See how Ami Bera actually votes — against your values.
DeepSyte scores Ami Bera's record on the issues you care about — not party, not press releases. Take the 2-minute values quiz to see your personal alignment.
Sign in and take the values quiz to see how Ami Bera's votes line up with your views.
Prediction track record
How often we called Ami Bera's passage votes correctly, from their stated positions on each bill's tagged topics. Excludes “unclear” calls and abstentions.
A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress.
A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress.
Based on 5 data points across public statements and recorded votes · AI analysis of public records
118-hr-2·Consistent
Secure the Border Act of 2023
85/100
What they said
Apr 23, 2026
Rep. Bera opposes negative characterizations of Indian immigrants and argues that immigration strengthens America. He contends that immigrants contribute positively to the nation through hard work and public service, and that the country benefits from welcoming people from diverse backgrounds.
Rep. Bera's statement emphasizes that immigrants strengthen America and opposes negative characterizations of immigrant groups. The Secure the Border Act focuses on border enforcement mechanisms (wall construction, asylum limits, employment verification) rather than on the value or characterization of immigrants themselves. Bera's NO vote on the bill is consistent with his pro-immigration stance, as the bill's restrictive provisions align with the enforcement-focused approach that typically accompanies skepticism toward immigration. However, the statement does not explicitly address border security policy or asylum eligibility limits, creating some granularity mismatch between his rhetorical focus (immigrant contributions and dignity) and the specific policy mechanisms in the bill.
Continuing Appropriations and Border Security Enhancement Act, 2024
75/100
What they said
Apr 23, 2026
Rep. Bera opposes negative characterizations of Indian immigrants and argues that immigration strengthens America. He contends that immigrants contribute positively to the nation through hard work and public service, and that the country benefits from welcoming people from diverse backgrounds.
Rep. Bera's statement strongly supports immigration and opposes negative characterizations of immigrants, particularly those from India. The bill imposes limits on asylum eligibility and includes provisions restricting DHS use of funds for immigration-related purposes—provisions that align with restrictive immigration policy. However, the bill is a complex continuing resolution that bundles appropriations for multiple federal agencies with immigration provisions. Bera's NO vote is consistent with opposing the bill's restrictive immigration components, though the vote also reflects opposition to the overall appropriations package and its funding reductions. The statement and vote align directionally on immigration policy, but the bill's omnibus nature and the vote's passage-level character (which can reflect multiple concerns) introduce some ambiguity about what specifically drove the vote.
Rep. Bera expresses support for maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including nuclear-armed submarine rotations and the Washington Declaration, to reassure the Korean public and deter North Korean threats.
Rep. Bera's statement supports maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including strategic asset rotations and the Washington Declaration. The bill is a broad FY2024 omnibus appropriations measure that funds the Department of Defense and the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs—both of which support U.S. military presence and diplomatic engagement in the Indo-Pacific. His YES vote on passage is generally consistent with his stated commitment to strengthening U.S.-ROK security cooperation, as the bill provides funding mechanisms for those commitments. However, the bill bundles multiple departments and programs; his vote reflects support for the overall appropriations package rather than a specific endorsement of extended deterrence provisions.
Rep. Bera expresses support for maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including nuclear-armed submarine rotations and the Washington Declaration, to reassure the Korean public and deter North Korean threats.
Rep. Bera's statement emphasizes maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea through strategic asset rotations and security cooperation. The bill he voted for addresses the mechanics of defense sales channels (FMS vs. DCS) and streamlining State Department review processes for commercial defense sales eligibility. While both touch on U.S.-Korea defense relations, the bill's focus on sales process efficiency does not directly advance the deterrence commitments and strategic asset rotations Bera advocated for in his statement. His yes vote may reflect support for defense industry competitiveness generally, but the bill does not substantively address the extended deterrence posture or alliance reassurance that was the core of his public position.
Rep. Bera expresses support for maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including nuclear-armed submarine rotations and the Washington Declaration, to reassure the Korean public and deter North Korean threats.
The statement addresses U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including strategic asset rotations and nuclear-armed submarine deployments. The bill is a broad DOD appropriations measure that funds military personnel, operations, procurement, and related activities—the general funding vehicle through which such commitments would be resourced. The rep's procedural yes vote is directionally consistent with supporting robust defense spending that enables deterrence operations, but the vote type is procedural rather than substantive passage, and the bill does not specifically address the Korea-specific deterrence questions the statement raises. The connection is plausible but indirect.
Pairs with ambiguous language and high uncertainty are withheld until more data is available. Procedural, cloture, and amendment votes are excluded — they don't cleanly signal substantive support or opposition.
Pro analysis
AI rep analysis — Pro
Get an AI-narrated read on Ami Bera's full voting record against your stated values — aligned themes, conflicts, notable votes, and what to watch for.
We haven't extracted campaign positions for Ami Bera yet. Once their campaign website or position pages are processed, this card will track what they said vs how they voted.
Crossing the aisle
Passage votes where Ami Bera broke ranks with ≥75% of Democrats. Threshold catches substantively partisan splits; unanimous-ish or close votes are excluded.
5
Cross-aisle votes
119-s-1318·Apr 29, 2026·80% of D voted NO
Fallen Servicemembers Religious Heritage Restoration Act
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the National Labor Relations Board relating to "Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status".
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the National Labor Relations Board relating to "Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status".
Rep. Bera Condemns Trump’s Attack on Indian Immigrants
Position: Rep. Bera opposes negative characterizations of Indian immigrants and argues that immigration strengthens America. He contends that immigrants contribute positively to the nation through hard work and public service, and that the country benefits from welcoming people from diverse backgrounds.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), the longest-serving Indian American Member of Congress, released the following statement in response to President Donald Trump’s Truth Social post attacking Indian immigrants and labeling India a “hellhole”:
“As the son of immigrants from India, I take great pride in both my heritage and in the country that gave my family the opportunity to build a better life. My parents came to the United States legally in search of that opportunity. My mother spent 35 years working as a public school teacher. My father worked as an engineer. They raised my brothers and me with a deep belief in hard work, public service, and giving back to the country that welcomed them.
“I am a product of that American story. I attended California’s public schools from kindergarten through medical school, became a doctor, and now have the privilege of serving our nation in Congress. That is what the American Dream looks like.
“The comments shared by President Trump are offensive, ignorant, and beneath the dignity of the office he holds. They reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of who we are as a nation. America has always been strengthened by generations of immigrants who come here, work hard, and contribute to our country. They do not weaken America — they strengthen it.
“America was built by people from all over the world who believed in its promise and worked tirelessly to make it better for the next generation. That’s the story of my family, and it’s the story of millions of families across this country.
“President Trump, who was born into wealth and privilege, has never had to struggle the way so many immigrant families have. He does not understand the grit, sacrifice, and determination it takes to build a life from the ground up. He does not understand public service, and he does not understand the values that make America the greatest nation in the world.
“We are a nation of immigrants, and we are stronger because of it.”
###
Rep. Bera Advances Bipartisan Measure to Strengthen U.S. Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs
Position: Rep. Bera supports legislation requiring the State Department to report on U.S. educational and cultural exchange programs and compare them to China's programs, arguing these initiatives are essential tools for advancing U.S. national security, diplomacy, and global leadership.
Washington, D.C. — Today, Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, welcomed the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s passage of his bipartisan legislation, H.R. 6428, with Representative Joe Wilson (SC-02) to strengthen American leadership through educational and cultural exchange programs.
The bill requires the Secretary of State to submit a comprehensive report to Congress on participation in U.S. funded and comparable People's Republic of China-sponsored educational and cultural exchange programs.
The report will include data on participation by country, funding levels, participant demographics, and long-term impact assessments on how these programs shape perceptions of the United States. It will also evaluate how such programs influence U.S. diplomatic standing and provide a comparative analysis of the PRC's expanding investment in these programs.
“Educational and cultural exchange programs are among our most effective tools for advancing U.S. national security, strengthening diplomatic relations, and sustaining American global leadership,” Bera said. “As the PRC moves to expand its own programs worldwide, the United States must take full advantage of this soft power tool to strengthen our diplomatic standing, influence, and strategic positioning.”
H.R. 6428 will help Congress better evaluate and strengthen exchange programs that build enduring partnerships and advance American leadership around the world.
Rep. Bera Presses Trump Official on U.S. Extended Deterrence Commitments to South Korea
Position: Rep. Bera expresses support for maintaining strong U.S. extended deterrence commitments to South Korea, including nuclear-armed submarine rotations and the Washington Declaration, to reassure the Korean public and deter North Korean threats.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S.
Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), Ranking Member of the House Foreign
Affairs Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, pressed the State Department
on the strength of U.S. extended deterrence commitments to the Korean Peninsula
and the status of security cooperation with the Republic of Korea.
