SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Calif. — California's 49th congressional district, which covers the northern coastal areas of San Diego County and a portion of southern Orange County, is gearing up for a closely watched election.
The incumbent is Democrat Mike Levin, who is making his case for re-election, while his Republican opponent, Matt Gunderson, seeks to unseat him.
CBS 8 interviewed each candidate and asked for their positions on these critical issues facing the district and the nation.
Healthcare Access
Both candidates acknowledge the importance of healthcare accessibility but differ in their approaches. Gunderson supports adapting the Affordable Care Act (ACA) while protecting individual choice, whereas Levin seeks to expand the scope of the law.
The Answers:
Mike Levin (Democrat) advocates for building on the ACA's progress and reducing prescription drug costs. Levin remarked, "Since the ACA was implemented, roughly 20 million Americans now have health care. Folks with pre-existing conditions are covered that previously couldn't get coverage. The ACA is working, but it still needs improvement. I want to see quality and affordable coverage for everyone, and we have to get the price of prescription drugs further reduced."
Gunderson says he doesn't support repealing the Affordable Care Act but does want to overhaul it. "We need to look into the ACA and tweak it to the degree that we can so healthcare is accessible to everyone while protecting people's individual choice and ability to have private healthcare and private health insurance."
Immigration Reform
One of the main issues in the current election cycle is immigration. CBS 8 asked each candidate their thoughts on how reform what has long been admitted is a broken system at the Southern Border.
The Question:
What specific policies do you support for comprehensive immigration reform to address the ongoing migrant crisis?
The Answers:
Representative Levin says he supports comprehensive reform to ensure a more secure border while providing a legal pathway for immigrants who can and already contribute to society. "I want to see a comprehensive immigration reform bill done on a bipartisan basis that includes both border security and a path to citizenship for those contributing positively to our economy and society. The apprehensions in the San Diego region are down 54% from earlier this year, and the rate at which Border Patrol can seize fentanyl and human trafficking and the potential risk of terrorism has been addressed since that executive action. We've got to codify that, and I think we can do it. "
Republican challenger Gunderson blamed Levin and other Democrats for failing to take action. Gunderson says that if elected, he would seek a return to the policies of former President Trump. "We've got to secure the border. Then, we can talk about how we handle these immigrants and absorb them into our communities. We have got to secure and close our border by getting back to the programs of the Trump border policies where we had remained in Mexico policies we had a tighter asylum definition. We did not make it as easy for people to come across and open our floodgates."
Support for Israel
The Question:
What is your position on the level of military and financial support the US should provide to Israel, especially in the wake of the recent conflicts?
The Answers:
Both candidates express support for Israel but differ in their approaches to the ongoing conflict.
Representative Levin highlighted the need for diplomacy.
Levin emphasized diplomacy, stating, "I want to make sure that we do continue to provide Israel with what they need to defend themselves, but that we also do all we can to advance diplomacy so that this doesn't turn into a larger regional war."
Challenger Gunderson also stated his support for Israel but had stronger words for Hamas and Iran. Said Gunderson: "I stand fully 100% on the side of Israel. We cannot let Israel be intimidated by the terrorists and by Iran, and we have to support them. You know, hook, line, and sinker. It is unbelievable to me that we think that there should be a cease-fire on this issue"
Stock Trading by Lawmakers
The Question:
A group of former members of Congress recently called for legislation barring lawmakers from owning or trading individual stocks. There are concerns about members from both parties using non-public information to make large profits. Critics say it's a conflict of interest. Where do you stand on this particular issue, and will you take action?
The Answers:
Both candidates support banning lawmakers from trading individual stocks.
Congressman Levin emphasized, "It's been alarming to see members of both parties that have used the information that they gather as members of Congress to line their pockets. As public servants, we should always aspire to serve the greater good, not our own financial well-being, and that's why it's so important we advance this legislation. I can tell you, it has been an uphill climb. Plenty of people in my party don't want this either, and we must continue to move the ball. "
Republican candidate Gunderson stated, "I would support a ban on trading individual stocks. You know, we own stocks. I don't know what we own because UBS manages that portfolio, and I don't know if they're in mutual funds or individual stocks, but it is certainly not something where congressmen should be holding and using inside information to benefit themselves."
Why Vote for Them
The candidates presented their unique qualifications and visions for the district.
Levin highlighted his track record: "I've had five and a half years of delivering results for our beautiful district, getting 30 bipartisan bills signed into law by both the former president and the current president, many for our veterans. I was honored to be named the 2024 Veterans of Foreign Wars legislator of the year, an award they give to one member of the House or Senate each year. I'm also honored to have been consistently rated among the top 5% of most effective lawmakers by the non-partisan Center for Effective law-making. We've been able to get $931 million of our taxpayer money reinvested into our district, for our schools, roads, bridges, water systems, and so much more."
Gunderson positioned himself as a fresh perspective, stating, "I'm not a politician. I'm a businessman. I didn't come up through the ranks of local government. So, I bring a completely different perspective to problem-solving and a different vision of where we go. The past isn't working. Business, as usual, doesn't work at work, and we need somebody to have a fresher perspective that really represents this district. My opponent is an extreme liberal. He tells you he's a moderate, but his voting record is 98.7% of the time with the Progressive Caucus You need a fresh perspective, somebody who's balanced a budget, signed the front of paychecks, and is not in it for partisanship, but rather to serve the people."
Watch the candidates interviews here: