Day: May 27, 2008

Well, most of them anyway. I have a little experience writing political questions and all these come across to me as simply asking whether the responder will go along with the pet projects that the AIA advocates, rather than about a philosophical approach to government. Yes, I’m ripping on that group I belong to again.

Granted, the last four questions are a cut better than the rest. Just for fun, I’m going to pretend I’m a Congressional candidate and answer them as I would if I were seeking their endorsement or the cash from ArchiPAC. Most likely they’d make a beeline to donate to my opponent’s coffers! The headings alone pretty much tell the story.

Making Our Communities Vibrant 

1. What is your position on federal programs to increase the availability of affordable housing or workforce housing?

Constitutionally, the federal government has no role in determining housing; however, states are free to do as they please. I believe the programs in place are counterproductive because they interfere with the free market and the extra infusion of cash raises housing prices for all of us.

2. Do you support increasing the share of federal transportation dollars that are used for public transportation and for community enhancement programs?

No, I believe that, if anything, federal transportation dollars should be used to fix our aging highway infrastructure and improve those places where most people, and more importantly the majority of goods, travel – our interstate and other federal highways.

3. Would you support increasing funding for programs that promote the preservation of historic buildings and spaces and increasing the current historic rehabilitation tax credit?

While the cause can be described as noble, philosophically I’m against any sort of targeted tax credits because I believe that taxes should be as flat and fair as possible.

4. Would you support increasing the amount of federal money to be used to clean up brownfields?

I would rather see states increase their incentives to corporations to clean these sites up themselves. Again, this really isn’t properly a federal issue according to the Constitution.

Protecting the Public’s Health and Safety

5. Under federal law, federal agencies must procure architects and engineers on the basis of qualifications, not by the lowest bid. Do you support the continuation of qualifications-based selection for the procurement of architects and engineers at the federal level?

I would like to see a blend of the two philosophies, the best-qualified company for the lowest price. Perhaps streamlining the federal process and rolling back regulations placed on companies who do business with the federal government would encourage more companies to apply.

6. Do you believe that the federal government has a role in helping communities plan in ways that mitigate the effects of natural and man-made disasters? How would you reform the federal emergency management system to better help communities rebuild after disasters?

The federal government has no role in helping communities plan because each community needs to be responsible for itself. And given the inefficiency and fraud that FEMA has become famous for, maybe it’s time to scrap that whole idea.

7. In Congress would you support a federal “Good Samaritan” statute that would provide architects and engineers qualified immunity from liability for negligence when they are providing services on a volunteer basis in response to a declared disaster or emergency?

It’s a good idea. However, I can see the tort lawyers all over this one fighting it tooth and nail.

Designing a Sustainable Future

8. Do you support increasing funding for programs at the Department of Energy that promote energy efficiency, such as the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the Federal Energy Management Program?

No, as a matter of fact I think the Department of Energy should be abolished. It creates no energy, while the private sector does a great job of doing so.

9. Do you support tax incentives for designing and building energy efficient buildings?

Similar to Question #3, I do not believe in targeted tax incentives; moreover, the benefits of energy efficiency should be apparent to owners anyway. Let the private sector and competition do its job.

10. Do you support setting national goals for energy efficient building codes and authorizing the Department of Energy to propose amendments to existing model codes if those codes do not meet energy efficiency targets?

No, because the situation in each state is different. Take “cool” roofs, which are generally white and reflective of solar rays. They’re a good idea in southern climes where the air conditioning load is decreased but in northern areas they actually are somewhat counterproductive in increasing the heat load. A blanket regulation would not be as efficient a solution as allowing those who are closest to the situation at hand to dictate how it is addressed.

Helping Architects Get Down to Business

11. What policies would you support to reduce the costs of health insurance for small businesses?

Policies that work to get the inefficiency of government out of the health care market and the private sector into it. One area of interstate commerce which the federal government could address is allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines, allowing people in highly regulated states the opportunity to purchase less expensive “no-frills” insurance from less regulated states.

12. Do you support reforms that minimize lawsuit abuse and to promote the administration of a fair civil liability legal system without jeopardizing the public interest?

Yes, in particular the “loser pays” approach to lawsuits and a cap on punitive damages. These don’t have to be enacted federally, though – states can take it upon themselves to pass needed reforms.

13. Would you support an increase in the cap on H-1B visas for skilled workers?

I would support an increase only after we take care of border security and also enforcement against those who overstay their visas. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, up to half of illegal aliens are those who overstayed their visas, and increasing that number would in turn increase the problem.

14. Would you support the repeal of the three percent tax withholding on government contracts and the elimination of the 10 percent retainage on fees for federal contracts with architects and engineers?

Yes on both counts. Give architects their money! There should be no tax withholding, and insofar as retainage goes, architects shouldn’t have retainage. Most of our work comes before the building is even started. If the architect is doing construction administration then the retainage can be placed on that portion of the contract.

*****

It’s likely that the only ones who will answer this questionnaire are the ones who already get the donations from ArchiPAC – most of them are Democrats. They certainly eat up those sustainability questions and love to play with the tax laws in order to regulate behavior. Obviously I feel the opposite way, placing my faith in the people and the free market. Also interesting to me was that there wasn’t any member input on the questions insofar as I know.

Of course, if the American Institute of Architects wants a good list of questions that deal with a philosophical approach to governance perhaps they can start by looking here.