During a
hearing with Thomas G. DiNanno, Under Secretary for Arms Control and
International Security at the U.S. Department of State, Bera underscored
growing concern among the South Korean public about regional security threats
and the importance of maintaining clear, credible U.S. commitments to the
alliance.
Bera noted
that anxiety over North Korea’s continued threat environment has contributed to
increased public debate in South Korea over independent nuclear capabilities.
He pointed to the Washington Declaration as an important step in reinforcing
deterrence and reassuring the Korean public of the United States’ ironclad
commitment to the defense of the Korean Peninsula.
In his
questioning, Bera pressed for an update on U.S. implementation of the extended
deterrence commitments laid out in the Washington Declaration, including
strategic asset rotations meant to reassure the Korean public and strengthen
deterrence on the Korean Peninsula. He also sought an update on ongoing
U.S.-ROK discussions over South Korea’s interest in acquiring nuclear-powered
submarines as part of broader efforts to strengthen allied maritime readiness
and long-term security cooperation.
A longtime
advocate for strong U.S. alliances in the Indo-Pacific, Bera has consistently
emphasized the importance of close coordination with South Korea and Japan to
preserve peace, stability, and deterrence in the region.
You can watch their exchange here and read the transcript below:
REP. BERA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As the ranking Democrat on East
Asia, I’ve spent a lot of time with our allies in Korea, talking to the Korean
National Assembly, their government, and others.
One thing that’s been concerning
over the last few years has been the sentiment within the Korean public about
obtaining their own nuclear deterrence. You know, you see polls that show over
60%, perhaps sometimes over 70%, of the public being concerned about,
obviously, the threats from North Korea, stability on the Korean Peninsula.
It’s part of the reason why I was
very supportive of the Washington Declaration under the Biden administration,
which did step up our rotations of nuclear-armed submarines and other assets to
reassure the Korean public about our commitments and our deterrence strategy.
Mr. Undersecretary, could you give
me an update on the status of our commitments under the Washington Declaration,
if we still are seeing those rotations of nuclear submarines and our
commitments for nuclear deterrence, both on the Korean Peninsula, but also in
East Asia with our Japanese allies?
UNDER SECRETARY DINANNO: Yes, sir. Thanks for the question.
So, as I’m sure you know, the Trump
administration, on the President’s visit there laid out a comprehensive set of
policies across economics, the military, as well as civil nuclear cooperation.
Specifically, my role, to your
question on the extended deterrence commitments: to the point about the
potential chatter or rumors about, or discussions of, the ROK having their own
nuclear deterrent, the strongest way that we can prevent that is by being
committed to the U.S. extended deterrence.
BERA: So you’re reassuring me that our commitments to extended
deterrence to the Korean Peninsula are as ironclad as they have ever been?
DINANNO: Well, sir, I mean, take the President’s word for it. I mean, you
know, we do that.
BERA: Another question. The Koreans have asked for the ability to have
their own nuclear-powered submarines. I think the President has addressed that
in the affirmative, that he’s willing to work with the Koreans to create some
of the nuclear-powered submarines as part of our alliance. Can you give us an
update on that?
DINANNO: Uh, yeah, just real quick back to extended deterrence, I’ll just
get to the second question. The President himself on the Peninsula was very
clear in his commitment to the U.S. extended deterrence umbrella. So there can
be no clearer message.
BERA: Okay.
DINANNO: One other point there is, I as Undersecretary, am planning a trip,
that we continue to engage with the Koreans. And you can’t just say it once and
walk away. We have to continue to work on it. And we do. Specific to nuclear
submarines, as part of the joint fact sheet, we’re going through a pretty
extensive process. Interagency is very active on building teams, who would go,
what our deliverables would be, because they’re extensive. One workstream there
is nuclear submarines. That’s really a shared responsibility, more so the War
Department on the infrastructure, on the actual, you know, the State Department
piece of that, my piece of that will be on the any potential nuclear fuel.
BERA: And again, if you can keep Congress informed on the progress of
those talks, obviously it’s important for us to continue to support our Korean
allies and continue to have those assets and capabilities.
DINANNO: Yeah it’s very robust. It’s ongoing, and we’re planning to go.
Rep. Bera Advances Bipartisan Measure Condemning Economic Coercion Against Japan
Position: Rep. Bera supports a bipartisan resolution condemning Chinese economic and military coercion against Japan in response to Japan's statements on Taiwan, and reaffirms U.S. commitment to its alliance with Japan and regional stability in the Indo-Pacific.
