Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Candidates › CA-20 race › 2025–2026
R Republican nominee for U.S. House, CA-20
Representative since 2024
5 priorities from vincefong.com, in the order they are listed there. Every heading and the text under it is copied exactly, as one passage for each page it is from, and links to that place on the page; hover a source to see which passage it opens.
America should never have to rely on foreign adversaries to power our economy. We are blessed with abundant natural resources, and we must unleash responsible domestic energy production to lower costs for families and small businesses. Energy independence strengthens our national security, creates good-paying jobs, and ensures California and the nation remain competitive. We can protect our environment while also developing reliable, affordable energy here at home.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · vincefong.com/issues
Heading as listed on vincefong.com/issues ↗ (opens vincefong.com/issues at this heading)
Water is the lifeblood of the Central Valley and the backbone of our agricultural economy. Our farmers feed the nation and the world, and they deserve reliable water infrastructure that reflects science, not politics. We must modernize storage, improve water conveyance, and stop policies that send water out to sea while our communities suffer. Supporting agriculture means supporting jobs, food security, and the economic strength of our region.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · vincefong.com/issues
Heading as listed on vincefong.com/issues ↗ (opens vincefong.com/issues at this heading)
Our aerospace and defense industries are critical to both our local economy and our national security. Our military installations play a vital role in advancing innovation, testing, and military readiness. We must ensure our armed forces have the tools and technology they need to deter threats and protect our freedoms. Investing in aerospace leadership strengthens America’s position in the world and supports high-skilled jobs at home.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · vincefong.com/issues
Heading as listed on vincefong.com/issues ↗ (opens vincefong.com/issues at this heading)
A secure border is fundamental to national sovereignty and public safety. We need an immigration system that is orderly, lawful, and fair—but that begins with enforcing existing laws and stopping the flow of illegal crossings. Border security protects our communities, prevents human trafficking and drug smuggling, and upholds the rule of law. We can support legal immigration while ensuring our border is secure and our laws are respected.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · vincefong.com/issues
Heading as listed on vincefong.com/issues ↗ (opens vincefong.com/issues at this heading)
The Second Amendment is a constitutional right that safeguards the freedoms of law-abiding Americans. Responsible gun owners should not be punished for the actions of criminals. We must focus on enforcing existing laws and holding violent offenders accountable, rather than restricting the rights of citizens who follow the law. Protecting constitutional freedoms remains a cornerstone of our republic.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · vincefong.com/issues
Heading as listed on vincefong.com/issues ↗ (opens vincefong.com/issues at this heading)
98% of their votes went with their party’s majority; they broke with it 14 times in the 119th Congress.
House Committee on Homeland Security
House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Matching this candidate against the House and Senate voting records…
The CRS policy areas of Fong’s 20 substantive sponsored measures, Congresses 117, 118, 119; the figure is how many fall in each. Sponsorship indicates legislative focus, not every policy position. GovInfo source ↗
FEC filings, Jan 1, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 · Official FEC bulk data · committee C00859892
74¢ of every dollar raised has been spent across 9 reports ($1.8M of $2.4M). Cash on hand went from $143.2K on Mar 31, 2025 to $667.3K on Oct 14, 2026.
| Report | Raised in the period | Spent in the period | Cash on hand at its close |
|---|---|---|---|
| APRIL QUARTERLY 2025 through Mar 31, 2025 | $265,245 | $161,322 | $143,154 |
| JULY QUARTERLY 2025 through Jun 30, 2025 | $248,006 | $183,754 | $207,405 |
| OCTOBER QUARTERLY 2025 through Sep 30, 2025 | $450,327 | $323,619 | $334,114 |
| YEAR-END 2025 through Dec 31, 2025 | $243,958 | $281,157 | $296,915 |
| APRIL QUARTERLY 2026 through Mar 31, 2026 | $238,448 | $237,360 | $298,003 |
| PRE-PRIMARY 2026 through May 13, 2026 | $146,277 | $130,067 | $314,213 |
| JULY QUARTERLY 2026 through Jun 30, 2026 | $257,097 | $117,560 | $453,750 |
| OCTOBER QUARTERLY 2026 through Sep 30, 2026 | $519,911 | $291,759 | $681,901 |
| PRE-GENERAL 2026 through Oct 14, 2026 | $38,066 | $52,628 | $667,339 |
Each report’s own period, as filed with the FEC; a report filed again counts once, as its latest copy.
