September 25, 2025 9:00 am
Two days after Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California legislature placed Prop 50, a redistricting measure, on the Nov.4 special election ballot, I received three 8 x 11 glossy campaign mailings, urging me to “Say No” to “Unconstitutional Gerrymandering.”
One flier declared, “California families struggle with soaring costs, and the states sink deeper into deficit, Governor Newsom and the legislature are scheming to take redistricting power away from our Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission.”
Yes, Prop 50 calls for a temporary change to this state’s redistricting rules in order to allow partisan gerrymandering, but for a very special reason. It is Gov. Newsom’s retaliatory response to Texas’ partisan redistricting move this summer, when President Donald Trump asked Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to do him a favor so that he can get more Republicans in the House of Representatives. Abbott and his legislature granted Trump his wishes, by creating five new additional GOP seats to the House before the 2026 midterm election — an unusual mid-decade congressional redistricting.
Newsom’s Prop 50 measure was a direct retaliatory move to counter Texas’s decision. It would allow five currently GOP–leaning red seats to be flipped into blue seats by changing district boundaries.
For years, California had voting districts that were gerrymandered — deliberately drawn by politicians to guarantee a victory for their party.
The Citizens Redistricting Commission was created in 2016, thanks to the inspiration and hard work from Palo Alto resident Charles Munger, Jr. The commission’s role is to officially ensure that voting districts in California are designed to be fair and representative, and prohibits Sacramento politicians from gerrymandering. A majority of Californians enthusiastically voted to create this commission, and its revamping worked successfully in the 2022 and 2024 elections. It was a marvelous change!
The Prop 50 campaign is now underway, with more mailings and a flurry of ads on radio, TV and in newspapers – from both sides. It will be a feisty, fiery campaign, but also a very important one. Why? Because it affects Congress, not just California.
A partisan battle
The campaign has also become a partisan battle, with Democrats urging that a temporary suspension of the independent commission is critical because it’s the only way to counter the already approved five GOP House seats from Texas. While most Californians dislike gerrymandering, including me, this issue is NOT really about whether or not the redistricting commission should continue in California. It will, because Prop 50 sunsets in 2030.
California Republicans say don’t gerrymander in California, just keep the districts as they are, since the independent commission is working well. Of course, they don’t want any change, because they don’t want California to have five almost-guaranteed Democratic seats in the House. By the way, Republican politicians in Texas favor gerrymandering.
Democrats support Prop. 50 because it would counter the Texas move. They say it’s important to guarantee those five Democratic seats even if gerrymandering is involved. These are unusual times, and Congress, our legislative branch of government, is important. The GOP has a slight majority in the House, and unless California acts, Texas’s five new members will ensure a GOP majority in the near future. “We must fight fire with fire,” they say.
There are those who say, “Well, things will get better, maybe in the 2026 election or maybe in 2028. I won’t worry because Trump cannot run for president again.” Hmm. I’ve heard him mention he just might consider it.
I can’t sit silently and say that this November a vote doesn’t matter. It does and I will vote yes.
Munger’s role
Palo Alto’s Charles Munger is a physicist at Stanford’s SLAC, a conservative Republican, a political donor and the son of Charles Munger, Sr., who was vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway. The younger Munger is now leading the campaign against Prop. 50 and so far has spent more than $30 million to convince voters to oppose it.
Munger was one of the first Californians who believed gerrymandering had to end and heavily funded the effort to stop it. I give him great credit for securing a more democratic voting process in the state. Because of all his hard work to create a commission to be in charge of redistricting, I can understand why he would not want anyone to tamper with it.
So why am I voting for Prop 50?
Because this country is a critical juncture, with democratic rights are sliding away. Trump is trying to pack the House because it would be helpful to him. Trump has caused this Prop 50. battle when he asked Abbot to find him new GOP seats. (Remember his request to the Georgia secretary of state to “find 11,780 votes”?)
I have some friends who tell me it’s more important to maintain the independent commission than it is to try to effect a change in the House. My response? OK, if California does not respond to Texas’s move, and California’s commission keeps on functioning, then what is the result?
Given a choice between not changing redistricting, versus voting for Prop. 50, which is a greater good?
No change in California contributes to a big change in the House of Representatives, i.e., more Republicans. So, the House will continue to go along with everything Trump wants, as it has been doing for the past eight months.
Is this what you want?
It’s not what I want. I want to stop Trump from packing the House of Representatives. And In do hope that all its members will stand up and do their jobs as legislators, as an active third branch of government.
Diana Diamond is a long time, experience journalist who has been a staff member of the San Jose Mercury News, serving on its editorial board and has been editor of the Daily News and the Daily Post.
Prop 50 sunsets in 2030. Unless it is extended.
Conveniently after newsom uses CA to launch himself into the whitehouse.
Maybe you want the king of taxes in the whitehouse but I dont. Everything Newsom does is for newsom. Next tax? Every mile you drive. No doubt loaded on top of gas tax. A tax on the working poor if ever there was one.
No to prop 50. No to newsom.