Washington, D.C. — Today, Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, welcomed the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s passage of H. Res. 971, a bipartisan resolution condemning coercive actions against Japan and reaffirming the United States’ commitment to its allies in the Indo-Pacific region.
Bera co-led H. Res. 971 with Representative Young Kim (CA-40) to support Japan and condemn coercive actions taken by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in response to Prime Minister Takaichi’s statements regarding Taiwan. The resolution reaffirms the United States’ ironclad commitment to its alliance with Japan, supports Japan’s right to express its views on matters of regional and international concern without fear of economic or military coercion, commends Japan’s commitment to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, calls on the PRC to cease its coercive actions, and commits to strengthening U.S. cooperation with Japan and other regional partners to deter aggression and maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific.
“Today’s vote sends a clear message that the United States stands by our ally Japan,” said Representative Bera. “The November 7th, 2025 remarks made by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi reflect the sovereign right of nations to speak on regional concerns, and we condemn the escalatory actions the PRC has taken in response.”
The resolution follows a series of actions by the PRC cited in the measure, including a travel advisory urging Chinese citizens to avoid travel to Japan, a renewed ban on Japanese seafood imports, export restrictions on dual-use items to 20 Japanese firms, China Coast Guard patrols around the Senkaku Islands, and dangerous military aircraft maneuvers near Japan’s Okinawa and Miyako-jima Islands.
###
Rep. Bera Announces Support for 25 Housing Bills to Address Affordability Crisis
Position: Representative Bera supports a comprehensive set of 25 housing bills designed to increase housing supply, reduce construction barriers, expand homeownership access, improve financing mechanisms, and address affordability challenges for working families, seniors, veterans, and first-time homebuyers.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06) announced that he is cosponsoring 25 housing-related bills aimed at increasing housing supply across the country, improving affordability, and helping more families find a safe, stable, and affordable place to live.
“At a time when too many families are being priced out of the housing market, Congress should be focused on advancing real solutions to build more homes and bring costs down,” said Representative Ami Bera, M.D. “There is no single solution to our housing crisis, but we can make real progress by cutting red tape, modernizing outdated rules, expanding access to financing, and championing innovative ways to build more housing faster. These bills reflect a commonsense approach to bolstering supply and making housing more affordable for working families, seniors, veterans, and first-time homebuyers.”
The bills Bera is cosponsoring address several key issues to tackle housing affordability:
Easing barriers that slow housing construction
Several of the bills would help communities accelerate housing production by streamlining federal reviews, improving coordination across agencies, encouraging the use of pre-reviewed building designs, and helping state and local governments adopt policies that support more housing at all income levels.
Expanding access to homeownership
A number of the bills focus on making it easier for families to buy a home by expanding access to small-dollar mortgages, supporting manufactured housing, updating financing rules, and improving awareness of home loan benefits for veterans.
Making more land and local resources available for housing
The bills also include proposals to help communities identify publicly owned land that could be used for housing, strengthen regional housing planning, and give state and local governments greater flexibility to use existing federal resources to support new development.
Improving access to financing for housing development
Bera is also backing measures to support community banks, credit unions, and community development-focused lenders that play an important role in financing housing production and neighborhood investment. These bills are designed to improve access to capital and promote stronger local lending capacity.
Improving accountability and protecting residents
In addition to increasing supply, the bills improve oversight of federal housing programs and public housing agencies, while also helping connect tenants with support when they are at risk of eviction.
“Housing affordability is one of the biggest economic challenges facing families in Sacramento County and across the country,” Bera continued. “We need to tackle this crisis with urgency and with practical solutions that can actually move the needle. That means making it easier to build, easier to finance, and easier for families to find an affordable place to live.”
The bills Bera is cosponsoring include:
Boosting housing supply and reducing barriers to construction
H.R. 2840, the Housing Supply Frameworks Act
H.R. 5077, the Strengthening Housing Supply Act of 2025
H.R. 6768, the Housing Our Communities Act
H.R. 4810, the BUILD Housing Act
H.R. 7344, the Affordable Housing Supply Chain Clarity Act
H.R. 5907, the Accelerating Home Building Act
H.R. 4989, the Streamlining Rural Housing Act of 2025
H.R. 5429, the HUD-USDA-VA Interagency Coordination Act
H.R. 4437, the SMART Act of 2025
H.R. 6345, the Point-Access Housing Guidelines Act of 2025
Expanding homeownership and modernizing housing options
H.R. 6293, the Housing Supply Expansion Act of 2025
H.R. 6774, the FHA Small Dollar Mortgages Act
H.R. 6132, the Housing Affordability Act
H.R. 2362, the VA Home Loan Awareness Act
H.R. 5263, legislation regarding federal manufactured housing standards and safety requirements
Unlocking land and local capacity
H.R. 6773, the Databases of Publicly Owned Land Act
Strengthening community finance and lending
H.R. 4544, the American Access to Banking Act
H.R. 5913, the Community Investment and Prosperity Act
H.R. 3234, the Keeping Deposits Local Act
H.R. 6556, the Failing Bank Acquisition Fairness Act
H.R. 3716, the Systemic Risk Authority Transparency Act
Improving oversight and tenant support
H.R. 3774, the HUD Accountability Act
H.R. 6825, legislation requiring federal monitors and receivers of public housing agencies to testify before Congress
H.R. 5889, the Eviction Helpline Act
H.R. 6344, the CAT Act
###
ICYMI: Rep. Bera Questions DNI Tulsi Gabbard on Iran War
Position: Rep. Bera opposes unauthorized military strikes against Iran without congressional authorization, arguing that the February 2026 strikes constitute an illegal and unconstitutional act of war that has resulted in American casualties and substantial costs.
WASHINGTON, D.C. –– Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), a senior Democrat serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, questioned Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard during the 2026 Worldwide Threats Hearing on her past condemnation of unauthorized strikes on Iran and whether she provided President Trump with an honest intelligence assessment showing there was no imminent threat to justify war.
The consequences of this war are not abstract for the Sacramento region. Since President Trump launched military strikes against Iran without congressional authorization on February 28, 2026, at least thirteen American servicemembers have been killed, including Chief Warrant Officer Robert M. Marzan of Sacramento, and approximately 200 servicemembers have been wounded.
You can watch the full exchange here and read the transcript below:
REP. AMI BERA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Gabbard, we've known each other for a long time. We were both elected to Congress in 2012 and served together for a while. I may not have always agreed with your positions, but I respected the consistency of some of your positions.
Director Gabbard, following the January 3, 2020, drone strike that killed Qassem Soleimani, you gave a speech on the House floor six days later, on January 9, 2020. In the speech that is currently in the Congressional Record and available for anyone to view, you stated, quote: “President Trump has committed an illegal and unconstitutional act of war, pushing our nation headlong into a war with Iran without any authorization from Congress. A war that would be so costly and devastating it would make our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic.”
On February 28, 2026, the Trump administration, under which you are the president’s principal intelligence advisor, launched an illegal and unconstitutional act of war, pushing our nation headlong into a war with Iran without any authorization from Congress. This war has already been costly and devastating. Thirteen American servicemembers have lost their lives, including Chief Warrant Officer Robert Marzan from my home of Sacramento, California and approximately 200 servicemembers have been wounded.
The Pentagon reported that the first six days of Operation Epic Fury cost $11.3 billion. That averages almost $2 billion per day. That was the first six days and now we’re in the nineteenth day of this war that’s ballooned into a regional conflict, putting the lives of Americans and our allies throughout the Middle East in danger.
Director Gabbard, do you still believe that strikes against Iran that don’t have congressional authorization constitute an illegal and unconstitutional act of war?
DNI TULSI GABBARD: Congressman, thank you for the question. The cost of war weighs very heavily upon me and my colleagues here, especially for those of us who have experienced and seen the cost of war firsthand.
My own personal and political views, as I mentioned earlier, I was asked and required by Congress and by the president, in this role as the Director of National Intelligence, to check those views at the door to ensure that the intelligence assessments are not colored by my personal views. And that’s exactly what I am responsible to deliver.
REP. BERA: Director Gabbard do you still believe that a war with Iran would be so costly and devastating that it would make our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic?
DNI GABBARD: Once again, in this role, it is essential that I do not allow any of my personal views on any issues to color or bias the intelligence reporting that we deliver to you and to the president.
REP. BERA: Director Gabbard, in this hearing one year ago, I asked some questions and I’ll paraphrase my exact question. It’s like “we should keep politics out of this, even if the president disagrees with a directive, if it goes against his personal wishes, if he’s considering an order that potentially is unconstitutional or illegal or compromises our security, I want your word that you will always provide and give the honest advice to the president, even if it will make him angry.
