In a Masthead from 2024, it was mathematically demonstrated that the U.S. affordable housing crisis can’t be solved by taxpayer subsidies. Next, it is a matter of record caught on video that former National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) CEO Jerry Howard stated the following. “Right now, in almost no market in this country, can a homebuilder build a house that is affordable for a first-time homebuyer,” NAHB CEO Howard said that on Fox Business’ “Varney & Co.,” adding this. “We can’t do it. The costs that are on us make it impossible.” Per that report on 11.17.2022: “His [i.e.: Howard’s] comments come as new data from Redfin revealed that a homebuyer has to earn at least $107,281 to afford the $2,682 monthly mortgage payment on a typical U.S. home, representing a 45.6% jump from last year, when annual income to afford a [site built] home was $73,000.” Part of that statement by Howard was reported by Cavco Industries to their current and potential shareholders via an Investor Relations (IR) presentation with this phrase under the header “The Affordable Housing Crisis “…(in) no market in this country can a homebuilder build a house that is affordable for a first-time home buyer.” Curiously, Cavco did so without apparently proper attribution of the news source (see screen grab below). One key point is that without taxpayer subsidies, at recent interest rates and common finance terms, first-time buyers routinely can’t afford to buy a new conventional “site built” house. But millions of Americans can still afford to finance and purchase a new HUD Code manufactured home. Even more could buy if existing federal laws were properly, routinely, and earnestly enforced.

In under 300 words, that introduction sets the stage for understanding the truth about the necessity for making the financing and placement of millions of new HUD Code manufactured homes a key feature of any successful administration’s housing policy. Congress recognized that decades ago, but two good laws they enacted have not been properly enforced. Will Trump 2.0 enforce existing housing laws?

Time will tell, but that 339 words above is also revealing for the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), for MHI member Cavco, and numerous others involved in affordable housing advocacy, as this fact- and evidence-backed analysis will demonstrate (i.e.: headline “historic demo”).

 

Part I: Facts-Evidence and Analysis of What Must Be Done to Truly Fix Affordable Housing Crisis

1)

 

Putting a phrase between quotation marks before doing a search reveals a focused result instead of millions of responses that may or may not be useful. A Google search was performed on 1.11.2025 at about 11:17 PM ET.  It used the precise phrase as typed by Cavco Industries (CVCO) in several of their Investor Relations (IR) presentations: “…(in) no market in this country can a homebuilder build a house that is affordable for a first-time home buyer.” Oddly, at that date and time, the only results for that phrase using the “all” search tab on Google are found on ManufacturedHomeProNews.com (a.k.a.: MHProNews), and nowhere else online? Hold that thought as we pivot to another headline point. Note: depending on your browser or device, you can click the image below, follow the prompts and open that illustration to see it more easily in a larger size.

 

 

2) According to several Federal Reserve System linked researchers, including, but not limited to those shown below, ‘sabotage monopoly’ tactics have been deployed against the mobile home industry which evolved into the manufactured housing industry following the enactment of what was later termed as the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 legislation. That law gave the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) primary federal jurisdiction over the regulation of manufactured home industry. That law and its updates remains the only national construction safety standards for residential housing and includes federal preemption.  More on federal preemption and manufactured housing later.

 

 

3) Elena Falcettoni, James A. “Jim” Schmitz Jr, and Mark L. J. Wright (Falcettoni, Schmitz, Wright) published the report (see second link above) entitled:

Mass Production of Homes in Factories in U.S. ‘First and Only Experiment Was Tremendous Success’

 

4) In the Word version of the PDF of their report provided by a Minneapolis Federal Reserve source to MHProNews is the following from their Introduction.

Mass production in factories ushered in dramatic price declines in a wide range of goods – automobiles, bicycles, clothing and more. It did so by developing simple versions (“no bells and whistles”) and standardized versions (products with uniform features) of craft-produced goods, and by using highly specialized machinery and a standardized manufacturing process. Mass production greatly expanded consumption opportunities for low and middle income families.

Housing was an obvious candidate for mass production, as it accounted for large shares of low and middle income household budgets. Moreover, the construction methods used by craft producers during the first half of the 20th century, sometimes called “stick-built” methods, were hundreds of years old.¹ However, housing has always faced a somewhat unique problem when trying to achieve mass production. When Henry Ford produced cars in one of his factories, there were no local producers of cars in that area. When a producer manufactured a home in a factory, there were always local craft-builders of homes in the area – and typically they fiercely resisted the factory-built homes.

