Telepeer

Christian Mendez, CA-43 candidate, 2026 primary election questionnaire

May 5, 2026

Ahead of the June primary election, the Southern California News Group compiled a list of questions to pose to the candidates who wish to represent you. You can find the full questionnaire below. Questionnaires may have been edited for spelling, grammar, length and, in some instances, to remove hate speech and offensive language.

Name: Christian Mendez

Current job title: Sr. Operations Analyst

Age: 35

Political party affiliation: Democratic

Incumbent: No

Other political positions held: None

City where you reside: Costa Mesa

Campaign website or social media: mendezforcongress.com

From voter ID to war powers and from immigration to tariffs, Congress has tackled many issues over the past year. What do you, though, see as the top three issues impacting Californians, and what specifically could you do as a lawmaker to address these issues? (Please answer in 250 words or less, and keep your response to future proposals.)

1. Affordability

2. Immigration

3. Sensible Foreign Policy

My primary concern is affordability. Americans are experiencing high rents, high costs of homes, high groceries, high utility bills and so on. Tax breaks won’t be enough and extreme measures must be taken. Rent freezes, increased housing being built, increased energy generation, holding corporations accountable, breaking monopolies, banning AI, increasing wages and taxing billionaires will lower your costs. Guaranteed.

My 2nd concern is immigration. Immigrants bring in $100 Billion in tax revenue. Lawful immigration is important. Creating a more efficient and lawful immigration process will protect both immigrants and Americans. Abolishing ICE and replacing it with the INS is important.

Creating a sensible foreign policy will lower immigration, will stop large taxpayer waste, stop us from engaging in never-ending wars and create stronger relations with Allied nations.

Speaking of voter ID, the president has implored Congress to approve legislation that would require people to show proof of citizenship in order to vote. What role do you believe the federal government plays in telling states how to conduct their own elections, as dictated by the U.S. Constitution? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

According to the Constitution, states have the right to run elections as they see fit. The 10th Amendment protects a state’s right to run elections. As it stands, the federal government has no general police power over state election fraud. This current administration loves to fear-monger over election fraud. Fear-mongering over fraud rates of between 0.00004% and 0.0009% is ridiculous. States are clearly doing it correctly. Let’s continue leaving it up to the states.

What, in your opinion, should the federal government focus on when it comes to immigration policy? For example, do you place a priority on border security, visas for high-skilled workers, refuge for asylum seekers, etc., and why? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Despite building walls and doing mass deportations, the problem still exists. Not only that, your tax money continues to be wasted. If you care about your taxpayer money and solving the problem, we need to make better decisions. If the government cares to solve immigration issues, it needs to focus on processing courts, employer enforcement and foreign affairs.

Increasing courts creates more legal migrants and allows for a faster system. Employer enforcement will stop employers from breaking rules, abusing workers and stop employers from using immigrants as leverage against paying American workers.

Dealing with the problem before it gets here is also important. We need to address why immigrants are coming here in the first place. If their home country has U.S. help, there will be no reason for immigrants to come here.

Lastly, ICE has committed crimes against immigrants and Americans alike. It must be abolished. ICE is younger than I am. It is unnecessary. INS can once again deal with immigration.

It’s been over a year since Gov. Gavin Newsom asked the federal government for supplemental disaster aid to help Southern California communities rebuild after the devastating Palisades and Eaton wildfires, but neither President Donald Trump nor Congress has acted. What would you do to push for the funding, besides writing letters to the Trump administration or the leaders of Congress? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

To push for funding, we have to do whatever it takes. We partner with people that we dislike for a common goal, use public hearings to put pressure, pass local resolutions to bring about funding or build coalitions to show popular support. Funny enough, only one Democrat has engaged Trump in one-on-one conversations to bring about changes to their city. Zohran showed Democrats that Trump is malleable and open to helping if you frame an issue in such a way that it brings positive results to Trump. Trump loves positive attention. If you show Trump that he will gain admiration for helping, he will help. Other than that, I am also willing to engage in dirty tactics. If I have to use procedural delays, committee leverage, attach funding to must-pass bills or use wedge issues, I’ll do it. Anything for the American people.

Do you support a ban or restriction on congressional lawmakers and their families from buying or selling individual stocks? Why or why not? And what would you propose to ensure lawmakers aren’t using their positions to engage in insider trading? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Absolutely, I support banning members of Congress from buying stock. Currently, we see both Democrats and Republicans abusing insider information to place bets on the stock market, and they are making hundreds of millions of dollars doing it. Not only do we see abuse, but we see bias. Congress will hold stock and then make decisions that benefit those companies. To stop lawmakers from insider trading, I would support or cosponsor any bill that bans the practice. I would also introduce criminal penalties for those congressmembers who engage in stock trading.