I asked you that question. I’m going to read your answer: “And to your specific question, the answer is yes. I will inform the president of that accurate, timely, unbiased intelligence reporting, whether it is something that agrees with an assumption or a view or an objective or not. That’s my responsibility to him and to the American people.”
Director Gabbard, there is no imminent threat of nuclear breakout. Did you deliver that assessment to the president?
DNI GABBARD: I have delivered the Intelligence Community’s assessments to the president.
REP. BERA: There was no imminent nuclear threat to the United States. There was no evidence of imminence that Iran was going to attack American assets. That was different from anything they’ve done over four decades, that was going to attack our homeland. There was no imminent threat. “Imminent” is defined in the dictionary as something that is about to happen, not something that’s been happening for four decades, not something that is going to happen three months from now, not something that’s going to happen a year from now. “Imminent” says this is about to happen.
Did you deliver that assessment to the president?
DNI GABBARD: I delivered the Intelligence Community’s objective analysis of the threats, the severity of those threats, and the scope, along with assessments of the different scenarios and context that exists within the Middle East.
REP. BERA: The president owes it to the American people to go on television, to explain to the American people—to the servicemembers who have died in action serving our country—why we are at war with Iran. He needs to go on television and explain that directly to the American people what the imminent threat was.
###
Ranking Member Bera Presses Trump Officials on Taiwan Commitments, Raises Concerns About THAAD Redeployment
Position: Ranking Member Bera pressed Trump administration officials to reaffirm U.S. commitment to the Six Assurances regarding Taiwan arms sales and expressed concern about the redeployment of THAAD missile defense assets from South Korea, arguing that U.S. policy toward Taiwan must remain anchored in the Taiwan Relations Act and that clarity and resolve from Washington are necessary to preserve peace in the Taiwan Strait.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, pressed Trump administration officials on whether the United States remains committed to the long-standing Six Assurances that have guided U.S. policy toward Taiwan and raised concerns about the redeployment of THAAD missile defense assets from South Korea at a time of continued instability in the Indo-Pacific.
At the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing titled “Reforming America’s Defense Sales,” Ranking Member Bera questioned Stanley L. Brown, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, and Michael P. Duffey, Under Secretary of War for Acquisition and Sustainment, on whether there has been any move to change the Six Assurances as they relate to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.
Ranking Member Bera made clear that the Taiwan Strait remains one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints and that U.S. support for Taiwan’s self-defense must not be negotiated with Beijing. His questions come as Taiwan continues to monitor the status of pending U.S. arms sales, including a second package that Taiwan’s defense minister said this week remains on schedule through the U.S. review process, and as Taiwan’s legislature has moved to allow previously delayed U.S. arms deals to proceed.
In response to Bera’s questions, Brown said he was not aware of any move within the State Department to change the Six Assurances. Duffey similarly said he was not aware of any change within the Department of Defense.
Ranking Member Bera also raised concerns about the redeployment of THAAD-related assets from South Korea, noting that the move comes amid continued threats from North Korea and broader regional instability. Recent reporting has indicated that parts of a THAAD system and other U.S. missile defense assets have been withdrawn from South Korea as military resources are redirected toward the Middle East, raising new questions about deterrence in Northeast Asia.
Ranking Member Bera emphasized that U.S. policy toward Taiwan must remain anchored in the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances, and that preserving peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait requires clarity, consistency, and resolve from Washington. That message comes as Taiwan continues to face sustained military pressure from Beijing, including renewed large-scale Chinese military flights near the island in recent days.
You can watch Ranking Member Bera’s full remarks here.
###
Rep. Bera in Substack: Why I Voted for the Iran War Powers Resolution
Position: Rep. Bera voted for the Khanna-Massie War Powers Resolution to block President Trump's military actions against Iran, arguing that the President lacked constitutional authority to initiate military action without congressional authorization and failed to provide Congress with adequate justification for imminent threats.
WASHINGTON, D.C. –– Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), a senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, released a video statement on “Ami’s Substack” explaining why he voted in favor of the Khanna-Massie War Powers Resolution to block President Trump’s ability to continue his war with Iran without authorization from Congress.
You can watch the full video here and read his statement below:
Last week, President Trump took us to war with Iran—and I use the president’s term; he called it a war. I would say this is an unconstitutional action, and I would even go so far as to say this is an illegal use of his authorities.
