The Case for Bipartisan Housing Policy

Troy Nash • March 18, 2026

Share this article

The Low Income Housing Tax Credit was created in 1986 under President Ronald Reagan as part of the Tax Reform Act. It was a Republican president who signed into law the most successful affordable housing program in American history. That fact is worth sitting with for a moment, because it tells you something important about housing policy: when it works, it works across the aisle.

I have spent my career in the space where policy meets development. As Vice Chairman of the Missouri Housing Development Commission from 2009 to 2017, I was nominated by Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat, and confirmed by the Missouri Senate on a bipartisan basis. The commission I served on administered the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the Missouri LIHTC, and the Affordable Housing Assistance Tax Credit. The members came from different political backgrounds. The votes were not partisan. They were about whether a project would serve families, whether the financing was sound, and whether the developer could deliver.

That experience taught me that affordable housing is one of the few policy areas where bipartisan cooperation is not just possible. It is the norm. And it needs to stay that way.

Why LIHTC Works Across the Aisle

LIHTC is a tax credit, not a government spending program. That distinction matters politically. The credit incentivizes private investment in affordable housing by allowing investors to reduce their federal tax liability in exchange for equity in affordable housing developments. The government does not build the housing. Private developers do. The government does not own the housing. Private entities do. The government creates the incentive, and the private market responds.

This structure appeals to both sides of the political spectrum. Fiscal conservatives support LIHTC because it leverages private capital rather than expanding direct government spending. It uses market mechanisms to achieve a public policy goal. Progressives support LIHTC because it produces affordable housing for families who need it, serving residents at the lowest income levels in communities across the country.

Since 1986, LIHTC has financed the construction or rehabilitation of millions of affordable housing units. No other program comes close. And it has maintained bipartisan support through every administration, Republican and Democrat, for nearly four decades.

My Bipartisan Confirmation

When Governor Nixon nominated me to the Missouri Housing Development Commission, the confirmation process required a vote of the Missouri Senate. That Senate was not a body where partisan votes were unusual. But my confirmation was bipartisan. Senators on both sides voted to put me on the commission because they understood that housing is not a partisan issue. Families in Republican districts need affordable housing. Families in Democratic districts need affordable housing. The need does not care about party affiliation.

During my eight years as Vice Chairman, I never once saw a LIHTC allocation decision break along party lines. The debates were about geography, about whether rural projects were getting a fair share compared to urban ones, about per unit costs, about which populations were being underserved. Those are legitimate policy debates, and they happened within a bipartisan framework that both sides respected.

The Board of Curators Precedent

My bipartisan experience did not start at MHDC. In 1996, at 26 years old, I was nominated by Governor Mel Carnahan and confirmed by the Missouri Senate to the University of Missouri Board of Curators, becoming the first African American to hold the position in the university system's history. That confirmation was also bipartisan. The Senate confirmed me because the question was not about party. It was about whether I could serve over 55,000 college students throughout the state of Missouri effectively.

These experiences shaped my understanding of how policy is supposed to work. When the question is framed around outcomes, around families served, students educated, communities strengthened, the partisan noise fades. When the question becomes about scoring political points, the families lose.

What Bipartisan Housing Policy Looks Like on the Ground

Today, at The Nash Group, we are building 254 or more affordable housing units across Kansas City and St. Louis with over $100 million in total development costs. Every one of those units depends on LIHTC, the bipartisan program that has been the backbone of affordable housing for nearly four decades.

The Mabion, our $19.3 million development bringing 57 homes to Beacon Hill in Kansas City, is a 4% federal LIHTC deal. Promise Place, our 85 unit development serving families at 30 to 60 percent of Area Median Income, is also a 4% federal deal backed by significant city resources. The Ville Wellness Campus in North St. Louis is a $75 million project integrating 120 affordable housing units with a 45,000 square foot health center.

None of these projects would exist without LIHTC. None of them would exist without the bipartisan consensus that created and sustained the program. When elected officials on both sides of the aisle agree that affordable housing matters, developers can build. When that consensus fractures, families pay the price.

The Threats to Consensus

Bipartisan support for LIHTC has held for decades, but it is not guaranteed. Every few years, tax reform conversations raise the possibility of changes to the credit. Rate adjustments, cap modifications, and program restructuring proposals all emerge when Congress takes up the tax code. Each of these conversations has the potential to weaken the program that millions of families depend on.

The developer community has a responsibility to make the case for LIHTC to both parties, in language that both parties understand. To fiscal conservatives: LIHTC leverages private investment, creates jobs, generates property tax revenue, and revitalizes neighborhoods without expanding government ownership of housing. To progressives: LIHTC produces more affordable housing than any other program in American history and serves the families who need it most.

Both of those statements are true simultaneously. That is the power of a bipartisan program.

What I Tell My Students

I teach in the Executive MBA Program at the UMKC Henry W. Bloch School of Management, and I direct the Lewis White Real Estate Center. My students come from across the political spectrum. When we discuss affordable housing policy, I tell them the same thing I am writing here: the most productive policy conversations happen when both sides focus on outcomes instead of ideology.

LIHTC works because it was designed to work for everyone. The investor gets a tax benefit. The developer gets equity. The city gets new housing stock and increased property tax revenue. The family gets a home. When a policy delivers outcomes for every stakeholder, the partisan incentive to oppose it disappears.

That is the model. And it is worth defending.

The Stakes

Where you live shapes who you become. I know this because I grew up in Section 8 public housing in Kansas City, raised by a single mother with six children. The housing I grew up in was made possible by government programs. The housing I build today is made possible by LIHTC, a program that exists because a Republican president and a bipartisan Congress agreed in 1986 that affordable housing was worth investing in.

That agreement has held for nearly 40 years. It has housed millions of families. It has created an entire industry of developers, investors, syndicators, and service providers dedicated to building affordable housing in every state in the country. It is one of the great success stories of American public policy, and it happened because both parties said yes.

The case for bipartisan housing policy is not theoretical. It is 57 homes at The Mabion. It is 85 families at Promise Place. It is 120 units at the Ville Wellness Campus. It is every family that will sleep in an affordable home tonight because somewhere, at some point, both sides of the aisle decided that housing matters more than politics.

That is the case. That is the commitment. And that is the work.

Dr. Troy Nash is CEO and Co-Founder of The Nash Group, LLC. He served as Vice Chairman of the Missouri Housing Development Commission (2009-2017), confirmed by the Missouri Senate on a bipartisan basis. He currently serves as a Professor in the Executive MBA Program and Director of the Lewis White Real Estate Center at the UMKC Henry W. Bloch School of Management.

Recent Posts

By Troy Nash March 19, 2026
I grew up in public housing. Section 8. Kansas City, Missouri. That is not a metaphor or a brand story. That is where I slept at night. My mother raised us without much, but she raised us with an understanding that where you start does not determine where you finish. I took that seriously. Maybe more seriously than she intended, because by the time I was done, I had collected nine academic degrees, traveled to more than 50 countries, served on the Kansas City Council, been appointed to the Missouri Housing Development Commission by the governor, joined the boards of a bank, a university, and a national development company, and built a real estate advisory firm that operates across multiple states. Savoy Magazine named me among the Most Influential Black Executives in Corporate America in 2020 and again in 2022. Ingram's Magazine put me on their list of 50 Missourians You Should Know in 2015. I am telling you this not to impress you but to establish a fact: the trajectory from public housing to national recognition is documented. It is not a claim. It is a record. The Arc Nine degrees sounds excessive until you understand the logic. Each degree opened a door that the previous one could not. A bachelor's degree got me into law school. Law school gave me the tools to understand policy. A master's in public administration taught me how government actually works from the inside. An MBA taught me how capital flows. A doctorate gave me the credibility to teach at a university. Every credential was a strategic investment in the next phase of the work. People ask me why I kept going back to school. The answer is simple: every time I reached the next level of my career, I discovered that I needed knowledge I did not yet have. When I entered government, I needed to understand public administration. When I started doing development deals, I needed to understand finance. When I wanted to teach at a university, I needed the terminal degree. Education was never the goal. It was always the tool. The Kansas City Council taught me how cities make decisions. Chairing the Planning, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee showed me the full machinery of urban development: the politics, the financing, the community dynamics, and the trade-offs that nobody talks about publicly. Every major development project in Kansas City crossed my desk. Every zoning change. Every tax abatement. Every TIF district. I saw how the system worked from the inside, and that education was more valuable than any degree. The Missouri Housing Commission taught me how states allocate Low Income Housing Tax Credits. As a commissioner appointed by Governor Jay Nixon, I sat on the other side of the table from the developers who submitted applications. I evaluated their proposals. I participated in discussions about which projects deserved limited state resources. That experience is available from almost nobody in the private sector, because almost nobody in the private sector has served as a housing commissioner. Traveling to 50 countries was not tourism. It was education. I studied housing systems in Europe, urban planning models in Asia, community development approaches in Africa and Latin America. In Cuba, I studied a healthcare delivery model that puts a doctor in every neighborhood, and I brought that concept back to Kansas City, where it eventually influenced our approach to co-locating healthcare with affordable housing. Every country taught me something. Every lesson informed the work. Why I Built The Nash Group After years in government and education, I understood something that most people in this field do not: the gap between policy and execution is where communities get hurt. Policies exist. Funding exists. Tax credits exist. But the people who can actually structure a deal, navigate the politics, manage the construction, and deliver housing that serves the community are rare. There are plenty of policy experts who cannot execute. There are plenty of builders who do not understand policy. There are plenty of consultants who have never served in government. The Nash Group exists because I have done all three, and I built a firm that brings all three capabilities to every project. We do not just advise. We develop. We do not just develop. We teach. The Lewis White Real Estate Center at UMKC, where I serve as director, trains the next generation of real estate professionals using the same principles that built the firm. That is not a side project. It is core to the mission, because the problems we work on will outlast any individual career. What This Story Means For You If you are a prospective client evaluating whether to work with us, here is what my story tells you: I have been on every side of this table. I have been the resident who needed housing. I have been the elected official who voted on housing policy. I have been the commissioner who allocated tax credits. I have been the developer who built the housing. And I have been the professor who teaches others how to do it. That is not a typical resume in this industry. Most people know one side. I know all of them. And that knowledge shows up in every project we touch, because we understand not just what needs to be built but why it matters and who it serves. When we sit across the table from a housing finance agency, we understand their perspective because I have been a commissioner. When we engage with a city council on an entitlement approval, we understand the political dynamics because I chaired the committee that made those decisions. When we structure a capital stack, we understand the investor's requirements because I have an MBA and have closed these deals myself. When we engage with community residents, we understand their concerns because I grew up in public housing and I have lived in the conditions that bad housing creates. The kid from Section 8 did not forget where he came from. He turned it into a career that has generated hundreds of millions of dollars in community investment across multiple cities. That is the power of refusing to accept your starting point as your endpoint. Thirty years. Nine degrees. Fifty countries. And it all started in public housing in Kansas City. ================================================================= THEME 2: AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT =================================================================
By Troy Nash March 19, 2026