Do you support stronger regulations on pollution and carbon emissions? If so, how would you ensure those regulations aren’t overly burdensome on small businesses or lower-income families? And if not, how do you propose lawmakers protect the environment and curtail the impacts of climate change? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Yes, I support stronger regulations on pollution and carbon emissions. Regulations need to be effective for large companies. Large companies are the greatest polluters in the world. Bills can be structured to only affect those large companies. I would focus primarily on regulations affecting large companies. To support small businesses or low-income families, I would create energy assistance programs to transition them to green energy. These programs would create low to no-cost solutions. On top of that, I would take more general solutions as well. Expanding public transportation, subsidizing home efficiency upgrades, grid modernization and expanding EV infrastructure will help small businesses and families. Any tax increases to support these programs will only occur to large companies.

President Donald Trump has significantly increased spending for the U.S. Department of Defense. Would you, as a member of Congress, approve additional dollars for the military if the president were to ask for more funding? How would you ensure that any military spending does not end up putting the American people or national security in harm’s way? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

No, I would not support additional funds for the military. Currently, we are spending our defense budget of $12 Billion on a war started by Israel. A war with no plan and a war that risks American lives. No more money for war. Engaging in a war for a foreign nation is placing American lives at risk. Until the war is stopped and the DOD passes an audit, no additional funds. Americans are suffering from high prices in every aspect of life. Funding military endeavors seems secondary to funding American citizens that are struggling here at home.

Under what specific circumstances do you believe the U.S. should engage in a war? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

War is a last resort. Lying about WMDs, nuclear weapons and providing no proof of aggression is not reason enough to engage in war. American soldiers should be treated with the utmost respect and care. Frivolously engaging in wars for foreign nations or oil companies is not respecting our soldiers and what they stand for. Congress needs to stop being lazy and incompetent and actually protect its power. Allowing the President to unilaterally send us to war over nothing, is an insult to all Americans.

Do you believe a president should seek congressional approval before engaging in military action overseas? Why, or why not? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Yes, absolutely. We’ve already seen the consequences of allowing a President to unilaterally engage in a conflict overseas. Currently, we are fighting a war for a foreign nation. A foreign nation that is not sending troops, has universal healthcare and free college. Meanwhile, we are sending troops, have no affordable healthcare or college. Congress failed to act and allowed the President to engage in war. As a result, we already have American deaths and have spent $12 billion. For what?

Congress, in theory, is supposed to serve as a check on the president through budgetary, legislative and oversight powers. Do you believe Congress has fulfilled that obligation during the past two administrations, with one being a Democrat and the other a Republican? Why or why not? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

As is, Congress is absolutely useless. No matter the party, they’ve failed in their job. Congress has failed to exert any check on the President. They’ve failed to show any form of pushback on the President. Congress has passed nothing positive for the American people. Congress has made life unaffordable for the American people. Congress is a joke. All members of Congress, barring 10 or so, should be removed and replaced.

Governments around the world are increasingly considering an age ban or other restrictions on social media use among young people, citing mental health and other concerns. Should Congress adopt such restrictions? If so, what specific restrictions do you propose? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Age bans/restrictions are stupid. Kids will always find a way around those bans/restrictions. Not only that, these bans/restrictions have nefarious uses. They function as a way to track everyday citizens. Your anonymity online will be gone. A better method of protecting children would be creating “garden” versions of apps/websites. Algorithms can also be written to determine age and used to place kids within these garden sites. This lessens the impact on privacy. Punishing platforms for not engaging in user protection is also a great way of pushing for safety. Lastly, it is an issue parents must engage in. Parents must ultimately teach kids about online safety. The government will never replace the role of a parent.

Statistically, violent crime rates in California are on the decline, yet residents still don’t feel safe or at ease in their communities. How do you see your role in Congress in addressing the underlying issues that make Californians feel unsafe in their own neighborhoods? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Crime reports don’t tell the whole story. They don’t represent underlying social, economic and community factors. In order to create safer environments, we must be willing to address these issues within our communities. We must address economic issues in order to stop unemployment, homelessness and healthcare. Poor economic solutions lead to more crime. We must improve neighborhood infrastructure to create well-lit communities, create vibrant neighborhoods and build trust within communities. This will reduce fear and crime.

Prevention is also key. Early intervention programs ensure that youths will have better outcomes. Lastly, we must work with the police. Accountability, transparency and bonds will create trust between the police and communities. Programs that allow police to live within their communities show better outcomes. Relying on preventative and rehabilitation programs will improve the feelings of residents.

There are term limits to serve in the California Legislature, but none to serve in Congress. Would you advocate for term limits for House members? Why or why not? If you support term limits, how many years maximum should a House member be allowed to serve? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

Yes. I would advocate for term limits for House members. House members end up feeling too safe and complacency comes about. Not only that, but long-time members become out of touch with the general populace. The reason we are here today is due to long-time representatives doing absolutely nothing regarding safety during their incumbency. If we are being candid, long-time House members tend to be older. These older house members tend to have health issues. These health issues can cause problems with legislation and voter representation. Lastly, a long-time House member will likely have more corporate backers. Meaning Americans will be less represented by long-time House members.

What’s a hidden talent you have? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)

I can play piano. I’m also very good at sleeping through any loud music and can induce sleep paralysis.

Orange County Register

News Details

Christian Mendez, CA-43 candidate, 2026 primary election questionnaire

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

News

CONTACT INFO

QUICK LINKS

SERVICES

CURRENT NEWS