Now I’m going to take a little bit of time to talk about what war powers are—what authorities a President of the United States has, but also what the Constitution clearly lays out as Article One authorities—that only Congress has the ability to declare war on another country.
We have given the President of the United States some authorities if there’s an imminent threat to the American homeland, if there’s an imminent threat to American assets abroad; the president can take unilateral actions, but within 48 hours, he has to come to Congress and explain why he took those actions.
One, the president has failed to do that. While Secretary Rubio and Secretary Hegseth, when we were briefed this week, have said there were imminent actions that were going to take place and we had to do this, they’ve never explained what those actions were; they’ve just used the term “imminent.” That is unacceptable. Thus, the President of the United States did not have the authority to take us to war with Iran.
Now, they’re going to try to say a bunch of different things. They’re going to point out that Iran has been an extremely bad actor—they’re the leading sponsor of terrorism around the world. That is a true statement, but they’ve been the leading sponsor of terrorism around the world for decades.
They have taken covert actions in the United States, they have tried to perpetrate assassination attempts in the United States, they have attacked and killed multiple hundreds of U.S. servicemen and women over the decades, and they’ve attacked U.S. assets—but that’s been going on over decades.
They are a bad country. They hate the United States. The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is a horrible individual. I don’t shed any tears for his death, but I also understand this was an action that the president took unilaterally. Congress did not authorize this.
This is an action that could go very poorly, and in fact, we’ve already seen six brave service members killed in action, including one in my home county of Sacramento. Our hearts go out to those families.
They deserve to understand what the goal of these actions are. They deserve to understand what the president hopes to accomplish. They deserve to understand what the endpoint is. Thus far, the President of the United States has failed to do that.
He’s going to come to the United States Congress and ask Congress to give him $50 billion. I’m all in favor of supporting our troops, our men and women, but I have a hard time voting for that at a time when he has cut billions of dollars out of food programs, school nutrition programs, the ability for kids to go to college, and the ability for Americans to afford their health care.
We’re seeing gas prices go up. Mr. President, if you want us to authorize the supplemental funding, you need to come to Congress. Tell us why you took these actions. Tell us what the game plan is here. How long are you going to stay engaged? What is the endpoint?
I don’t think the American people want to be engaged in another forever war in the Middle East, and that’s what this is starting to look like. You didn’t build a coalition, you didn’t come to Congress, and you didn’t explain yourself as to why, at this moment in time, these actions were absolutely necessary.
Mr. President, when this War Powers Resolution comes up today, I will vote to block your ability to continue this war until you come to Congress and get that authorization.
Also, when that $50 billion supplemental comes up, I will praise the American troops—our service members that are in harm’s way, that you’ve sent to war—but I will also ask you: if we’re going to authorize these funds, what is the game plan, what is the end goal, and why is it that at a time when so many American families are struggling to pay the rent, to put food on their table, to pay for their health insurance just to get by every day, you can’t fund any of those programs and provide them relief?
That is an urgency to all these American families, these Sacramento County families. Yet you can just sit here and wave your fingers and say, “give me $50 billion.” That’s not what the American people elected you to do.
That is not what I’m supporting at this moment in time unless I’m given justification. I don’t work for the President of the United States—I work for the people of the United States.
###
Rep. Bera Statement on American Military Strikes Inside Iran
Position: Rep. Bera opposes the unilateral military strikes on Iran without prior congressional authorization or briefing. He calls for immediate congressional briefing on the legal rationale, objectives, and exit strategy, and states he will support a War Powers Resolution on Iran.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06), a senior Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, released the following statement after the United States carried out wide-ranging military strikes inside Iran:
“As a senior Member of the House Foreign Affairs and Intelligence Committees, I was not briefed by the Administration in advance of these strikes on Iran. The Administration has not presented a clear case to the American people, and it did not seek authorization from Congress.
“President Trump’s own statement makes clear this is an act of war. The President himself warned that ‘the lives of courageous American heroes may be lost, and we may have casualties.’ Any decision that puts the lives of our servicemembers in harm’s way demands the highest level of scrutiny, deliberation, and careful planning.
“The Administration must immediately come to Congress to brief Members on its legal rationale, objectives, and exit strategy.
“We must also remain clear-eyed about the brutality of the Iranian regime, which has killed thousands of its own people in recent weeks. I continue to stand with the Iranian people as they seek freedom from this oppressive regime and the ability to determine their own future. But any regime change efforts initiated by the United States will require rebuilding institutions and sustained support. This cannot be done overnight. We must learn from past failures to avoid another open-ended entanglement in the Middle East.
