Provoking chaos and division to justify seizing more power is unconscionable. As Californians, we cannot allow our immigrant communities to be unjustly targeted. Peaceful protest is not against the law.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|California District 7
Doris O. Matsui
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 534
Yes41%
No58%
Present1%
Not Voting0%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 7
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Doris O. Matsui
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratCalifornia District 7
SoupScore
Doris O.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 23 sponsored · 98 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
That’s exactly what this is – a power grab to intimidate our immigrant communities and silence dissent. The National Guard is made up of our families and neighbors who volunteered to protect our country. Weaponizing them against their own communities is beyond shameful.
President Trump’s deployment of the California National Guard is clearly meant to escalate the situation and deepen his culture of fear. Time and again, the Trump Administration has undermined the rule of law to extend unilateral power.
Visiting the Sacramento History Museum and their new ‘Sacramento In A Can’ exhibit was inspiring – reminding us that the arts are vital for preserving history. That is why we must fight to protect them against the Trump Administration’s threats to dismantle arts funding.
Connectivity and artificial intelligence go hand in hand. The reality is, President Trump is undermining U.S. AI leadership.
This is unacceptable. I will continue to fight for all Americans to access the resources and skills they need to capitalize on an increasingly digital—and AI-driven—world.
The Trump Administration is clearly willing to leave everyday Americans behind – but I will continue to fight to ensure we deliver on our promises to close the digital divide.
matsui.house.gov/media/press-...
Today, the Trump Administration decided to tear down that progress, delay our deployment timeline, and ultimately, drive up costs for consumers. BEAD funding is a matter of necessity. Reliable, high speed internet access dictates who succeeds and who is left behind in the modern economy.
The Broadband Equity, Access & Deployment (BEAD) program is a bipartisan program designed to close the digital divide in areas that have long been overlooked. We worked together to pass this funding & have since worked with our states to ensure that its deployment is effective & targeted.
That’s why 32 of the world’s 50 leading AI companies call California home.
The Republicans “Big Beautiful Bill” blatantly strips the ability to provide AI oversight, regulate AI implementation, workforce protection, and protect consumers for the next 10yrs. This makes no sense. It must be stopped.
Without a federal AI regulatory framework, California has embraced common-sense safeguards to ensure innovation and competition can thrive. As AI tools grow more sophisticated and more widely deployed, these state and local measures are crucial to promote safety and trust with consumers.
As the top Democrat on the @EnergyCommerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, I led my California colleagues in demanding the removal of the 10-year ban on state and local regulation of AI in the Republican’s disastrous budget bill.
These aren’t just numbers, they’re real people, real families, and real consequences.
This battle is not over. I will continue to push back every step of the way. I will continue to expose the truth. I will never stop fighting to protect my constituents from this disaster.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office ran the numbers. If Republicans’ Big Ugly Bill is enacted, it will gut Medicaid and ACA Marketplaces. 16 million Americans will lose their health care coverage.
rollcall.com/2025/06/04/1...
I’ve introduced the Broadcast Freedom & Independence Act to protect our media from government attacks regardless of their point of view. And I’ve led efforts to protect federal funding for public broadcasting. I'll keep fighting to protect our media from the Trump Administration’s baseless attacks.
Public broadcasting provides people with free community-supported access to news, educational content, and lifesaving emergency alerts.
Unlike privately-owned media, it is not beholden to stakeholders, government or private.
President Trump continues to attack public media funding for a clear reason – to silence dissenting voices and keep people from the truth.
www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/...
That’s why Congressman Jim Costa and I led our colleagues in demanding that the Trump Administration restore 24/7 operations to the Sacramento and Hanford forecast offices.
matsui.house.gov/media/press-...
The National Weather Service is a lifeline – providing the forecasting necessary to keep Californians safe and prepared for wildfires, floods, and heatwaves.
Yet, the Trump Administration has gutted the agency by terminating or forcing hundreds of staff into early retirement.
This week, Visit Sacramento’s State of Tourism brought together industry leaders to showcase our city’s progress and the exciting road ahead.
Sacramento is a special place. We manifest the future we want to see. I’ll keep working with our community leaders as we move forward together.
@mikethompson.house.gov and I partnered to host a hearing with our community leaders and constituents to lay out all of the facts about the Republicans’ Big Ugly Bill.
It must be stopped, and I will never back down from protecting my constituents from greedy and blatantly cruel legislation.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History534 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
534 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-26 | H.R. 275 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-26 | H.R. 875 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-25 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-25 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-25 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-06-25 | H. Res. 519 (119th) | Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-24 | — | Motion to Adjourn | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-24 | H. Res. 530 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-24 | H. Res. 530 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-24 | H. Res. 537 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-06-23 | H.R. 3422 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-23 | H.R. 3394 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-23 | H.R. 1998 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-12 | H.R. 2056 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-12 | H.R. 2056 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-12 | — | Motion to Adjourn | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-12 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-12 | H.R. 4 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-12 | S. 331 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-06-11 | H. Res. 499 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-11 | H. Res. 499 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-10 | H.R. 884 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-10 | H.R. 2096 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-10 | H. Res. 489 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-10 | H. Res. 489 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-09 | H. Res. 481 (119th) | Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-09 | H. Res. 488 (119th) | Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-09 | H.R. 2035 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-06 | H.R. 2966 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-05 | H.R. 2987 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-05 | H.R. 2987 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-05 | H.R. 2931 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-05 | H.R. 2931 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-04 | H.R. 2483 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-06-04 | H.R. 2483 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-06-04 | H. Res. 458 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-04 | H. Res. 458 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-03 | H.R. 1804 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-06-03 | H.R. 1642 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-05-22 | S.J. Res. 31 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H. Res. 436 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H. Res. 436 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H. Res. 436 (119th) | Consideration of the Resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | H. Res. 436 (119th) | Consideration of the Resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-22 | — | Motion to Adjourn | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-05-20 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-20 | H.R. 1223 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-20 | H. Res. 426 (119th) | Approve resolution | 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.