Strip the Bureaucracy
Hold government accountable by measuring results, not dollars spent.
Government runs on process. It needs to run on outcomes.
Over a third of Congress are lawyers while only a handful are engineers. No wonder we have replaced legislation with litigation.
Politicians abuse the tax code to hide spending, bypassing the hard work of compromise and prioritization that an annual budget requires.
We need leaders who understand that complexity is a tax. I will fight to strip this friction and force the government to measure results, not dollars spent.
It is time to reward outcomes, not the lobbyists who wrote the loophole.
Case Study:
Low Income Housing in Washington State
Let’s dive into an important issue to many voters in the region: low income housing. This case study is to serve as a prime example of good intentions led astray by misaligned incentives and inefficient bureaucracy that negatively impacts outcomes. We can apply this same analysis across the entire federal government.
Representative Suzan DelBene, one of the wealthiest members of Congress who has represented our district since 2012, has made multiple, continuous attempts to expand the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. In Washington State, developers must compete for this funding through the Washington State Housing Finance Commission (WSHFC). Winners are not selected based on who can build the most homes, but by a complex Point System, known as a Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) [1].
While points are awarded for standard criteria like location and number of units, significant weight is given to entering complex legal partnerships with "Community Based Organizations" (CBOs). These partners are required to undergo mandatory interviews with Commission staff just to prove their “value.” Additional points are awarded based on the racial identity (BIPOC) of the developer’s board, as well as inclusion of solar cells and EV charging stations.
These are noble intentions, but they come at a cost. Proposals are strictly required to stay under posted Total Development Cost (TDC) limits, and point penalties are applied to future applications if projected costs go over [2]. These limits are already 30-50% higher than market rates, and projects frequently exceed them.
For example, in Marysville, Twin Lakes Landing II opened in 2023 to integrate homeless families, low-income families and families with special needs. The final cost of the project was $534,949 per unit, approximately $570 per square foot [3]. We could have funded brand new townhomes in the same area for that price.
The “Capital Stack” Scam
This is a federal program implemented locally. Don't blame the WSHFC staff. They are reacting to the incentives Congress created. The WSHFC isn’t given money to dole out. They allocate tax credits.
It is easier for Congress to “pay” for initiatives with tax credits since that only adds to the deficit instead of actually having to allocate funds. Developers must sell these tax credits to generate funds to pay for the build. To create demand, Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) to effectively require banks to buy them. Because the tax code is so complex, expensive “Syndicators” are required to match developers with banks.
Is your head spinning yet?
This is the failure of transferable tax credits. Because the developer cannot use the credit themselves, they must sell it to a bank, creating a secondary market where Wall Street skims off the top.
When all the financial maneuvering is done and banks sell the credits to investors, 15-20% of the taxpayer’s money evaporates before construction even begins [4]. To make matters worse, these credits don’t cover the full cost. Developers are often forced to layer up to seven different funding sources, each with its own application, regulations and legal fees.
The program is funding a bureaucracy of consultants and lawyers as much as it is funding low-income housing.
Let me be clear. These are good sponsors with good intentions. This is not a program that needs to be cut. It’s a program that needs to be optimized. We should be getting more for the tax dollars we are spending.
It is time to stop subsidizing the process and start housing the people.
The Engineer’s Solution
We must stop the tax credit circus. The most direct solution is to reform Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) into a direct funding program. Instead of an indirect system where 20% of the value is lost to financial middlemen, we should provide funding directly to developers to deliver housing.
While a competitive, incentive-based process is still necessary to ensure quality and budget, this reform removes complex financial hurdles and eliminates the “Consultant Tax.” Organizations like the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) have advocated for similar shifts, noting that the current tax credit model is economically inefficient. We want 100% of our tax dollars allocated to low income housing to go directly into building, not consultants and lawyers.
We’ll still need a committee such as the WSHFC but the focus should shift to the non-profits. The same committee can vet, assign and manage non-profits to fill the housing and hold tenants accountable to ensure the tax dollars are going to help people move up the economic ladder and not enable destructive habits.
Let the builders build, and let the non-profits focus on the people, not file endless compliance forms.
This is about more than just numbers. When housing is scarce, it becomes expensive. When it becomes expensive, the most vulnerable fall off the bottom rung of the ladder and onto the street. We cannot solve the homelessness crisis until we solve the scarcity crisis. Every dollar wasted on "Syndicator Fees" or "Consultant Reports" is a dollar stolen from a family sleeping in a car.
LIHTC is just one example of a government that incentivizes process over results.
This rot exists across the entire federal government. We see it in transferable tax credits, such as LIHTC, that create secondary markets, leaking billions to consultants and lawyers. We see it in the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) bureaucracy that replaces clear legislation with administrative social engineering.
The incentive structure is perverse. Because these credits are awarded as a percentage of the total cost, the system actually rewards cost inflation. The more a project costs, the larger the tax break and the higher the fees for the consultants and lawyers. We are literally paying a premium for inefficiency.
We must pay for results We must stop funding compliance and start demanding outcomes. We need to shift to direct funding models and non-transferable tax credits, stripping away the middlemen to ensure every dollar goes toward the intended goal.
I am an engineer, and my job is to optimize complex systems. Government is desperate for this mindset. It is time to reward outcomes, not the lobbyists who wrote the loophole.