“Next week, the House will vote on a War Powers Resolution on Iran. I will support that resolution.
“I am praying for the safety of our servicemembers and for the protection of all innocent civilians.”
Rep. Bera Issues Statement on Supreme Court Striking Down President Trump's Tariffs
Position: Rep. Bera opposes unilateral presidential tariff authority and calls for Congress to reassert its constitutional control over tariff policy to protect consumers, businesses, and international relationships.
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CA — Today, U.S. Representative Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06) issued a statement following the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling striking down President Trump’s tariff policy:
“The Supreme Court got it right today.
“President Trump never had the power to impose these sweeping tariffs that raised costs for working families, hurt small businesses, and strained our alliances around the world.
“This ruling does not put an end to President Trump’s chaotic and unstable behavior.
“My Republican colleagues need to join us in clearly reasserting Congress’ authority over tariffs to restore stability and predictability for American consumers, businesses, and our trading partners.”
Source: GDELT 2.0 GKG, filtered to a curated list of national outlets. Inclusion is not endorsement; opinion pieces and reported news are mixed.
Recent stock activity
Periodic transaction reports filed under the STOCK Act — disclosed by the rep, sourced from public filings.
No disclosed trades on record.
Source: open-data mirrors of the Senate eFD and House Clerk financial-disclosure systems. Disclosure within 30 days of trade is required by law (45 for spouse/dependent trades).
Top PAC donors · 2026 cycle
Political action committees that gave the most to this rep's principal campaign committee this cycle. PAC giving is direct organizational support — industry, ideological, or leadership.
2.AMERIPAC: THE FUND FOR A GREATER AMERICAIdeological3 contributionsIdeological PAC with a nationalist or patriotic framing — specific policy positions not clearly signaled by the name.AI · low$15,000
3.ASPIRE PACLeadership3 contributionsMember-of-Congress leadership PAC — supports Democratic candidates and causes aligned with its affiliated leadership.AI$15,000
4.NATIONAL APARTMENT ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEEReal Estate2 contributionsTrade association PAC for apartment owners and operators — backs candidates supporting property-rights protections, favorable tax treatment of rental housing, and reduced regulatory burdens on multifamily housing.AI$10,000
5.KPMG PARTNERS/PRINCIPALS & EMPLOYEES POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEEFinance2 contributionsPAC of KPMG, a multinational professional-services and accounting firm. Backs candidates and policies supporting business-friendly tax, regulatory, and trade positions.AI$10,000
6.AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGEONS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEEHealth2 contributionsProfessional association PAC for oral and maxillofacial surgeons — supports candidates and policies aligned with dental and surgical practice interests.AI$10,000
7.THE AMERICAN CONGRESS OF OB-GYNSHealth2 contributionsMedical-specialty PAC for obstetricians and gynecologists — backs candidates supporting reproductive healthcare access, medical liability protections, and physician practice autonomy.AI$10,000
8.POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONSHealth2 contributionsMedical-specialty PAC representing orthopedic surgeons — backs candidates supporting physician interests, healthcare reimbursement, and medical liability protections.AI$10,000
9.AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS SERVICES PAC; (ACPS PAC)Health2 contributionsPhysician-advocacy PAC representing the American College of Physicians — backs candidates supporting healthcare policies aligned with internal-medicine practitioners' interests.AI$10,000
10.VSP HOLDING COMPANY INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (VSP - PAC)2 contributions$10,000
Source: OpenFEC (api.open.fec.gov) Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “committee.” Aggregated by contributing committee. Self-transfers from joint-fundraising / victory committees are excluded.
Top individual contributors · 2026 cycle
Itemized individual contributions over $200 to this rep's campaign committee, aggregated by donor employer. PAC giving is shown above; this section is people, not organizations.
1.SELF$20,026
2.WESTERN HEALTH ADVANTAGE$7,500
3.SKK DEVELOPMENTS$7,000
4.URBAN ELEMENTS$7,000
5.WESTBRIDGE$7,000
6.UC DAVIS$6,750
7.MINNESOTA UROLOGY$6,500
8.KOREANA PLAZA MARKET OAKLAND INC.$5,500
9.FULCRUM PROPERTY GROUP$4,708
10.MOLECULE VENTURES$3,500
Source: OpenFEC Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “individual,” aggregated by the donor's self-reported employer. This is a geographic / industry correlation, not a corporate endorsement.
