Congress ordered a study in 2000 and gave the Army Corps 44 months to finish it. Instead, it remained unfinished for 26 years, slowed by funding gaps while other priorities moved ahead.
I fought to secure $1.8 million in 2022 and another $2.2 million in 2025 to move this study forward.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|California District 49
Mike Levin
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 612
Yes46%
No53%
Present1%
Not Voting1%
Party align97%
Cross-party3%
Mike Levin
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratCalifornia District 49
SoupScore
Mike's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 25 sponsored · 100 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
For 73 years, Oceanside’s beaches have been disappearing. The federal government acknowledged back in 1953 that Camp Pendleton harbor disrupted the natural flow of sand along our coastline.
But it failed to deliver a lasting solution for decades.
The only way to change it is a constitutional amendment, which takes 2/3 of both chambers plus 3/4 of the states.
Trump’s response was to call on Congress to pass a law instead. Many 7th graders could explain why that does not work.
Free Civics Lesson of the Day.
The Supreme Court just ruled that the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship.
Once the Court says the Constitution requires something, no executive order and no ordinary act of Congress can undo it.
Reposted byMike Levin
The Trump administration just killed a federal program that hundreds of small farmers relied on to survive, and the damage is already landing.
The program paid farmers full market price for their crops, then routed that fresh food to food banks and the families who needed it.
You are being asked to treat pure corruption as normal, to shrug at a President personally profiting from a foreign gift the taxpayers paid to upgrade.
In any other administration this would be the scandal that ends a presidency. With Trump, it’s Wednesday.
abcnews.com/Politics/tru...
When Trump leaves office, the plane does not stay with the government. Ownership transfers to his presidential library foundation. In other words, he keeps it.
American taxpayers then paid to retrofit it, with an estimated cost of at least another $400 million (some estimates far higher), for security and communications work in a Texas hangar since last September.
To everyone celebrating the first flight on Qatar Force One today, understand what you are actually applauding.
A foreign government handed the sitting President of the United States a $400 million plane.
“The corrupt official and the man who corrupts the official alike aim at the assassination of the commonwealth itself.” -Theodore Roosevelt
This clearly helps Republicans, whose party already holds a huge advantage with big-money donors.
It is the worst campaign finance ruling since Citizens United, and one of its biggest practical effects has barely entered the public conversation.
www.notus.org/money/suprem...
They paid much higher market prices, by some estimates three to eleven times more for the same airtime.
That wall is now gone. Money donated to party committees can stretch much further in close races, buying far more television for the same dollars, all coordinated tightly with the candidate.
They argued the limits violated the First Amendment.
But one of the biggest practical consequences is about TV ads.
Federal law has long handed candidates the lowest ad rates broadcasters can charge. Party committees have not gotten those rates.
The headlines focus on the Court striking down limits on how much party committees can spend in coordination with their own candidates.
The vote was 6-3, along ideological lines. The case was brought by JD Vance, of all people, then running for Senate, alongside the national Republican committees.
Most people are missing one of the biggest parts of today's Supreme Court campaign finance ruling.
Slash a program that feeds seniors and supports farmers, save almost nothing, and call it winning.
www.kqed.org/news/1208897...
Without those federal dollars, the future is more uncertain than ever for these farms and the millions of hungry families they feed.
That is the pattern.
For many, it was the most reliable buyer they had.
Then the White House pulled the plug, right as farmers were buying seeds for spring. Contracts already in motion were canceled mid-delivery. Three years of funding these growers had planned around vanished overnight.
In California alone, it supported roughly 870 farms across more than 50 counties, moved 23 million pounds of food, and put over $60 million directly into local economies.
The Trump administration just killed a federal program that hundreds of small farmers relied on to survive, and the damage is already landing.
The program paid farmers full market price for their crops, then routed that fresh food to food banks and the families who needed it.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History612 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
612 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-09 | H. Res. 682 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-09 | H. Res. 682 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-08 | H.R. 3425 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-08 | H.R. 3424 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 105 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 106 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 539 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 672 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 672 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-02 | H.R. 747 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-02 | H.R. 4216 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 4275 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 3357 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 1917 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 3937 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-21 | H.R. 3351 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-21 | H.R. 3095 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.