Telepeer

Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA-37 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: Sydney Kamlager-Dove

Current job title: U.S. Representative CA-37

Age: 53

Political party affiliation: Democratic

Incumbent: Yes

Other political positions held: CA State Senate (2021-2022); CA State Assembly (2018-2021); Trustee LA Community College District (2015-2018)

City where you reside: Los Angeles

Campaign website or social media: https://sydneykamlager.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.)

The top three issues all deal with improving the quality of life for Californians: rising costs, better-paying jobs, and improving our education system. Too many Californians struggle with the rising costs of everyday items like gas and groceries, and big-ticket items like healthcare and housing.

While these problems didn’t start with President Trump, his policies have made things worse. His illegal tariffs are a tax on products like coffee and lumber. His unconstitutional war in Iran has driven up the price of oil and gas. And Trump’s legislative achievement was to cut healthcare programs to pay for tax cuts to billionaires. We must reverse Trump’s disastrous policies, provide real health care reform, and give meaningful tax relief for working Americans. Providing better-paying jobs in a changing global economy means cultivating new industries and invigorating existing ones like sports and entertainment.

For example, we need to bring jobs back to Hollywood. And not just for actors and writers. The downstream impacts of movies and TV shows set in Hollywood mean more jobs in catering, lodging, and transportation. Through combined federal and state tax credits, we can incentivize production to stay in L.A.

Finally, we need to ensure that California has the best education system. This doesn’t only mean our world-famous state university system. We need to prioritize the expansion of vocational, career, and technical education programs that furnish the skills needed to develop career goals and secure high-wage jobs that sustain families.

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.)

I believe that Congress–and only Congress as outlined by the Constitution–can regulate how states conduct federal elections. Any executive order by President Trump dictating how California should run our elections would be unconstitutional.

Should Congress wish to intervene, it should focus on expanding voting rights, not taking those hard-won rights away. Ideas like mandatory photo ID for voting sound fine at first. But in practice, a mandatory ID requirement functions as a poll tax, because people who don’t have a U.S. passport or driver’s license must pay to get the IDs. Instead, Congress should focus on policies like expanding early voting and mail-in voting, instituting same-day registration, and making Election Day a Federal holiday.

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.)

First, the federal government must stop the horrible abuses of Trump’s immigration enforcement. No U.S citizen should be shot and killed for protesting ICE. No US citizen should be detained because they look “foreign.” No U.S. city should be invaded by federal immigration officials wearing masks and lacking identification. These should be basic, common-sense practices for every law enforcement agency—city, state, and federal. Second, we are a nation of immigrants. They are our neighbors, they are our coworkers, they are our friends. That’s why we need to focus on a comprehensive immigration plan to provide a pathway to citizenship for the millions of hardworking, law-abiding immigrants, including Dreamers. Until we finally bring our neighbors out of the shadows with a legal pathway, then demagogues like Trump and Stephen Miller will continue to make them targets for their racist agenda.

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.)

The most important thing to do to get California the money is to vote for Democrats on Election Day. It’s clear Trump doesn’t care about helping Californians, even though the deadly fires didn’t check if you were a Democrat or a Republican. The only thing that will force Trump’s hand is to have Democrats wield true legislative power. Until then, I will not vote to support any disaster aid package unless CA wildfire money is included. And just as I did with former Secretary Kristi Noem, I will hold Secretary Mullin accountable for stalling disaster aid funding.

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.)

Yes, I support a ban on insider trading to include congressional members and their families. The American people deserve to know that their elected representatives act in the public interest, not in their own financial interest. To ensure compliance, fines should be levied for violations of insider 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.)

I believe climate change is an existential problem for this and future generations. We are already seeing its devastating impacts in California with a wildfire season that never ends. To combat climate change, we need everyone attacking it from every direction. And that includes strong regulations on pollution and carbon emissions. To ease potential burdens for small businesses or lower-income families, Congress could enact direct rebates or dividends from the revenue generated on capping or taxing carbon emissions. Congress also could make targeted investments in greener public transportation and affordable housing in impacted areas.

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.)

I will oppose any request from President Trump for more money for the Department of Defense (DoD). In fact, I voted against Trump’s 2026 budget for the DoD, because I cannot support more money for the military when Trump is cutting funding for health care, cancer research, food aid, and many other programs that help working people. Now we have a President drunk on our military might, launching war after war like he’s an imperial king. This madness must stop. That’s why I will vote against any more defense funding that supports Trump’s warmongering.

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

Our Founding Fathers were wise to distrust the war impulses of a president. That’s why they entrusted Congress with the constitutional power to declare war. They wanted the representatives who were closest to the people to make the most important decision a nation can make. We are tragically seeing the flaws now of a president foolish enough to believe that he alone can make war.

That said, there are times when the president must take action to prevent an imminent threat to the country or U.S. personnel under Article 2 of the Constitution, provided the actions are short, limited uses of force, and the actions comply with the War Powers Act.

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.)

Sending our brave men and women to war is the most consequential decision an elected leader can make. That’s why the president must ask Congress for approval. Not only is this move required by law, but congressional approval can ensure that the president has made a convincing argument to the American people about why we should go to war. This argument is both a moral argument and a resource argument. War has many costs, none greater than the cost to our brave service members.

I have a nephew who just graduated from the Marine Corps Officer Candidate School. When he asked why we were going to war with Iran, I couldn’t tell him a good reason. Although President Trump has given many reasons, they contradict his own top officials and even his prior statements. This madness needs to stop. The American people must stand up and say enough.

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.)

Truthfully, Congress is broken. During the Biden administration, Republicans spent millions of dollars and countless hours pursuing criminal charges against Hunter Biden, who was an unelected private citizen, in an effort to politically damage his father, President Biden. They produced no real evidence of crimes. But they did drag someone who struggled with drug addiction through the political gutter. Now, under President Trump, Republicans in Congress have done a complete reversal, spending as little time as possible investigating the illegal and unethical abuses of Trump and his wildly unqualified Cabinet officials. The list is exhausting: the Qatari jet gifted to Trump, violating the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution; the unconstitutional tariffs; the illegal elimination of U.S.A.I.D; the illegal war in Iran; and the illegal boat strikes in Venezuela. The list goes on and on. Even the one bipartisan oversight investigation during this Congress—the release of the Epstein files—was blocked for months by Speaker Johnson. We need more elected representatives who will take seriously their constitutional duty of oversight and not serve as empty suits in Congress.

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.)

There are equal parts promise and peril when it comes to social media. As a parent, I understand the potential peril for young people who spend too much time on social media. Studies point to a potential link between excessive social media use and mental health problems like depression, anxiety, and suicide. No parent wants to see their kids struggle with these problems. At the same time, social media holds so much promise for young people, like having an outlet for their creativity, connecting with others who share their interests and identities, and learning the critical skills needed for the workplace. That’s why I don’t support arbitrary age bans. Parents should decide where the line is between promise and peril. What’s good for a 15-year-old Susie may not be good for 16-year-old Jimmy. That said, I wholeheartedly support sensible guardrails around social media like greater parental controls on platforms, default privacy settings, restrictions on algorithmic targeting of minors, and limiting data collection of minors.

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.)

While crime is largely an issue best addressed by state and local authorities, I believe the federal government plays an important role. Through targeted grant programs, the federal government can help local police departments maintain adequate staffing levels, while also investing in accountable, community-centered policing practices. Simultaneously, we must address the root causes of crime and the factors that contribute to its harmful cycle. Federal investments in reentry programs help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully transition back into their communities, reducing recidivism, and federal investments in community violence intervention programs prevent criminal behavior before it starts. Expanding access to mental health services, substance use treatment, affordable housing, workforce development, job training, and youth violence prevention and after-school programs are also invaluable ways that the federal government can not only combat cycles of harm before they begin, but also ensure people have real economic pathways and stability. Additionally, the federal government plays a critical role in coordinating efforts to combat large-scale human trafficking rings, such as those on the Figueroa corridor. Finally, we cannot ignore the broader economic pressures that contribute to instability. Rising costs for everyday necessities like gas and groceries, combined with job losses and underinvestment in education and social services, create conditions where communities feel less secure. A holistic approach that understands and addresses the socioeconomic circumstances contributing to crime and safety is essential for making Californians safe.

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.)

I do not support term limits. The American people should decide for themselves whether an incumbent deserves their vote or not. An arbitrary number should not decide it for them. Term limits also lead to a consolidation of power among unelected staff or, worse, lobbyists, because they will have the most institutional knowledge of an issue or how the legislative process works.

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

I play the saxophone.

Orange County Register

News Details

Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA-37 candidate, 2026 primary election questionnaire

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

News

CONTACT INFO

QUICK LINKS

SERVICES

CURRENT NEWS