So, while many groups attempted to mass produce housing during first half of 20th century, hoping to accomplish for housing what had been achieved for other goods, they faced significant opposition from stick-builders. None of the attempts at mass production succeeded.²

 

5) The first two footnotes in the Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright authored report are as follows.

¹ For example, A.C. Shire (1937), who was the chief engineer of the Federal Housing Administration, wrote, “In an age of large-scale financing, power, and mass production, we have the anachronism that the oldest and one of the largest of our industries, concerned with the production of one of the three essentials of life … follows practices developed in the days of handwork … [and] is unable to benefit by advancing productive techniques in other fields.” He continued: “Unlike other widely used commodities, shelter is not made in a factory or plant organized for its production [our (i.e.: Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright) emphasis].”

² See, for example, Thurman Arnold (1947) for how resistance by incumbents in the stick-built sector sabotaged factory production of homes. Arnold, among many other accomplishments, ran the antitrust division at the Department of Justice under FDR from 1938-1943. He brought indictments against many groups that were sabotaging factory-built homes during his tenure. More below on the sabotage of factory-built homes.

So, research by Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright pointed out that “the stick-built sector sabotaged factory production of homes.” That trio also informed us that the FHA’s A.C. Shire said in 1937 that: “In an age of large-scale financing, power, and mass production…Unlike other widely used commodities, shelter is not made in a factory or plant organized for its production.”

The reason for Shire’s insight? Per Thurman Arnold, another federal official, the sabotage of the factory-built housing industry. So, who is Arnold?

6) According to WyoHistory.org on 1.12.2025 entitled:

Thurman Arnold, Laramie Lawyer and New Deal Trustbuster

are the following remarks.

In 1939, The Saturday Evening Post published a lengthy profile of Thurman W. Arnold, a lawyer born and raised in Laramie, Wyo., dubbing him a “Trust Buster” and calling him “probably the most singular figure in the American Government today.”

President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s appointment of Arnold to head the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division in 1938 had pushed him into the national spotlight. In 1940, Arnold found himself arguing one of the most important antitrust cases of all times in front of the United States Supreme Court. In this case, the Justice Department had convicted several major oil companies and their officers for illegal price-fixing. As Arnold stood before the assembled justices, he must have been comforted by the sight on the Supreme Court bench of his old friend and colleague, Justice William O. Douglas, with whom he had served on the Yale law faculty.

Arnold, representing the government, won a resounding victory.

 

7) That is the same Thurman W. Arnold referenced by Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright in footnote #2 previously shown.

Arnold was known as a ‘trust buster,’ meaning an antitrust or anti-monopoly attorney in the U.S. Antitrust Division. So, it is no light remark for Arnold to allege that factory building techniques were being sabotaged by conventional builders and other ‘special interest’ groups.

Given the importance of antitrust or pro-competition law enforcement and the research by Falcettoni, Schmitz, Wright and others into this topic, one might think that Thurman Arnold would be someone of interest to the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI). But per a search of their website on 1.12.2025 per Google, no.

 

 

8) Does the HUD.gov website mention Thurman Arnold? Again, on the date and time checked, per Google, no.

 

9) Does the NAHB website mention Thurman Arnold? No joy, per another Google search result, but the Minneapolis Federal Reserve and MHProNews do have results on that search per Google.

 

10) Per an outside attorney for MHI, David Goch, MHI monitor websites like ours because we are considered a critic of that Arlington, VA based trade organization he has represented.

Additionally, MHProNews has contacted Goch and MHI multiple times over the course of years for comments on these topics. Furthermore, MHI – per sources deemed reliable – have multiple high-ranking staff and corporate board officials who are regular readers of MHProNews. Should they and their unaltered records ever be deposed that would be demonstrable.

 

11) Depending on reading speed, in about 7 to 12 minutes someone could have read all of the text above, including captions under images. In mere minutes anyone who stumbles across this article would begin to grasp the following.

a) Conventional builders can’t solve the affordable housing crisis. It is not mathematically possible. At the time of prior NAHB CEO Jerry Howard’s remarks that affirmed that conventional builders couldn’t do it at then current costs and burdens it required: “at least $107,281 to afford the $2,682 monthly mortgage payment on a typical U.S. home.” Per Copilot, which provided footnoted sources:

The average income in the U.S. in 2025 is $59,436¹²³⁴⁵.

That’s almost double what is needed to qualify, thus underscoring Howard’s point cited by Cavco Industries IR pitch. Fortunately, manufactured homes are about half the cost of conventional housing. That’s more evidence that modern mainstream manufactured housing is essential to solve the U.S. affordable housing crisis.

