The U.S. House will probably be able to defeat an attempt by members of the Senate to penalize cities that, like Cambridge, have rent control programs. Congressional sources said yesterday.

The issue will be debated this week or next by a conference committee on banking trying to reconcile Senate and House versions of the budget. The Senate version includes an amendment that would cut off Section 8 housing funds, used as home subsidies by older cities, to any community with a rent control law in effect.

Test

"I don't believe the House banking conferees would sign a budget resolution if that provision was insisted on," Jerry McMurray, an aide to Rep. Fernand J. St. Germain (D-R.I.). chairman of the housing subcommittee of his chamber's banking committee, said yesterday.

House Speaker Thomas P. O'Neil Jr. (D-Mass.) will tell conferees on the House side that blocking the Senate challenge to rent control is a top priority. Kevin Peterson, a legislative aide to the speaker, said yesterday. "He has been advocating strong resistance," Peterson said.

And City Councilor David Sullivan, who met with O'Neill over the weekend, said yesterday the Cambridge representative has been "very supportive. He said he'd do everything he could to get the anti-rent control provisions out of the bill."

Strongest support for the bill has come from Sen. William L. Armstrong (R-Colo.) and Sen. Alfonse M. D'Amato (R-N.Y.).

"There's a great deal of support in the Senate for the law," Jack Winner, an aide to Armstrong, said yesterday, adding, "I'm sure the senators on the committee will have it as a high priority."

Opposition to rent control is based on the belief that it discourages construction of new rental housing. Armstrong said, adding that since Section & money is used for new rental housing, giving it to cities with rent control would be "like bailing out a boat whose passengers insist on drilling holes in the hull."