Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Matthew Rascon
Matthew Rascon (Democratic Party) ran for election to the U.S. House to represent California's 48th Congressional District. He lost in the primary on March 5, 2024.
Biography
Matthew Rascon was born in San Diego, California. Rascon earned an associate degree from Grossmont Community College in 2017. His career experience includes working in security. Rascon has been affiliated with the Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus, and Alliance for peacebuilding.[1]
Elections
2024
See also: California's 48th Congressional District election, 2024
California's 48th Congressional District election, 2024 (March 5 top-two primary)
General election
General election for U.S. House California District 48
Incumbent Darrell Issa defeated Stephen Houlahan in the general election for U.S. House California District 48 on November 5, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ |  | Darrell Issa (R) | 59.3 | 213,625 |
 | Stephen Houlahan (D) | 40.7 | 146,665 | |
| Total votes: 360,290 | |||
 = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
Nonpartisan primary for U.S. House California District 48
The following candidates ran in the primary for U.S. House California District 48 on March 5, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Darrell Issa (R) | 62.4 | 111,510 |
| ✔ | | Stephen Houlahan (D) | 14.9 | 26,601 |
 | Whitney Shanahan (D) | 12.2 | 21,819 | |
 | Mike Simon (D) | 7.2 | 12,950 | |
 | Matthew Rascon (D) | 2.2 | 3,988 | |
 | Lucinda Jahn (No party preference) | 1.1 | 1,959 | |
| Total votes: 178,827 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Endorsements
Ballotpedia did not identify endorsements for Rascon in this election.
2022
See also: California's 48th Congressional District election, 2022
General election
General election for U.S. House California District 48
Incumbent Darrell Issa defeated Stephen Houlahan in the general election for U.S. House California District 48 on November 8, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Darrell Issa (R) | 60.4 | 155,171 |
| Stephen Houlahan (D) | 39.6 | 101,900 | |
| Total votes: 257,071 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Nonpartisan primary election
Nonpartisan primary for U.S. House California District 48
Incumbent Darrell Issa and Stephen Houlahan defeated Matthew Rascon and Lucinda Jahn in the primary for U.S. House California District 48 on June 7, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Darrell Issa (R) | 61.5 | 101,280 |
| ✔ | | Stephen Houlahan (D) | 27.8 | 45,740 |
| Matthew Rascon (D) | 9.1 | 14,983 | |
| Lucinda Jahn (Independent) | 1.6 | 2,614 | |
| Total votes: 164,617 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Withdrawn or disqualified candidates
- Chris Balasinski (Independent)
- Harley Rouda (D)
- Mari Barosay (D)
Campaign themes
2024
Ballotpedia survey responses
See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection
Matthew Rascon did not complete Ballotpedia's 2024 Candidate Connection survey.
Campaign website
Rascon’s campaign website stated the following:
| “ |
Term Limits To address those career politicians who move from one legislative body to the next, I also would call for a maximum cap in Congress of no more than 20 years total. These limits would help to remove complacency in the House and Senate, with no person serving more than 12 years in the lower or upper body of Congress and no more than 20 years overall. A two-term limit in the senate would prevent any one person from holding power for too long, allowing states to have a real voice and forcing political parties to pick the best candidates as opposed to backing incumbents endlessly keeping the status-quo. Meanwhile, a six-term limit in the House of Representatives provides ample time for Jr. Representatives to acclimate and enact change before leaving office and transitioning to local/state office, attempting a senate run, or retiring from political office. While the six-term limit in the House would overlap with the two-term limit of the Senate, that would force politicians to make a choice of pursuing both terms in the senate or serving out all six terms in the House, ensuring change and making them pick where they think they are needed most. Mandatory Divestiture Most politicians in Congress have investments, and some are heavily invested in certain industries. This in and of itself creates a huge chance for corruption and representatives putting self-interest over the needs of their constituents. A representative heavily vested in pharmaceutical companies is inherently more likely to pass legislation that favors those companies, inflating their own net worth regardless of outcome and potential repercussions. Blind trusts have been wholly ineffective, and questionable trading by representatives seems to make the news more and more in recent years. It’s gotten to the point where many Americans simply expect politicians to be looking after self-interests first, but there is one way to deal with this. Mandatory Divestiture by the date of inauguration for all members of the Legislature would remove the chance for politicians to put lobbyists and personal gain over the needs of their constituents. Additionally, by making this a requirement, it deters the ultra-wealthy and the compromised from running for the sake of self-enrichment and helps to limit the influence of lobbyists and corporations in politics. Those unwilling to divest for the sake of transparency should not be the ones trusted to enact the will of the people or shape this Great Nation towards a brighter future. We don’t need career politicians; we need real representatives that will deal with the consequences and benefits of their work along with the people. Real Consequences The STOCK (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) Act of 2012 is a prime example of our current lack of consequences. The act itself provides little to no defense against insider trading and profiteering, with extensive study revealing that since being signed, at least 182 top Congressional staffers and 57 members of Congress have violated the STOCK act and received no consequence for it. To deter such actions from those in office, we need representatives willing to draft and fight to pass Legislation that does more than set “guidelines” and ensures that there are truly stiff consequences for violation and not merely provide lip service. Instead, we need true consequences such as barring offenders from future federal office, censure and possible impeachment of offenders, and jail time for those found guilty depending on the frequency and severity of the violations. Until the day we go beyond guidelines and fines, the penalties for breaking these rules and taking advantage of one’s positions will be nothing more than a cost of doing business.[2] |
” |
| —Matthew Rascon’s campaign website (2024)[3] | ||
2022
Matthew Rascon completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2022. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Rascon's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.
| Collapse all
- TERM LIMITS: work with members from both sides of the isle to push for a joint resolution imposing much needed term limits on the house and senate.
- MANDATORY DIVESTITURE: tirelessly fight for laws requiring elected members of Congress to divest from financial interests by date of inauguration, removing conflicts of interest before they can compromise the legislature.
- CONSEQUENCES: I will work to try and bring true consequences to members of Congress who would break from established guidelines and laws. Those in elected office should be held to a hire standard and face more than mere fines for betraying public trust.
I’m also very passionate about tribal sovereignty and repairing damage done to America’s first peoples, the pursuit of improved infrastructure, and US agricultural and Economic independence.
I admire former Governor Schwarzenegger for his dedication to physical fitness and the health of California’s people.
I look to the example set by my mother, who raised me to do what I can to help those in need and have a servant's heart.
We need more regular people with an understanding of the average American lifestyle, and fewer career lawyers or decades old politicians out of touch with those people’s lives.
Those who spend more time and focus on lobbyists over communities are inherently flawed in their efforts. Those who seek to constantly build upon their own financial interests over the needs of their constituency are a hindrance to a proper representational government.
I have no desire to have a monument or building with my name on it. Nor do I need to have some bill named after me. All I want is to leave this world and this country in a better place than it was before I served.
I was only six at the time, but distinctly remember the look of disbelief on adults faces as such unthinkable events happened in real-time.
Having a clean slate and an area of focus can be superior at times, as building from the ground using a sound blueprint is better than finishing from a faulty foundation.
I believe term limits are a necessity, and while too short a time in office may lead to a revolving door where the two-party system picks and chooses, a lack of term limits leads to our current issue of life-long politicians increasingly out of touch with the needs of their constituents.
You might guess "R", but it be the "C"!
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
Campaign website
Rascon's campaign website stated the following:
| “ |
Term Limits In order to have a stronger functioning Legislature, we need to enact term limits to do away with life-long Senators and Representatives. With some exceptions, the longer politicians remain in office, the more out of touch they get from the needs of their constituents and the more beholden to lobbyists they become. I propose a two-term limit in the Senate and a six-term limit in the House of Representatives. To address those career politicians who move from one legislative body to the next, I also would call for a maximum cap in Congress of no more than 20 years total. These limits would help to remove complacency in the House and Senate, with no person serving more than 12 years in the lower or upper body of Congress and no more than 20 years overall. A two-term limit in the senate would prevent any one person from holding power for too long, allowing states to have a real voice and forcing political parties to pick the best candidates as opposed to backing incumbents endlessly keeping the status-quo. Meanwhile, a six-term limit in the House of Representatives provides ample time for Jr. Representatives to acclimate and enact change before leaving office and transitioning to local/state office, attempting a senate run, or retiring from political office. While the six-term limit in the House would overlap with the two-term limit of the Senate, that would force politicians to make a choice of pursuing both terms in the senate or serving out all six terms in the House, ensuring change and making them pick where they think they are needed most.
Perhaps the most important step needed in cleaning up the Legislature, and to help ensure no conflicts of interest arise, it must become a requirement that all those assuming office divest by the day of inauguration. Most politicians in Congress have investments, and some are heavily invested in certain industries. This in and of itself creates a huge chance for corruption and representatives putting self-interest over the needs of their constituents. A representative heavily vested in pharmaceutical companies is inherently more likely to pass legislation that favors those companies, inflating their own net worth regardless of outcome and potential repercussions. Blind trusts have been wholly ineffective, and questionable trading by representatives seems to make the news more and more in recent years. It’s gotten to the point where many Americans simply expect politicians to be looking after self-interests first, but there is one way to deal with this. Mandatory Divestiture by the date of inauguration for all members of the Legislature would remove the chance for politicians to put lobbyists and personal gain over the needs of their constituents. Additionally, by making this a requirement, it deters the ultra-wealthy and the compromised from running for the sake of self-enrichment and helps to limit the influence of lobbyists and corporations in politics. Those unwilling to divest for the sake of transparency should not be the ones trusted to enact the will of the people or shape this Great Nation towards a brighter future. We don’t need career politicians; we need real representatives that will deal with the consequences and benefits of their work along with the people.
In order for the above-mentioned mandatory divestiture, or any rules to work we need real consequences. The STOCK (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) Act of 2012 is a prime example of our current lack of consequences. The act itself provides little to no defense against insider trading and profiteering, with extensive study revealing that since being signed, at least 182 top Congressional staffers and 57 members of Congress have violated the STOCK act and received no consequence for it. To deter such actions from those in office, we need representatives willing to draft and fight to pass Legislation that does more than set “guidelines” and ensures that there are truly stiff consequences for violation and not merely provide lip service. Instead, we need true consequences such as barring offenders from future federal office, censure and possible impeachment of offenders, and jail time for those found guilty depending on the frequency and severity of the violations. Until the day we go beyond guidelines and fines, the penalties for breaking these rules and taking advantage of one’s positions will be nothing more than a cost of doing business.[2] |
” |
| —Matthew Rascon's campaign website (2022)[4] | ||
Campaign finance summary
Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
See also
2024 Elections
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Information submitted to Ballotpedia through the Candidate Connection survey on April 30, 2022
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Matthew Rascon for CA 48th, “The Issues,” accessed January 28, 2024
- ↑ Matthew Rascon for CA 48th, “The Issues,” accessed May 23, 2022
