after enactment. Only units of general local government would be eligible for grants, which they would have to use to establish or expand eviction diversion programs.
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (hereafter referred to as the Secretary) shall establish a pilot program to provide grants to eligible entities to fund the establishment or expansion of pre-filing eviction diversion programs.
(b) Eligibility To be eligible for a grant under this section, an entity shall be a unit of general local government. (c) Use of funds An eligible entity that is awarded a grant under this section shall use such grant amounts to establish or expand an eviction diversion program.
For residential rental housing covered by these programs, landlords would have to give tenants written notice of their participation rights and how to exercise them, both by hand delivery and by mail with proof of mailing. The notice would explain that participation does not waive legal rights, including trial before a judge and jury if the dispute remains unresolved.
the term eviction diversion program means a program that includes the following attributes with respect to residential rental housing within the jurisdiction of the unit of general local government:
A requirement that landlords notify tenants in writing, by hand delivery and by mail with proof of mailing, of the tenant’s right to engage in an eviction diversion program and how to exercise such rights. The notice shall explain that opting to participate in an eviction diversion program does not waive any of the tenant’s legal rights, including the right to go to trial before a judge and jury if the diversion program is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute.
A tenant's choice to participate would require both the landlord and tenant to participate in good faith for at least 30 days before the landlord starts formal eviction proceedings.
A requirement that if the tenant chooses to participate in the eviction diversion program, that landlords and tenants participate in the program, in good faith, for a minimum of 30 days before the landlord initiates any formal eviction proceedings.
Programs would have to include direct rental assistance or connections to rental assistance, mediation services, a housing counselor assigned to the tenant, and other assistance to help resolve the dispute.
Dispute resolution procedures between the landlord and tenant with respect to a potential eviction, including— (A) direct rental assistance or the connection to rental assistance; (B) mediation services; (C) assigning a housing counselor to the tenant; and (D) any other assistance to facilitate dispute resolution between the landlord and tenant.
Programs would have to exempt evictions necessary to prevent an imminent threat of physical harm from the participation requirement.
An exception to participation in the program for evictions necessary to prevent an imminent threat of physical harm.
If a landlord failed to comply with a program requirement, the tenant would be able to raise that failure as a defense in a related eviction court case. The text does not make that defense an automatic guarantee against eviction.
In the case that the landlord does not comply with any requirement of the program, the ability of the tenant to assert such noncompliance as a defense in any related eviction court proceeding.
When a landlord had a lawyer, a tenant with income at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty line would have a right to a lawyer at no cost before the diversion process could occur.
In the case that the landlord is represented by legal counsel, the tenant has a right to counsel at no cost if their income is equal to or less than 200 percent of the Federal poverty line before the diversion process can occur.
The Secretary could provide technical assistance to grant recipients, including model landlord notice forms intended to make notices accessible to tenants. This assistance would be permitted, rather than required.
The Secretary may provide technical assistance to eligible entities that are awarded a grant under this section, including by issuing model forms to standardize a landlord notice to a tenant with respect to a tenant’s right to engage in an eviction diversion program to ensure accessibility by tenants.
Grant recipients would have to report to the Secretary within one year after enactment and annually until the pilot ends. Reports would cover case counts, average cost per case, landlord types, percentages of landlords and tenants represented by counsel, and aggregated tenant demographic data on income range, age, race and ethnicity, and urban, suburban, and rural residence. The Secretary could require additional information.
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section, and annually thereafter until the date described in subsection (f), an eligible entity that is awarded grant under this section shall submit to the Secretary a report that includes— (A) the number of eviction diversion program cases filed; (B) the average cost for each case; (C) the types of landlords in each case; (D) the percentage of landlords and tenants represented by legal counsel in each case; (E) the aggregated demographic data of tenants participating in the eviction diversion program, including data on income range, age, racial and ethnic identity, and urban, suburban, and rural residency; and (F) any other information as the Secretary may require.
Within three months after receiving annual reports, the Secretary would have to send a summary to the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee. The department's Inspector General would have to assess the pilot's implementation and operation at least twice between enactment and termination to ensure fair and legitimate use of the program.
Not later than 3 months after receiving the annual reports under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate a report that summarizes such reports.
Not less frequently than twice between the date of the enactment of this section and the termination date described in subsection (f), the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall complete an assessment of the implementation and operation of the pilot program under this section, to ensure the fair and legitimate use of such program.
The pilot would end on December 31, 2030. The bill would authorize $300 million for each fiscal year from 2026 through 2030; the authorization would not itself appropriate the money.
(f) Duration and expiration The pilot program under this section shall terminate on December 31, 2030. (g) Authorization of appropriations There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $300,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 6, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Financial Services on August 13, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-06T08:05:34Z. 2026-08-13: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. 2026-08-13: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-08-13. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No earmark was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; it does not establish formal earmark status or absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential carve-out was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. Conditional eligibility for assistance to intended program beneficiaries or participant protections does not alone warrant a finding under the supplied definition. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 6, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI