California Assemblyman Says State Spends 10 Times More on Immigrants Than Veterans

California Assemblyman David Tangipa is sounding the alarm on state spending priorities, and the numbers he’s citing are impossible to ignore. In a recent appearance on California Politics 360, the Republican legislator pulled back the curtain on what he sees as a fundamental misalignment between where California’s money goes and where it should go—and his argument hinges on a stark comparison that’s likely to spark debate across the state.

Tangipa claims the state spends 8 to 10 times more on services for undocumented immigrants out of the general fund than it does for veterans. That’s not hyperbole meant for cable news soundbites; it’s a specific assertion about state budget allocations that cuts to the heart of California’s spending crisis. With a $355 billion state budget—larger than most countries’entire GDPs—Tangipa’s frustration centers on what he views as the state’s inability to prioritize its own citizens first, especially those who’ve served in the military.

His grievances extend beyond veterans, though. Tangipa points to specific spending decisions that seem almost absurd when you stack them against basic necessity: $30 million on a syphilis outbreak campaign and $8 million on condom distributions by nonprofits, while Californians struggle to afford gas, groceries, and housing. One in five residents can’t even pay their utility bills. Yet the state keeps finding money for what Tangipa calls“passion projects”rather than what he frames as the true priorities—keeping young families housed, keeping seniors fed, and ensuring service members never sleep on the streets.

The real flashpoint in this interview isn’t just about spending totals, though. It’s about what Tangipa sees as a runaway system with no accountability. Democrats in Sacramento argue budget gaps stem from Trump administration cuts to federal programs, but Tangipa counters with a question that deserves serious consideration: How can you claim you’re broke while holding a record budget and record revenue? The state’s budget has more than doubled since 2016—from $170 billion to $355 billion—yet nothing, in Tangipa’s view, has gotten better for ordinary people.

The budget process itself comes under fire too. California gives itself just eight weeks to debate and pass a $355 billion spending plan each year. That’s not deliberation; that’s triage. And minority party legislators like Tangipa? They’re told what’s happening, not consulted about it. The compressed timeline combined with the legislature’s supermajority control means there’s little room for dissenting voices, let alone the kind of transparent, public scrutiny that arguably should accompany decisions about how to spend more money than Texas spends on everything.

Whether you agree with Tangipa’s priorities or not, his core challenge to Sacramento is worth taking seriously: A state this wealthy shouldn’t have to choose between veterans and undocumented immigrants, between housing young families and funding discretionary campaigns. The real question isn’t which group deserves help—it’s why California, drowning in revenue, keeps telling residents there’s not enough to go around.