 

 

b) The most successful timeframe for factory-built housing (see above and what follows) was the pre-HUD Code “mobile home” era of what became manufactured housing. The base illustration below is from MHI member Champion Homes’ IR presentation. One should keep in mind that per SEC guidelines, IR information ought to be factually or “materially” accurate by law. MHProNews has added the additional content and captions as shown.

 

 

c) Federal Reserve researchers cited above, who pointed back to the 1930s and 1940s remarks by federal officials including DOJ antitrust enforcer Arnold, said that conventional housing interests in apparent collusion with HUD, have ‘sabotaged’ the U.S. housing market and created the affordable housing crisis. There is an evidence-based argument to be made that without understanding the above the affordable housing crisis can’t be solved. More evidence for that will follow.

12) In a sense, the direct and indirect evidence for this gets worse when looking at some research from the Obama-Biden (D) era and the Biden-Harris (D) era too. How so?

Regulatory Barriers to Manufactured Housing Placement in Urban Areas was a HUD Policy Development and Research (PD&R) commissioned study published on 3.3.2011 (Obama-Biden) per the screen shot shown below.

 

 

But note that the 2011 report cites federal subsidies available, even in that brief from the search screen grab above. As the preface and linked evidence informed and/or reminded us, subsidies won’t ever solve the affordable housing crisis. Subsidies are part of the tactics that Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright described as ‘sabotaging’ the factory-built housing market. An entirely separate Federal Reserve linked report authored by Donald H. Layton emphasized that manufactured housing is an essential part of the unsubsidized solution to the affordable housing crisis.

 

 

13) Fast forward to 2021 and the Biden-Harris (D) regime when the following post by HUD PD&R researchers Pamela Blumenthal and Regina Gray published “Opportunities to Increase Housing Production and Preservation” on the HUD website.

That report said in part:

Without significant new supply, cost burdens are likely to increase as current home prices reach all-time highs…

These data emphasize the urgency of employing opportunities for increasing the supply of housing and preserving the existing housing portfolio.

The regulatory environment — federal, state, and local — that contributes to the extensive mismatch between supply and need has worsened over time. Federally sponsored commissions, task forces, and councils under both Democratic and Republican administrations have examined the effects of land use regulations on affordable housing for more than 50 years.

That’s the key agency in the federal government responsible for insuring affordable housing for all is more than a slogan admitting that “federal, state and local” policies ‘contributed’ to “the extensive mismatch between supply and need has worsened over time.” Trump 2.0 nominee to be the next HUD Secretary, Eric Scott Turner, are you seeing this? The agency you will be leading has flatly admitted via Blumenthal and Gray’s insights that for over 5 decades the causes and cures for the affordable housing crisis have only worsened over time.

 

 

14) HUD PD&R’s Regina Gray made it even more specific two years later (9.12.2023).

Gray said:

Operation Breakthrough’s biggest accomplishment, however, was the adoption of the HUD Code, which introduced the industry and the world to manufactured housing.

See more, linked below.

 

15) So, several Federal Reserve linked researchers including Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright have said that the mobile home era (the timeframe that Operation Breakthrough referenced by Regina Gray occurred was 1969 to the mid-1970s) and HUD’s own Regina Gray both said that federally regulated manufactured housing and its precursor, the pre-6.15.1976 era mobile home, were the success story to be considered.

 

 

16) With those facts in mind, let’s pivot back to several curious facts, insights, information, and professional views on the subject of the U.S. affordable housing crisis.

a) The causes and cures are quite well known. They have been well known for “over 50 years.”

b) Before we begin to summarize and further synthesize the key facts, some additional insights are useful. Let’s pivot back to that illustration from Cavco. In several respects, it is a good executive summary of the situation, provided some additional insights are shared. The version shown below was uploaded to MHProNews on December 16, 2023. Click that image and follow the prompts or the link here and follow the prompts to see it in a larger size.

 

 

c) Cavco cited the sources for quotes from Pew, NPR, and Forbes. But curiously, Cavco didn’t mention that the source for the quote at the top was a video and article on Fox Business.  Why not? Even more curiously, if someone types that phrase in precisely as Cavco showed it on their illustration, that statement is only found on the MHProNews website. The following was previously shown in Part I #1. But oddly, that parenetical “…(in) no market in this country can a homebuilder build a house that is affordable for a first-time home buyer” is a typo by Cavco. The word “in” was said by NAHB’s Jerry Howard, per that Fox Business article and video. If someone types that phrase into a search engine, and had MHProNews not published those reports, there would have been NO search result for a precise phrase search as provided by Cavco. Was Cavco trying to hide some key fact (i.e.: the source) of that remark? And if so, why? What was the logic behind showing other sources and not the source as being uttered on Fox Business? That may be a mere curiosity, or it may have a deeper meaning that Cavco’s leadership ought to be quizzed on so a formal record is developed.

 

 

17) From a different presentation by Minneapolis Federal Reserve Senior Economist Jim Schmitz Jr. is the following statement. Note that Schmitz and his colleagues had previously said that monopolists often obscure their tactics which makes them difficult to detect.

 

So, those peering into manufactured housing, per Schmitz (and others shown below) ought to be on the lookout for evidence that at least some people in the manufactured housing industry are at some level also involved in an apparent scheme to “sabotage” manufactured housing, to borrow the term used by DOJ antitrust official Arnold.

 

18) As a terminology relevant point, per the Federal Register: “The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (the Act) requires HUD to publish in the proposed revised Construction and Safety Standards submitted by the MHCC.” But per left-leaning Wikipedia that law was originally called “Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 or National Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards Act is a United States federal law establishing design and development safety standards for manufactured housing or prefabricated homes.” It was later renamed as the “National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act.”

19) These concerns about purported antitrust violations involving the factory-built housing industry during the mobile home era, perhaps no contemporary sources from outside the ranks of manufactured housing have done more to highlight these issues than Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright, or James A. Schmitz Jr., Arilton Teixeira, and Mark L. J. Wright previously have.

 

 

But that also begs questions. Why is it that MHProNews and MHLivingNews have cited such facts in several prior reports, but the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) and/or their associated trade media and bloggers haven’t? We saw earlier in Part I that Thurmond Arnold’s name isn’t found on MHI or their member-blogger-publications but is found on MHProNews. Something similar could be demonstrated about Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright, OR Schmitz, Teixeira, and Wright.

 

 

20) Other sources researching manufactured housing, or who are already engaged in the industry have made some eye-opening claims and allegations too. Sadly, perhaps for some, there is evidence to support their various claims.

 

 

21) Then and more recently, there are fingerprints of Warren Buffett led Berkshire Hathaway (BRK) and various brands they own such as Clayton Homes, 21st Mortgage Corporation, and Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance (VMF) appear to be involved in this tragic mess that has given us and/or made worse, the current affordable housing crisis.

 

 

22) While the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) has not directly weighed in on several of these details (e.g.: Schmitz, Strommen, Ryan, Rolfe, others), they too have pointed out that certain federal agencies along with the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) are failing at their respective jobs and that Congressional and regulatory agencies should be investigating these matters. MHARR has said that “shell game” is being played and that the affordable housing crisis has been made worse because of it. More recently, MHARR has said that failure to properly implement existing federal laws are causing the bottlenecks that keep inherently affordable mainstream manufactured homes from solving the U.S. housing crisis.

 

 

23) When former MHI VP, MHARR’s founding president and CEO, and current senior advisor to MHARR, Danny Ghorbani speaks about “post production representation” that is a reference to MHI, which claims to represent both producers and post-production, or “all segments” of the manufactured housing industry.

 

 

24) Mark Weiss, J.D., MHARR’s current president and CEO has signaled his hope that “Trump 2.0” will do something that other 21st century presidents and administrations have failed to do. Namely, enforce existing laws routinely and robustly so that manufactured housing can solve the affordable housing crisis with essentially no additional taxpayer costs.

 

 

25) The tragedy of the ‘sabotage’ of affordable manufactured housing is illustrated in these production trend graphics that follow the remarks by Scholastica “Gay” Cororaton, CRE, via the National Association of Realtors (NAR) linked Journal of Real Estate Studies. 

 

 

 

26) There was a reason to point out that Regulatory Barriers and the various items published by Blumenthal and Gray referenced above occurred during the Obama-Biden (D) years and the Biden-Harris (D) years. While a U.S. Senator, Joe Biden co-sponsored legislation in the U.S. Senate entitled the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (a.k.a.: MHIA 2000, MHIA, 2000 Reform Law, 2000 Reform Act). That 2000 Reform Law has a provision commonly referred to as “enhanced preemption” because the original HUD Code enabling legislation enacted in 1974 already had federal preemption that was later deemed by the industry, Congress, and others to be in need of strengthening. Thus, the common phrase “enhanced preemption.” MHARR’s Mark Weiss, J.D., explains it like this.

 

27) What that point from Weiss, buttressed by Congressional reps that helped enacted the 2000 Reform Law and others, means is this.  The legal tool needed to solve the affordable housing crisis already exists. It is enhanced preemption under the 2000 Reform Law. Here is how several congressional representatives described the importance of the law in a letter to prior HUD Secretary Mel Martinez (R).

 

 

28) On paper, MHI seems to hold a similar position as MHARR does on “enhanced preemption.”

 

29) But upon closer examination MHI, and several of the bloggers/trade publishers linked to them fail to use those key words “enhanced preemption” on their own website. In what sense are they effectively advocating for enforcement of a policy that can’t be found on its own website?

 

 

30) Still more curious is that MHI has been actively and openly engaged in advocacy with the competitors of manufactured housing which includes the very trade group, the NAHB, that Schmitz and his colleagues say have been colluding with HUD to sabotage manufactured housing. Details on that are found in the report linked below.

 

31) What could be the motivation for this troubling pattern of behavior? Per several sources involved with MHI it is consolidation of the manufactured home industry. This is not a matter of speculation. The evidence is often found in corporate statements, such as the IR pitches from MHI member Flagship Communities and the earnings call remark by a senior Champion (SKY), shown below.

 

Pulling Back Veil on MHI-MHV-SSK Connected Nathan Smith, Kurt Keeney and Flagship Communities REIT – Fact Check-Analysis of Flagship Investor Relations Pitch (TSX: MHC.U); plus MHVille Markets

 

32) This sabotage monopoly pattern is causing the affordable housing crisis, say the Federal Reserve system linked research cited above: Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright, OR Schmitz, Teixeira, and Wright. Here is how MHARR’s President and CEO, Mark Weiss, J.D., summed it up. Keep in mind that “post-production” is a kind of code meaning the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI), because they claim to represent “all segments” (i.e.: production and post-production) of the industry. In contrast, MHARR is a producer’s trade group.

 

 

33) AI powered Copilot said the following about MHI’s curious, vexing, if not problematic and legally questionable behavior. See the quotes at the base of the image below.

 

 

34) Let’s sum up what this demonstration (demo) has documented.

a) The math at current interest rates and financing terms means that most Americans can’t afford to buy a new conventional house.

b) Millions of new housing units are needed, Cavco put it at 6 million. Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA-D) recently put the need it at 7 million units. Other sources place that need higher still, at over 10 million housing units. Conventional builders can’t achieve the price points or the production level needed.  Thus, the reason why Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright, AND Schmitz, Teixeira, and Wright each said that antitrust efforts are needed to solve the housing crisis.

c) Falcettoni, Schmitz, and Wright pointed out that the late DOJ antitrust leader Thurmon Arnold said that ‘sabotage monopoly’ tactics have been deployed against factory-built housing. Those Federal Reserve linked researchers specifically said mobile/manufactured housing was targeted by the NAHB-HUD and other interested parties. David Fettig and Jim Schmitz Jr. said that ‘monopolies are silent spreaders of poverty and economic inequality.’  They also cited Thurman Arnold and another antitrust advocate, Henry Simons.

 

 

 

d) MHI has ducked accountability for years their vexing pattern of saying one thing in an email to members and/or in letter to a public official but then lacking that same information on the public side of their own website. Nor has MHI sued to enforce laws that they claim they want enforced.

 

 

e) As if to confirm concerns raised by voices in or beyond manufactured housing who say that antitrust action is needed to deal with these issues, several MHI members have been sued by in multiple class action antitrust actions.

 

 

f) MHARR has been asking for Congress to probe these issues and has also asked that appropriate federal officials investigate those involved the lack of enforcement of existing laws. Congress held hearings in 2011 and 2012 that were specifically focused on the 2000 Reform Law and its lack of proper enforcement.  Congress heard from Cavco’ Bill Boor on 7.14.2024 that the lack of enforcement of enhanced preemption is still an issue. See three linked articles below that have the transcripts of those remarks and hearings.

 

 

g) Years of third-party research and years of reports on MHProNews, MHLivingNews, and independently on the MHARR website all directly or indirectly point to the following realities.  A key part of the solution to the affordable housing crisis must include HUD Code manufactured homes. The fact that MHI postures support for those laws but then fails to take the obvious steps needed to see to it that those laws are robustly and earnestly enforced ought to be formally investigated. So too should the behavior of agencies that include HUD, FHFA, and DOE.

Part II – Additional Information with More MHProNews Analysis 

To learn more, see the linked reports.

National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)-‘How Zoning Regulations Affect Affordable Housing’ ‘Without Subsidies Developing and Building Untenable’ Hits-Misses re: Manufactured Housing FEA