No endorsers named
Advanced · 115,035 votes (68%) · 1 of 4 · Full results ↗
Election not held yet · Full results ↗
Every contest for this seat that named this candidate, most recent last; a result is shown once the race is called. Election dates and results from civicAPI (civicapi.org). civicAPI aggregates results from Secretaries of State and equivalent election bodies, and makes its own race calls. civicapi.org ↗
Official FEC filing record for the current cycle. The priorities they publish are quoted from their own site, in their order.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the campaign’s; the record marking is ours.
The 12 largest committees by total given are listed. In all, 625 committee contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.1M. Counted from the givers' own filings, which can run above the total the campaign itself reports.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 569 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $747.2K.
Money moved in from the candidate’s other authorized committees, such as a joint fundraising committee. It was raised once and is reported again here on arrival. The 2 largest sources by total given are listed. In all, 13 transfers were filed this cycle, totaling $114.3K.
Total reported receipts $2,407,334
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. Open a source marked + to see who gave. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
75% of the money placed by state came from inside California: $557.9K of $747.2K.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 405 contributions · 75% | $557,935 |
| 60 contributions · 6.5% | $48,478 |
| 31 contributions · 2.6% | $19,700 |
| 9 contributions · 2.6% | $19,250 |
| 13 contributions · 2.2% | $16,520 |
| 9 contributions · 2% | $15,000 |
| 5 contributions · 1.7% | $12,500 |
| 3 contributions · 1.4% | $10,500 |
By the state each donor wrote on the filing, across 24 states and territories. Donors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized, so they cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 35 contributions · 5.3% of ranked | $32,850 |
| 14 contributions · 3.1% of ranked | $19,250 |
| 7 contributions · 2.7% of ranked | $16,500 |
| Written instead of an employer · 29 contributions · 2.6% of ranked | $16,075 |
| 3 contributions · 1.7% of ranked | $10,500 |
| 6 contributions · 1.3% of ranked | $8,000 |
| 4 contributions · 1.3% of ranked | $8,000 |
| 4 contributions · 1.3% of ranked | $8,000 |
A further $87,700 came from donors whose answer names no employer (N/A, blank), so it is not ranked. Ranked from the largest 200 of 201 employer spellings filed; each share is of the money in those. Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($21,463) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
No outside spending filed
The campaign also refunded $17,601 in contributions, which the categories below do not include.
Total itemized disbursements $1,225,127
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 696 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
32 payments were reported as a lump sum, such as a card or payroll bill, with the detail filed underneath as memo entries. Those entries, $184,341 in all, are counted under the payee and purpose they name rather than under the processor that was paid. The total is the same either way.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 34 payments · 22% of all spending | $386,124 |
| 37 payments · 9.9% of all spending | $176,019 |
| 14 payments · 7.1% of all spending | $126,784 |
| 31 payments · 5.3% of all spending | $95,077 |
| 6 payments · 3.6% of all spending | $64,291 |
| 13 payments · 2% of all spending | $35,750 |
| 2 payments · 1.2% of all spending | $21,199 |
| 7 payments · 0.9% of all spending | $16,834 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 57 contributions · 12% of ranked | $86,915 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 72 contributions · 7.7% of ranked | $54,425 |
| 30 contributions · 6.9% of ranked | $48,791 |
| 27 contributions · 6.3% of ranked | $44,500 |
| 24 contributions · 5.3% of ranked | $37,250 |
| 22 contributions · 4.4% of ranked | $31,250 |
| 29 contributions · 3.5% of ranked | $24,770 |
| 11 contributions · 3% of ranked | $21,000 |
A further $42,100 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (N/A, None, blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($21,463) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.