PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-5] · R–CA
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: Jan 23, 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.1133 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.1133 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.1133 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.1133 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 · 2025-02-07 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.
This bill proposes to abolish grants by repealing specified parts of the federal housing and community development law. Its title identifies Community Development Block Grants as the target. The proposed repeal would take effect on October 1, 2025.
This Act may be cited as the Repeal Community Development Block Grants Act of 2025.
2. Abolition of grants (a) Abolition of grants Section 101 and sections 103 through 122 of title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) are repealed. (b) Effective date The amendments made by this section shall take effect on October 1, 2025.
Section 2 would repeal section 101 and sections 103 through 122 of title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Section 102 is not included in the specified repeal.
Section 101 and sections 103 through 122 of title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) are repealed.
The bill specifies October 1, 2025, as the effective date for the repeal. This is a proposed effective date, not evidence that the repeal took effect.
The amendments made by this section shall take effect on October 1, 2025.
The official-actions snapshot updated January 23, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Financial Services on February 7, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-01-23T18:37:23Z. 2025-02-07: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. 2025-02-07: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-07. 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 change attached to appropriations was identified in 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 congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; earmark disclosures and accompanying committee materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. 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: Jan 23, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI