Millions of Californians have been cast adrift. For nothing
- Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
- Proposition 50, the Democratic gerrymandering initiative, has drawn California Republicans into near-extinction on Capitol Hill.
- That’s not a good or healthy thing, and the blue tsunami proved it was also unnecessary.
President Trump fancies himself a farsighted man of destiny and if his vision has often proved lacking — witness the Iranian quagmire — he was right about one thing: 2026 was going to be a rough year for Republicans.
That’s typically how midterm elections work for the party in the White House.
And so Trump, knowing the GOP’s House majority was hanging by the slenderest of threads, strong-armed Texas into redrawing its congressional map to boost Republican chances of keeping control by nabbing up to five extra seats.
The move was stunningly brazen — redistricting usually takes place once, early in a decade after the census — and it was a terrible thing to do.
Lest there’s any doubt how your friendly political columnist feels, let us repeat: It was a very, very, very, very, very bad thing. And provocative, at that.
In response, California — egged on by its White House-hankering governor — passed a ballot measure to gerrymander five of its House seats to give a big advantage to Democrats. With that, the battle was joined. More than half a dozen Republican-led states ultimately ended up redrawing their congressional districts in an effort to bypass voters and predetermine the outcome of the November election.
It didn’t work. (Yay, voters! Way to show who’s in charge!)
But that’s not nearly the end of it.
A mind-blowing election
Last week’s Republican wipeout was beyond anything that anyone, save the most hopium-addled Democrat, could have imagined. The party needed a gain of three seats to flip the House. Democrats are on track to pick up more than 40, despite all that Republican gerrymandering.
And what of those five rigged seats in California? Democrats captured them all.
“We fought fire with fire,” Gov. Gavin Newsom crowed on social media. “And won.”
At least, Newsom did. His headlining role as champion of Proposition 50, his Trump-trolling and online towel-snapping antics have turned the gallivanting governor into one of the party’s most talked-about 2028 presidential prospects.
But the body politic that he yields to incoming-Gov. Xavier Becerra didn’t fare nearly as well.
The map drafted to bolster Democrats has resulted in the near-extinction of California Republicans on Capitol Hill. When the next session of Congress convenes in January, the state’s four remaining House members can caucus inside a Toyota Camry, with room to spare.
Consider: Registered Republicans make up 25% of California’s electorate and many more regularly support the GOP. The party’s share of the 52-member House delegation will be less than 8%.
If you’re a fiercely partisan Democrat, a give-no-quarter lefty or someone who’s animating political impulse is to drive your fist into the other guy’s face, this is all lip-smackingly delicious.
For everyone else, not so much.
Especially if you’re one who believes in the representative part of representative democracy and thinks that if our government and political system are to function properly, it’s important that citizens of all stripes and all political persuasions feel as though they’re invested and have a stake. In short, they need to feel as though their voice and their votes matter.
Millions of Californians now have good reason to doubt that.
Anger and agita
We’ve just witnessed an election that amounted to a primal scream. Much, if not most, of the distemper was aimed at the would-be authoritarian in the White House. But a goodly amount of anger was directed at politicians of both parties and a sense they’re focused more on power and their own interests — such as holding on to power — than the needs of those they’re supposed to represent.
In hindsight, it’s obvious that gerrymandering those five California House seats was unnecessary for Democrats to seize the majority. Given the magnitude of the blue wave, it’s quite possible they might have flipped a few of those seats even without partisan tinkering.
But that’s not just assessing the results with a 20-20 rearview.
On the day that voters approved Proposition 50 last November, Trump’s approval rating was already heading south. More than half a century of history shows a strong correlation between a president’s standing in polls and his party’s performance in the midterm election; on average, the opposition party gained more than two dozen seats. So even then it appeared highly likely that Democrats would take control of the House, even if the Texas gerrymander worked as planned.
(It didn’t. Democrats ended up winning four of the five seats the GOP intended to flip.)
Commentary: This sheriff crossed a line pandering to Trump. He should pay, from his own pocket
Chad Bianco betrayed public trust by seizing ballots in hopes of winning Trump’s endorsement. Riverside County was right to say Bianco should pony up for his legal bills.
Proposition 50, which undid the lines carefully drawn by the state’s nonpartisan, independent redistricting commission, was billed as a one-time, break-glass solution to a political emergency. However, the new map will stay in effect through 2030.
So much for a temporary fix.
Voters should hold Democrats to their word and see to it that the nonpartisan commission resumes its map-making role after the next census. (With California projected to lose anywhere from two to four House seats, Democrats will be sorely tempted to again hijack the process to protect their interests.)
With their new majority in Congress, Democrats should act to ban gerrymandering nationwide. The Problem Solvers Caucus, a bipartisan group, has put forth a proposal to begin that process, demonstrating that support exists on both sides of the aisle.
Gerrymandering is a dirty business, notwithstanding its practice dating to the Colonial era. It needs to stop.
Once and for all.
What else you should be reading
Get smart: In search of post-midterm message, Trump waffles on trusting election, immigration policy
The deep dive:Empowered congressional Democrats gear up for battles over immigration and ICE oversight
The L.A. Times Special:As Stephen Miller rises, California hopes it can blunt his force with Democratic gains
Until next time,
mzb
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The column argues that Texas’ mid-decade redistricting was a brazen attempt to improve Republicans’ electoral prospects, but says California’s response—Proposition 50—was also a serious breach of democratic norms. By replacing district lines drawn by the state’s independent commission with a partisan map, California answered one gerrymander with another.
- The column contends that the response was unnecessary: Democrats were likely to make major gains in the midterms even without California’s new map. It also warns that the map sharply reduces Republican representation in a state where Republicans make up about a quarter of registered voters, leaving millions with less reason to feel represented.
- Looking ahead, the column says the maps remain in place through 2030 despite being presented as an emergency measure. It urges Democrats to restore the independent commission’s role after the next census and calls for a nationwide ban on partisan gerrymandering.
Different views on the topic
- Supporters of Proposition 50 cast it as a temporary, voter-approved countermeasure to Texas’ effort to gain Republican seats, and to similar redistricting moves elsewhere. The official voter guide argued that the measure would level the playing field and defend Californians’ political voice while reaffirming a commitment to independent redistricting after the 2030 census.[1]
- Some supporters say the measure mattered beyond the seats it could change: it gave voters who felt powerless under the Trump administration a way to act and helped energize Democrats nationally. Others argue the new map also protects Democratic incumbents in future, less favorable election cycles.[2][3]
- Opponents of Proposition 50 argue that a partisan response does not justify sidelining the independent commission. The official voter guide’s argument against the measure says it removed protections for fair maps and keeping communities together; critics cited by CalMatters say Democrats may have won seats anyway and warn that undoing the commission sets a dangerous precedent.[1][3]