People always want to know how I got here. They see the degrees, the developments, the board seats, and they assume there was some master plan. There was not. What there was, at the very beginning, was a kitchen table and a set of circumstances that demanded I do something about them. In 1995, I was 25 years old, a law student at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, living with my wife Sherrie in a house on Charlotte Street near Brookside. My three older brothers — Harvey, Daryl, and Todd — were smart men with no credentials and no clear path forward. They had the ability but not the access. Nobody had shown them how to navigate the system that separates people who can from people who do. I decided that if nobody else was going to do it, I would. Every Saturday at 10 a.m., we held a formal meeting at my house. I sat at that kitchen table and worked with all three of my brothers. We went through the material together. We talked about what college actually was, what it required, and what it could open up. The brothers all wore ties. They rose when they spoke, observed parliamentary procedure, and referred to one another by formal titles. It was not some grand philanthropic project. This was family. These were my brothers, and they were too talented to stay where they were. There is a particular kind of frustration that comes from watching people you love operate below their potential. Not because they are lazy or incapable, but because nobody ever sat them down and said: here is how this works. Here is what you need to do. Here is the path. My brothers had spent their entire lives in a system that was not designed to show them that path. The schools they attended were underfunded. The neighborhoods they grew up in were disinvested. The message they received from every institutional interaction was that people like them did not go to college. I rejected that message. And then I spent months proving it wrong, one brother at a time. One by one, each of them enrolled in college. The conversations were not always easy. When you are an adult who has been out of school for years, the idea of going back feels impossible. You feel too old. You feel too far behind. You feel like the opportunity has passed. My job was to break through that feeling and replace it with evidence: here is the application. Here is the financial aid form. Here is the course catalog. You can do this. I will help you. My mother watched her sons transform their lives, and then she did the same thing. At 55 years old, my mother earned her GED. She looked at what her boys were doing and decided she was not going to be left behind. That is the most powerful thing I have ever witnessed in my life. A woman who had spent decades raising children in public housing, who had every reason to believe that her own educational moment had passed, looked at her sons and said: if they can do it, so can I. She was right. Why This Matters I tell this story not because it makes for a good profile piece, although it does. I tell it because it explains everything that came after. Every development I have built, every policy I have fought for, every classroom I have taught in comes from the same impulse that put me at that kitchen table: if the people around you have the ability but not the access, you create the access. This was not about charity. It was about refusing to accept that my family's circumstances were permanent. The housing projects where I grew up taught me that systems create conditions, and conditions shape lives. But they also taught me that individuals can break those conditions if somebody shows up with a plan and the willingness to execute it. My brothers did not need saving. They needed a bridge. That is the same thing I have spent the last 30 years building for communities across this country. Different scale, same principle. The parallel to affordable housing development is direct. When we build housing in an underserved neighborhood, we are not rescuing the community. We are providing infrastructure that allows the talent and determination that already exists in that community to flourish. The families who move into our developments are not charity cases. They are people who need a bridge between where they are and where they want to be. Quality, affordable housing is that bridge. The same is true of the policy work. When I sat on the Kansas City Council and fought for investment in East Side neighborhoods, I was not arguing that those neighborhoods were helpless. I was arguing that they deserved the same public infrastructure that the rest of the city took for granted. The people were capable. The systems had failed them. The Lesson When people evaluate The Nash Group, they are evaluating whether we actually care about the communities we serve. I understand that skepticism because I have seen plenty of developers who treat affordable housing as a transaction. Build the units, collect the credits, move on. That is not us. Our commitment to community transformation predates the company. It predates my career. It started at a kitchen table in Kansas City with a 25 year old kid who refused to watch his brothers get left behind. My mother earning her GED at 55 proved something I have believed ever since: it is never too late, and nobody is beyond reach. That conviction shows up in every project we take on. When we build housing in a neighborhood that has been disinvested for decades, we do not just build units. We build the infrastructure that lets people reach for something better. The Kansas City Star covered this story in 1995, back when I was just getting started. They saw a young man helping his family. What I see, looking back, is the foundational act that defined everything. If you can change your family, you can change a block. If you can change a block, you can change a neighborhood. If you can change a neighborhood, you can change a city. That is not a slogan. That is a 30 year track record. And it started with three brothers, a kitchen table, and a refusal to accept that where you start is where you finish.
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Visits Kansas City
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; Nash, Weaver Secure Funding for Police Trailer and ATVs to Help Fight Crime; City Councilman Unveils Plan to Combat Crime in the Third District
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; City Councilmen Sponsor Forum to Bridge the Racial Divide; KC Councilmen Share Lessons of Diversity; Students Say Racism Exists in KC
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; Ordinance by Nash, Williams-Neal Targets Troost Revitalization
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; Labor Unions Partner with City to Renovate Community Centers; Councilman Nash Continues Partnership with Labor Unions; Labor Groups Endorse Troy Nash
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Kansas City Star; KC Seeks New Jobs, Business with Mexico; KC Group Will Prospect in Costa Rica; New Council Panel Aims to Steer KC's Role in Global Trade; Council Nash Discusses Business Linkages with Mayors
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Troy Nash Named to White House Board; PTPI Board of Trustees Meeting
By Troy Nash March 18, 2026
Press Coverage: Savoy Magazine, 2020 and 2022
Show More