Over the past several years, many people all across the country have found themselves on the brink of foreclosure. Many others have fallen off that brink, and been forced to move out of their homes. While there are federal programs that offer home loan modifications, the fact of the matter is that not everyone qualifies for those programs. In addition, there are accusations that the programs aren’t being run efficiently at the federal level, and that many people who qualify for a modified mortgage aren’t getting them.

Lawmakers in California are currently working on a number of proposals that are aimed at the tens of thousands of California residents who are looking at foreclosure or who have already lost their house. It’s estimated that just under 90,000 Californians are currently facing foreclosure, and that half a million default notices were sent out in 2009.

There are currently three bills before the California legislature that are aimed at these folks. Two of the bills are designed to help borrowers be able to get reductions in their regular monthly home loan payments before they go into default.

The third bill is designed to help folks that lost a home to foreclosure avoid paying large tax bills. Specifically, that bill would make it so that the tax code in California matches up with federal law. It would make it so that homeowners don’t have to pay the taxes when their debt is forgiven after their home is foreclosed or after a short sale.

As it stands today, when a bank accepts less for a home that what it’s worth, the difference between those two figures counts as income for the former homeowner. This can create a severe financial hardship for people who are already struggling to make ends meet.

Whether or not these bills will pass the legislature remains to be seen. Even if they do, there is the possibility of a veto. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed another housing bill in March, due to a provision in that bill that would have increased certain tax penalties. The current bills don’t have those tax penalties, so it would seem that a veto is unlikely.