Homeownership has long been one of the defining features of the American dream. For many young families today, it feels increasingly out of reach.
While policymakers have spent years debating interest rates and zoning reform, they have largely ignored one of the biggest demand shocks in modern American history.
According to a report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the surge in illegal immigration from 2021-2024 accounted for roughly 30 percent of the increase in home prices and 20 percent of rent growth during that period.
While housing prices are just now beginning to decrease, due in large part to efforts at the state, local, and federal levels, many Texans are still feeling the sting of simply affording a place to live. According to the National Association of Homebuilders, two-thirds of American households cannot afford a new-build single-family home, and that every increase of $1,000 prices out another 156,405 households.
To understand the pressure placed on the housing market, one must first grasp the scale of immigration the nation experienced under Biden’s policies, which extended beyond the roughly 10 million unlawful entries at the border. It included the expansion of executive authorities that collectively admitted millions of additional foreign nationals into the United States, like the CBP One app, which admitted over 900,000 foreign nationals, and the CHNV parole program, adding roughly 500,000 foreign nationals. All of which created increased demand for housing in communities already struggling to keep pace with population growth.
Housing markets are governed by the same economic principles as every other market. When millions of additional people enter the United States over a short period of time, each of them needs a place to live. Whether they rent an apartment, share housing with others, or purchase a home, the result is the same: increased demand. When supply cannot expand quickly enough, prices rise for everyone.
Pairing increased demand with a supply chain constrained by rigid land-use requirements, heavy-handed regulations, and over-taxation meant that Americans coming of age, graduating, getting married, and having kids could not afford the same style of starter home that their parents enjoyed.
Thus, the net effect was not merely the consequence of failed immigration policies, but of a broader public-private system that increasingly treats illegal aliens and foreign nationals as equal participants in markets traditionally built around American citizens.
Prospective American homebuyers now find themselves competing for increasingly scarce housing, while the value of citizenship itself becomes harder to distinguish in practice. That is a profound problem, corrosive to the public trust and indicative of a system gone wrong.
Of course, housing affordability is only one element in a much longer chain. The same pressures that spiked housing costs likely also manifest elsewhere in the economy in unhelpful ways, like fewer job opportunities, slower wage growth, and modest price hikes for everyday goods and services. While these ripple effects are difficult to quantify, it’s not unreasonable to believe that the same market forces that hurt citizens in one area may also be found in other parts.
The government cannot guarantee housing or jobs, but what it can do is create an environment that promotes homeownership for Americans. On the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, we need to recommit to policies that place Americans and Texans first.
A nation that asks its own citizens to compete for scarce housing with an ever-expanding population admitted through unlawful or extraordinary executive pathways is not merely creating affordability challenges but diminishing the very value of citizenship itself. If policymakers are serious about restoring affordability, they must pair sound housing reforms with immigration policies that prioritize citizens, respect the rule of law, and ensure that scarce housing opportunities first serve the people to whom this country ultimately owes its highest obligation.