Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account

This record is only as complete as the public makes it

No one has catalogued Mike Levin's campaign promises yet — and an empty page holds no one accountable. StumpWatch is built by volunteers, one sourced promise at a time. Be the first to add this official's promises: paste a campaign pledge or public statement with a link to where it was said, and we'll start tracking whether it's kept. Every entry is sourced, neutral, and open to correction.

Mike Levin

DemocratMike Levin

U.S. Representative · California

California's 49th district

DemocratFederal

U.S. Representative from California

0 tracked promises

California · California's 49th district

California's 49th district

Their congressional district

View district dashboard →

Trust rating

Not yet rated

Not enough rated promises yet to provide an accurate Trust Rating.

Their tracked promises haven’t been rated against the record yet.

A Trust Rating appears once their promises have been rated against what they actually did. How this is measured. Help build the record →

How they won their seat

Mike Levin won the 2024 U.S. House election in California (District 49) with 52.2% of the vote (197,397 votes).

52.2%
Win share
197,397
Votes for winner
378,347
Total cast
  • Mike Levin · Democrat52.2%
  • Matt Gunderson · Republican47.8%

Certified results. Source: MIT Election Data + Science Lab (MEDSL) ↗. A plurality winner can hold under 50% when more than two candidates run.

Inferred legislative agendas

Mike Levin's record includes a variety of bills related to environmental protection, military and veteran affairs, and health-related issues. He has sponsored bills such as the Plastic Pellet Free Waters Act and the Military Dependents School Meal Eligibility Act. His voting record includes instances of voting differently from the majority of his party. Focus areas (from the record): Environmental Protection · Veterans Affairs · Health Care · Military Support · Renewable Energy Alignment with declared positions: Insufficient evidence. There are no declared positions or tracked promises on file to compare against Levin's legislative activity. Therefore, it is not possible to assess alignment. What this can't tell you: The motives behind Levin's legislative choices are not disclosed in the record; There is no information on the effectiveness of the bills he has sponsored; The absence of declared positions limits the understanding of his priorities. Confidence: moderate (based on the volume of verified record on file).

Inferred, not stated. Mike Levin has not necessarily stated these as goals. This is an AI-generated, nonpartisan reading of the patterns in their verified record — sponsored legislation, committee work, roll-call votes, and campaign-finance composition — and how those patterns compare to any declared positions and tracked promises. It describes what the record emphasizes, never imputes motive, and is run through an adversarial review pass that scrubs bias, loaded language, and any claim the evidence doesn’t support. It is not a quote, a claim they made, or a rating; every underlying item is sourced in the verified record below; and it never affects the Integrity Score.

Showing 2025–2027 term. Every tile and chart below reflects this window; some record types (e.g. roll-call votes) only have data for recent years.

Activity in office

What Mike Levin has actually done in office — sourced from official roll-call and government records, shown in full below. These are facts, separate from tracked promises and never folded into any score. The tracked-positions tile counts sourced stated positions — claims about what they believe, not conduct — and is likewise never scored.

Roll-call data last updated September 7, 2026 · source: Voteview.

Monthly voting activity

  • Yea
  • Nay
  • Total
016324864VotesSep '25: 15 YeaSep '25: 49 NaySep '25Nov '25: 9 YeaNov '25: 14 NayNov '25Dec '25: 25 YeaDec '25: 29 NayDec '25Jan '26: 25 YeaJan '26: 22 NayJan '26Feb '26: 13 YeaFeb '26: 17 NayFeb '26Mar '26: 12 YeaMar '26: 18 NayMar '26Apr '26: 22 YeaApr '26: 24 NayApr '26May '26: 21 YeaMay '26: 15 NayMay '26Jun '26: 25 YeaJun '26: 17 NayJun '26Jul '26: 16 YeaJul '26: 34 NayJul '26Aug '26: 2 YeaAug '26: 0 NayAug '26Sep '26: 3 YeaSep '26: 7 NaySep '26Sep '25: 64 totalNov '25: 23 totalDec '25: 57 totalJan '26: 47 totalFeb '26: 30 totalMar '26: 30 totalApr '26: 47 totalMay '26: 36 totalJun '26: 42 totalJul '26: 50 totalAug '26: 2 totalSep '26: 10 total
Measures voted on:492 passed162 failed1 procedural/other

Roll-call votes per month — most recent on file. Source: Voteview.

Vote attendance

99.4%
attendance
651 of 655 roll calls4 missed
Monthly participation rate
0255075100100%Sep 25Dec 25Feb 26Apr 26Jun 26Aug 26Sep 26

Share of roll calls participated in — most recent votes on file. Source: Voteview.

Bills sponsored over time

25bills sponsored
25 pending
05101520Bills2025: 16 pending1620252026: 9 pending92026

Bills sponsored per year, stacked by outcome (latest action). Outcome data covers the 118th–119th Congresses; earlier years show as “awaiting status” until enriched. Source: Congress.gov.

Independence

3%
Votes against own party
21 of 650 recent votes

How often they break with their party’s majority — neither good nor bad, just the record.

Most recent roll-call votes on file. Source: Voteview.

Bill success rate

0%
0 of 25 sponsored bills became law
25 pending

Bills SPONSORED in the 118th–119th Congresses, by their latest action. Source: Congress.gov.

Campaign finance over time

$0
Cash on hand · 2026
$3.2M
Raised, 20262026
RaisedSpentCash on hand
$0$1.3M$2.5M$3.8M$5M2026: raised $3.2M2026: spent $2.0M20262026: cash on hand $0
Where the money came from · 2026
Small-dollar (unitemized): $217K (7%)7%Large individual (itemized): $2.3M (79%)79%PAC / committee: $391K (13%)13%
  • Small-dollar (unitemized)$217K7%
  • Large individual (itemized)$2.3M79%
  • PAC / committee$391K13%

By election cycle. Source: FEC.

Committee memberships

Voting record

Total votes
655
Yea
294
Nay
356
Present
1
Not voting
4

Full voting record

655 votes
  • S32Yea
  • S307Yea
120 of 655
Page 1 / 33

Roll-call votes, 119th Congress. Source: Voteview (voteview.com). Click any vote to verify it independently.

Positions on record

2 positions on record

The record on this issue — recorded votes this official cast, and sourced claims about what they believe. Each is labelled with which it is, because a vote is what someone did and a statement is what they said. Neither is scored, and neither affects the Integrity Score.

  • Mass Surveillance, Tracking, and Flock SafetyStated position

    On record asserting that the government ordinarily must obtain a judicial warrant to compel cell phone location data, and urging the DHS Inspector General to open a second investigation into ICE and other DHS components purchasing Americans' location data from commercial data brokers without one.

    SourcesBicameral letter to DHS Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari requesting a second investigation of warrantless purchases of Americans' cell phone location data by ICE and other DHS components
    View position & sources
  • Mass Surveillance, Tracking, and Flock SafetyRecorded vote

    On record voting NO on Biggs of Arizona Amendment No. 1 to H.R. 7888, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, an amendment to prohibit warrantless searches of United States persons' communications in the FISA Section 702 database, with exceptions for imminent threats to life or bodily harm, consent searches, and known cybersecurity threat signatures. The amendment failed on a 212 to 212 tie.

    SourcesHouse Roll Call Vote 114, 118th Congress, 2nd Session: On Agreeing to the Amendment, Biggs of Arizona Amendment No. 1 to H.R. 7888, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act. Failed by recorded vote, 212 ayes to 212 noes, April 12, 2024.
    View position & sources
Disclosure
No undisclosed priorities on record

Disclosure

A separate measure from the promise scorecard above. It tracks confirmed cases where this official has acted on or championed an issue that already existed when they ran, but which they did not disclose as a priority in their campaign. Each case meets a high evidence bar — three independent sources — and the score is shown alongside the Integrity Score, never merged into it. How this is measured.

No undisclosed priorities on record. This is not a clean-audit claim — it means none have been confirmed for this official.

Suggest a correction to this official's info

See something wrong or out of date — the biography, party, jurisdiction, common name, or photo? Suggest a sourced correction. Every suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.

Sign in to suggest a correction

Free — it takes a minute. New here? Create an account and complete the Contributor Agreement once.

Office context & community edit history

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →