Outside groups trade attacks in Matsui-Vang race, with one on TV and the other in mailboxes
The PAC advertisements also reinforce the candidates’ competing messages
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Two political action committees are taking on the sharpest attacks in California’s 7th Congressional District race, using different ways to reach voters as Rep. Doris Matsui and Sacramento City Councilmember Mai Vang compete for the same seat.
story continued below
Affordable California 2026, a super PAC opposing Vang, reported $400,000 in spending on television and digital advertising and production. A commercial airing in the Sacramento market questions Vang’s attendance at regional board meetings and accuses her of voting against housing for homeless residents and legal aid for immigrants and refugees.
It ends: “Mai Vang can’t deliver here. Won’t deliver in Congress.”
The group’s website presents those accusations as part of a broader critique of Vang’s decade in local office. They are the PAC’s claims.
For example, its legal-aid and housing accusations cite Vang’s votes against city budgets that contained funding for those programs, rather than separate votes on each program.
On Vang’s side, Leaders We Deserve reported $59,573 for direct mail production and postage supporting her. A folded mailer and a similar flat piece delivered this week in Elk Grove call Matsui “The Face of DC Corruption.”
It portrays the longtime congresswoman as beholden to wealthy and corporate interests while presenting Vang as a candidate who would challenge them. Those accusations, too, are the PAC’s arguments, not findings established by the mailer.
The contrasting formats reflect the spending reported for these particular efforts: Affordable California 2026 has committed substantially more to a campaign that includes television, while Leaders We Deserve’s reported expenditure covers mail.
The mailer for Vang also reinforces campaign themes: Washington needs a new generation of leadership.
Affordable California 2026 registered with the FEC on Aug. 25. Its donors had not appeared in a regular financial report as of Sept. 24; its next quarterly report is due Oct. 15. A closer examination of who finances the outside groups will follow separately.
Video below
