Zero Down Home Loans for Illegals – It’s Happening

homes sold to illegals

California’s latest bill allowing zero down payment home loans for illegal immigrants has ignited a firestorm of controversy.

At a Glance

  • A California bill, Assembly Bill (AB) 1840, aims to allow home loans for illegal immigrants.
  • The bill faces strong opposition from state Republicans.
  • AB 1840 passed in the Senate Appropriations Committee and awaits a floor vote.
  • The bill broadens the definition of a first-time homebuyer to include undocumented persons.
  • Critics argue that the bill would impose financial burdens on taxpayers amid California’s budget shortfall.

Bill AB 1840: Zero Down Payment Home Loans for Illegal Immigrants

Assembly Bill (AB) 1840, introduced by Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula in January, has raised significant debate among California residents and lawmakers. This bill allows illegal immigrants to access zero down payment home loans, sparking frustration and anger among many citizens struggling to afford homes themselves.

The bill, which passed the Senate Appropriations Committee and is awaiting a floor vote, aims to expand the California Dream For All Shared Appreciation Loan program. This initiative will now include undocumented individuals by preventing the program from denying applicants based on their immigration status. Supporters argue that broader homeownership benefits society, while opponents see this as preferential treatment to those breaking federal laws.

Strong Opposition from State Republicans

California Republicans have been vocal in their opposition to AB 1840. State Senator Brian Dahle stated, “California’s budget deficit continues to grow and Democratic lawmakers are so out of touch with everyday Californians that they are quite literally taking money away from law-abiding citizens, their own constituents, and handing it over as a free gift to people who broke federal law to cross the border illegally.”

Critics like Dahle and San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond label the bill as an imprudent financial move that conveys a troubling message, prioritizing illegal immigration over addressing the needs of citizens and amplifying California’s fiscal irresponsibility amid a $60 billion deficit. Desmond remarked, “Once again, California has chosen to prioritize illegal immigration and fiscal irresponsibility.”

Financial Burdens on Taxpayers Amid Budget Deficit

The bill’s financial ramifications aren’t trivial. The expansion of this program could result in significant cost pressures, potentially in the millions annually. The loan program was immensely popular among first-time buyers, with the initial $300 million fund exhausting in under two weeks when applications opened in May 2023. The median home price in California nears $1 million, pointing to the high demand for such housing assistance programs.

Opponents argue this move is fiscal madness given California’s existing budget shortfall. Critics emphasize the additional taxpayer burden and possible economic hardships that such programs could cause, especially in a state grappling with a $46.8-billion deficit, leading to spending cuts and increased taxes on some businesses.

Debate on Broadened Homebuyer Definition

The bill redefines the term ‘first-time homebuyer’ to include undocumented persons, which has become another point of contention. Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula champions the bill, stating, “When undocumented individuals are excluded from such programs, they miss out on a crucial method of securing financial security and personal stability for themselves and their families.” His advocacy underscores a belief in extending homeownership opportunities to all community members, irrespective of immigration status.

While Arambula’s intentions may seem noble, the reality of the situation paints a different picture. Opponents remain steadfast, arguing that prioritizing illegal immigrants over lawful citizens is an outrageous stance, especially when many Americans are struggling to achieve homeownership. The expanded eligibility may also strain the already underfunded program, ultimately affecting the California taxpayers.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR